179 questions
No questions match those filters.
Product wants to maximize user clicks, and sales wants...
This is one of the questions in the full AI/ML interview bank. Pro unlocks all 1789 questions; Premium includes the same bank plus the highest daily Practice limit.
See plansThe tempting move is to fold both objectives into one loss function — something like α·LogLoss(click) + β·MSE(profit) — and spend the interview tuning α against β to find a sweet spot. It’s mathematically tidy, and it’s the wrong layer to solve the problem at. The moment a business trade-off is baked into model weights, your engineering infrastructure is coupled to whatever the current OKRs happen to be. If priorities shift for a few hours around a promotional event, “fixing” that requires retraining the model, re-validating offline metrics, and canary-deploying a new version — a multi-day pipeline in response to a same-day ask.
The better architecture separates what the model is allowed to know from what the business decides. Relevance — what the user actually wants — is a modeling problem: train a model that predicts a clean, business-agnostic quantity like P(click) or P(conversion), with no notion of commission or margin anywhere in its loss function. Priority — what the company wants to optimize for right now — is a runtime decision, not a training-time one. Fetch the relevant business signal (commission rate, margin, inventory pressure) from the feature store and combine it with the model’s prediction at the serving layer, with a simple, auditable formula such as Final_Score = w1·P(click) + w2·commission_normalized.
The payoff is operational: when sales wants a temporary margin push, you change w2 in a serving-layer config file, not the model. The model learns probabilities; the business defines the trade-off dynamically, on its own timeline, without ever touching a training pipeline.