Deal of The Day! Hurry Up, Grab the Special Discount - Save 25% - Ends In 00:00:00 Coupon code: SAVE25
Welcome to Pass4Success

- Free Preparation Discussions
Mail Us support@pass4success.com
Location US
Mob_nav_barsMENU

Salesforce ANC-301 Exam - Topic 4 Question 74 Discussion

A CRM Analytics consultant is reviewing results from an Einstein Discovery story with a business user. They agree with the findings but notice that none of the fields used in the story have a correlation value greater than 4%. The client is now concerned that the modelmay not be good enough to deploy.Which action should the consultant take?
A) A Identify additional data that may have a stronger relationship with the outcome variable.
B) Edit the model accuracy settings and rerun it to evaluate the correlation.
C) Use the appropriate algorithm and update the model.

Salesforce ANC-301 Exam - Topic 4 Question 74 Discussion

Actual exam question for Salesforce's ANC-301 exam
Question #: 74
Topic #: 4
[All ANC-301 Questions]

A CRM Analytics consultant is reviewing results from an Einstein Discovery story with a business user. They agree with the findings but notice that none of the fields used in the story have a correlation value greater than 4%. The client is now concerned that the model

may not be good enough to deploy.

Which action should the consultant take?

Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer
Suggested Answer: A

by Gerardo at Jul 02, 2026, 11:33 AM

Limited Time Offer

25%

Off

Get Premium ANC-301 Questions as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF

Contribute your Thoughts:

0/2000 characters
Submit Cancel
Regenia
5 days ago
True, but B could help refine the model. It's worth considering.
upvoted 0 times
...
Rory
10 days ago
Editing settings in B seems risky. Might not solve the core issue.
upvoted 0 times
...
Melissa
15 days ago
I'm leaning towards A too. We need stronger data connections.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lezlie
20 days ago
I agree, but option C could also work. A better algorithm might improve results.
upvoted 0 times
...
Beth
25 days ago
I think option A is the best. More data can help find better correlations.
upvoted 0 times
...
Ashlee
1 month ago
Using a different algorithm could make a big difference!
upvoted 0 times
...
Crista
1 month ago
Editing accuracy settings might not help much.
upvoted 0 times
...
Kristel
1 month ago
Wait, can we really trust a model with such weak correlations?
upvoted 0 times
...
Izetta
2 months ago
Totally agree, they need to find better data!
upvoted 0 times
...
Merri
2 months ago
Correlation values under 4% are pretty low.
upvoted 0 times
...
Nydia
2 months ago
I feel like using the right algorithm is important, but if the data isn't strong enough, it might not make a difference. I'm a bit confused about the best approach here.
upvoted 0 times
...
Adelina
2 months ago
This reminds me of a practice question where we had to choose between updating the model or finding new data. I think finding additional data is usually the better first step.
upvoted 0 times
...
Belen
2 months ago
I'm not entirely sure, but I think editing the model accuracy settings might not really address the underlying issue with the data itself.
upvoted 0 times
...
Chu
2 months ago
I remember we discussed how low correlation values can indicate weak predictors, so maybe identifying additional data could help strengthen the model.
upvoted 0 times
...

Save Cancel