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 Certified CRM Analytics and Einstein Discovery Consultant (Analytics-Con-201) Exam - Topic 6 Question 33 Discussion

After the initial creation of a model, the first model insight explains93% of the variation of the outcome variable. This is unusually high.What is the most likely reason for this?
C) The outcome variable may be causing data leakage.
A) The dataset contains multiple dominant values.
B) The model contains too many outlier values.

Salesforce Certified CRM Analytics and Einstein Discovery Consultant (Analytics-Con-201) Exam - Topic 6 Question 33 Discussion

Actual exam question for Salesforce's Salesforce Certified CRM Analytics and Einstein Discovery Consultant (Analytics-Con-201) exam
Question #: 33
Topic #: 6
[All Salesforce Certified CRM Analytics and Einstein Discovery Consultant (Analytics-Con-201) Questions]

After the initial creation of a model, the first model insight explains

93% of the variation of the outcome variable. This is unusually high.

What is the most likely reason for this?

Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer
Suggested Answer: C

by Francoise at Mar 07, 2026, 02:00 AM

Limited Time Offer

25%

Off

Get Premium Salesforce Certified CRM Analytics and Einstein Discovery Consultant (Analytics-Con-201) Questions as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF

Contribute your Thoughts:

0/2000 characters
Submit Cancel
Francine
4 days ago
I thought models usually explain less than that?
upvoted 0 times
...
Allene
9 days ago
Definitely sounds like data leakage to me.
upvoted 0 times
...
Genevieve
14 days ago
That's a crazy high percentage!
upvoted 0 times
...
Wynell
19 days ago
I disagree, outliers could be the real issue here.
upvoted 0 times
...
Julieta
24 days ago
I think it could be the dominant values messing things up.
upvoted 0 times
...
Carin
2 months ago
Wait, 93%? That seems too good to be true!
upvoted 0 times
...
Yuriko
2 months ago
Definitely sounds like data leakage to me.
upvoted 0 times
...
Yong
3 months ago
That's a crazy high percentage!
upvoted 0 times
...
Marylyn
3 months ago
Really? 93%? I’m not buying it without more info.
upvoted 0 times
...
Mariko
3 months ago
A) seems plausible, but I lean towards C).
upvoted 0 times
...
Vannessa
3 months ago
I thought models usually explain less than that?
upvoted 0 times
...
Ivory
3 months ago
Definitely sounds like data leakage to me.
upvoted 0 times
...
Kiley
4 months ago
That's a crazy high percentage!
upvoted 0 times
...
Armando
4 months ago
I really can't decide between C and B. Both seem plausible, but I lean towards C because of the data leakage concept we practiced.
upvoted 0 times
...
Arminda
4 months ago
I feel like we went over a similar question where dominant values affected the model's performance. Could it be A?
upvoted 0 times
...
Lashaun
4 months ago
I'm not entirely sure, but I think having too many outliers could skew the results too. Maybe option B is also a possibility?
upvoted 0 times
...
Shaquana
4 months ago
I remember discussing data leakage in class, and it seems like option C could be the right answer since it would explain such a high percentage of variation.
upvoted 0 times
...

Save Cancel