← Meta Interview Insights

Meta·Data Scientist·Technical Phone Screen·Senior

Senior
Apr 2026

Summary

Meta DS interview, product analytics focus. The whole thing was one long case about a ranking change for a multi-account product, and they wanted both a historical analysis angle and a full experiment design. Dense question, not a lot of warmup.

Questions Asked (2)

Q1

A multi-account product currently ranks accounts by most recent visit. The team wants to switch to ranking by highest notification count instead, with recency as a tiebreaker. Using historical session-level logs, how would you assess whether this change is likely to be beneficial before running an experiment?

A/B Testing & ExperimentationProduct Analytics & MetricsRoot Cause Analysis
Author's notes

I started talking about correlational analysis between notification rank position and account selection rate, which felt right, but I kept second-guessing myself on the selection bias piece.

Create a free account to read the full note

AI HintsAI Generated

Suggested Approach

Use historical session-level logs to simulate the new ranking offline, then compare key engagement metrics (e.g., notification clicks, session duration) between the current and proposed ranking. Validate the simulation with a holdout or counterfactual analysis to estimate the potential impact before running a live experiment.

Pro tip: Leverage the fact that ranking changes can have heterogeneous effects across user segments; analyze results by account activity level and notification volume to uncover where the change might help or hurt. Also, check for novelty effects by examining long-term trends in the historical data.

1. Define success metrics and hypotheses

Identify the primary metric (e.g., notification click-through rate) and guardrail metrics (e.g., user retention) that the ranking change should impact. Formulate a hypothesis about how ranking by notification count will affect user engagement.

2. Reconstruct historical rankings

Using session-level logs, for each user session, compute the ranking of accounts under both the current (recency) and proposed (notification count with recency tiebreaker) schemes. Ensure you have the necessary data on account visits and notification counts at the time of each session.

3. Simulate counterfactual outcomes

Estimate what users would have clicked or engaged with under the new ranking by using models or heuristics (e.g., assume users click the top-ranked account with some probability). Compare simulated metrics to actual historical metrics to gauge potential lift.

4. Analyze heterogeneity and sensitivity

Break down the simulated impact by user segments (e.g., heavy vs. light users, high vs. low notification volume) to understand where the change is most beneficial. Perform sensitivity analysis on assumptions (e.g., click probability) to test robustness.

5. Decide on experiment design

Based on the offline analysis, determine if the change is promising enough to warrant a live A/B test. If so, design the experiment with appropriate power, duration, and guardrail metrics to validate the findings.

Key Points to Mention

  • Use of historical session-level logs to simulate ranking changes offline
  • Definition of clear success metrics (e.g., notification clicks, session duration) and guardrails
  • Counterfactual analysis to estimate what would have happened under the new ranking
  • Segmentation to identify heterogeneous treatment effects
  • Awareness of potential biases in offline simulation (e.g., position bias, novelty effects)
  • Recommendation for a follow-up A/B test to confirm causal impact

AI-generated suggestions, not part of the candidate's original notes. May be inaccurate — verify before relying on them.

Q2

Design an A/B test to measure the causal impact of the new notification-based account ranking. Walk through the eligible population, randomization unit, primary and secondary metrics, guardrails, power and MDE considerations, and any key segments or edge cases.

A/B Testing & ExperimentationProduct Analytics & MetricsProduct Sense & Ideation
Author's notes

This is where I spent most of the time.

Create a free account to read the full note

AI HintsAI Generated

Suggested Approach

Start by clarifying the product context and defining the causal question, then systematically walk through each design element: eligible population, randomization unit, metrics, guardrails, and power analysis. Emphasize trade-offs and justify choices with statistical reasoning and practical constraints.

Pro tip: Mention that you would check for network effects or interference between users, especially if the ranking affects content visibility, and consider using cluster randomization if needed. Also, proactively discuss how you would handle multiple testing corrections for secondary metrics.

1. Define the experiment scope and population

Clarify the product change and target population: who is eligible (e.g., active users who can receive notifications), and exclude users with prior exposure or those in conflicting experiments. Consider whether the ranking affects only notification recipients or broader user experience.

2. Choose randomization unit and assignment

Decide whether to randomize at user level or a cluster level (e.g., by social graph clusters) to avoid interference. Ensure proper randomization and balance checks, and consider using a holdout group for long-term effects.

3. Select primary and secondary metrics

Define a clear primary metric (e.g., notification click-through rate or engagement) that directly measures the impact. Choose secondary metrics (e.g., session time, retention) to capture broader effects, and guardrail metrics (e.g., user reports, unsubscribe rate) to monitor negative impacts.

4. Plan power analysis and MDE

Determine the minimum detectable effect (MDE) based on business relevance, then calculate required sample size and duration using power analysis. Account for variance, expected effect size, and multiple comparisons.

5. Identify segments and edge cases

Predefine key segments (e.g., new vs. existing users, heavy vs. light users) for heterogeneous treatment effect analysis. Address edge cases like users with no notifications, inactive users, and potential novelty effects.

Key Points to Mention

  • Eligible population: active users who receive notifications, excluding those in overlapping experiments or with prior exposure.
  • Randomization unit: user-level randomization, but consider cluster randomization if interference is likely.
  • Primary metric: notification click-through rate or engagement; secondary metrics: session time, retention; guardrails: unsubscribe rate, user reports.
  • Power analysis: calculate sample size based on MDE, alpha, power, and variance; consider sequential testing if needed.
  • Segments: analyze by user activity level, tenure, and notification frequency to detect heterogeneous effects.
  • Edge cases: handle users with no notifications, inactive users, and potential novelty or primacy effects.

AI-generated suggestions, not part of the candidate's original notes. May be inaccurate — verify before relying on them.