This message was deleted.
# ask-questions
w
This message was deleted.
šŸ‘€ 1
f
sticky bucketing will keep a user in the experiment based on their initial assignment. So its possible that the targeting is being skipped
I'd have to check on the specifics
p
One similar question. started later on what is the guarantee that the split between first test and variant does not cancel out the introduction into the second test. I have often seen that results change dramatically as soon as another test is started which normally should not be the case I would guess. I guess my question is if you think it is better to always use namespace to exclude ab test crossing or if perhaps this will ensure the outcome is reached sooner?
f
there can be interactions between experiments (and certainly if its the same part of the product, you should use namespaces), but meaningful interactions are rare.
šŸ‘ 1
p
Is the multi exposure notification shown based on the same phase date range or is it calculated somehow differently. Currently I have a situation in Android app with multi exposure count being twice as high as users exposed to the test. Any suggestion what can be to blame?
f
I Believe its within a phase
here are some reasons why you can get multiple exposure warnings: • you changed the split mid experiment phase • you changed the split in its own phase, but have sticky bucketing turned on • the attribute you're using for assignment is different than the id you're using for reporting, and the one for assignment is not as long-lived • the attribute you're using for assignment is conditional • you're not using the built in trackingCallback and instead firing you're own
šŸ‘ 1
p
We did have an issue with id, which were (not set) as expected so I will know tomorrow if this was the reason
We still have issue with multi exposure. Can this be due to fallback not being set and left as "null"? I mean we see a, b and "null" as the values. I guess what I mean by that if "null" or fallback also participates in the multi-exposure trigger count.