Design an experiment to evaluate a new ads algorithm

Read the full interview experience this question came from →

Quick Overview

This question evaluates a data scientist's competency in experimental design, causal inference, metric selection and trade-offs, randomization and interference reasoning, rollout strategies, and observational methods for algorithm evaluation, including consideration of stakeholder impacts such as users, advertisers, and revenue.

Design an experiment to evaluate a new ads algorithm

Company: Meta

Role: Data Scientist

Category: Analytics & Experimentation

Difficulty: hard

Interview Round: Technical Screen

You are a Product Analytics/Data Science partner for an ads ranking/recommendation team. Facebook has shipped (or plans to ship) a **new ad recommendation algorithm** and believes it is better. ## Part A: How would you evaluate whether it is better? Design an evaluation plan assuming you *can* run an experiment. In your answer: - Define the **goal** and key stakeholders (advertisers, users, FB revenue). - Propose a set of **metrics** with tradeoffs: - **Primary metric** (choose one and justify) - **Diagnostic metrics** to explain movement - **Guardrail metrics** to prevent harm (user experience, platform integrity, advertiser outcomes) - Choose the **unit of randomization** (e.g., user, session, advertiser) and explain interference risks (marketplace effects, repeated exposure, learning effects). - Discuss basics of experiment execution: ramp plan, duration, power/MDE considerations, data quality checks (SRM), and how you would interpret heterogeneous impacts. ## Part B: What if 50/50 randomization is not feasible? Sometimes a 50/50 split is not appropriate (e.g., risk, capacity limits, model learning/feedback loops, or advertiser delivery constraints). Propose **at least two** valid alternatives for randomization or rollout (e.g., unequal allocation, phased ramp, cluster randomization, switchback, geo split), and explain: - When each approach is appropriate - Key pitfalls (bias, interference, novelty effects) - How analysis changes (e.g., variance, sequential monitoring, CUPED) ## Part C: If you cannot run a controlled test If you are **not allowed** to run an online A/B test, how would you decide what to recommend to users and/or whether the new algorithm is better? - Propose an approach using observational/offline data. - Address confounding and selection bias. - For recommendations (especially cold-start users), describe a reasonable strategy that balances relevance and exploration. Be explicit about assumptions and failure modes.

Overview: This question evaluates a data scientist's competency in experimental design, causal inference, metric selection and trade-offs, randomization and interference reasoning, rollout strategies, and observational methods for algorithm evaluation, including consideration of stakeholder impacts such as users, advertisers, and revenue.

Read the full Meta Data Scientist interview experience this question came from

|Home/Analytics & Experimentation/Meta
Meta logo
Meta
Aug 21, 2025
hardData ScientistTechnical ScreenAnalytics & Experimentation
4
0

You are a Product Analytics/Data Science partner for an ads ranking/recommendation team. Facebook has shipped (or plans to ship) a new ad recommendation algorithm and believes it is better.

Part A: How would you evaluate whether it is better?

Design an evaluation plan assuming you can run an experiment. In your answer:

  • Define the goal and key stakeholders (advertisers, users, FB revenue).
  • Propose a set of metrics with tradeoffs:
    • Primary metric (choose one and justify)
    • Diagnostic metrics to explain movement
    • Guardrail metrics to prevent harm (user experience, platform integrity, advertiser outcomes)
  • Choose the unit of randomization (e.g., user, session, advertiser) and explain interference risks (marketplace effects, repeated exposure, learning effects).
  • Discuss basics of experiment execution: ramp plan, duration, power/MDE considerations, data quality checks (SRM), and how you would interpret heterogeneous impacts.

Part B: What if 50/50 randomization is not feasible?

Sometimes a 50/50 split is not appropriate (e.g., risk, capacity limits, model learning/feedback loops, or advertiser delivery constraints). Propose at least two valid alternatives for randomization or rollout (e.g., unequal allocation, phased ramp, cluster randomization, switchback, geo split), and explain:

  • When each approach is appropriate
  • Key pitfalls (bias, interference, novelty effects)
  • How analysis changes (e.g., variance, sequential monitoring, CUPED)

Part C: If you cannot run a controlled test

If you are not allowed to run an online A/B test, how would you decide what to recommend to users and/or whether the new algorithm is better?

  • Propose an approach using observational/offline data.
  • Address confounding and selection bias.
  • For recommendations (especially cold-start users), describe a reasonable strategy that balances relevance and exploration.

Be explicit about assumptions and failure modes.

Loading comments...