Maps Exam

Tips and Tricks

Passing this exam is achievable.
With some practice and an awareness of some common mistakes which are outlined here, you
will have what you need to ace your exam.

Many candidates have forgotten or overlooked some key criteria which has ended up in an
unsuccessful exam. We have compiled these top mistakes here for you so that you can be
prepared.

Remember, your guidelines are your friend. Don’t feel daunted by the number of pages - it is a
reference guide. Know how to search for terms and examples during the exam so you can feel
assured that you are rating correctly.

Use this guide together with your Engage Simulator to see these tips in action in questions. It is a
cliché for a reason - practice makes perfect!

Our support team are on standby if you need us. Please reach out to us via direct message in
your Connect Portal to speak to one of our recruiters.

We wish you the best of luck!

The Peroptyx Team

Confidential 1
 User Inside Fresh Viewport

When the user is inside the fresh viewport, the location intent becomes the user location
unless there is an explicit location intent for the query.

Many candidates fail to use the user location as the location intent in this scenario, a
common mistake would be to rate every result inside the viewport as excellent or demote results
further away from the user but still inside the fresh viewport to bad.

Here is an example from the guidelines on how to rate a scenario like that correctly:

Guidelines Reference ✍️ Section 2.3.2 Implicit Location

Section 5.6. Many Possible Results

Confidential 2
 Business Result for Address Query

When the query is an address query for a street and the returned result is a business on the
same street the user was looking for, that result does not satisfy the user intent.

Many candidates fail to demote such results to bad due to user intent and instead rate
relevance as good or higher when it should be demoted to bad.

Here is an example from the guidelines on how to rate a scenario like that correctly:

Remember to continue to ask yourself the question - could this result be what the user is looking
for? If I received this as a result, would I be satisfied?

Guidelines Reference ✍️ 5.14.Unexpected Results

Confidential 3
 Chain Business Relevance Rating

A query for a chain business is generally not considered an explicit query and is therefore not
eligible a for Navigational rating unless the query contains a location modifier that points to
a single unique location.

Many candidates rate these results with a relevance rating of Navigational which is considered
incorrect as the highest rating a chain business can receive is Excellent.

Here is an example from the guidelines on how to rate a scenario like that correctly:

Guidelines Reference ✍️ 10.6.2. Chain Businesses

Confidential 4
 Navigational Chain Business

If the query for a chain business includes a location modifier that points to a single unique
branch of that business, that specific branch can be eligible for a Navigational rating.

When there are multiple results available for the location modifier, the highest possible rating
for all results will be Excellent. Remember:

User and viewport location should always be ignored when there is a location modifier

Ratings must always be based on possible real-world results

Many candidates fail to either demote results outside the location modifier or are too
generous with the relevance rating. They either forget to check real-world results that did not
appear on the map or fail to do enough research to understand the boundaries of the location
modifier before rating relevance.

Here is an example from the guidelines on how to rate a scenario like that correctly:

Guidelines Reference ✍️ 10.6.3.

Chain Business with Location Modifier

Confidential 5
 Unique Transit Stations

When the user is looking for a specific transit station with a unique name in a locality that
does not share the name as the transit station, we expect a Navigational result and rate any
other transit station in that locality as bad for user intent.

For example, let’s take the transit stations in San Franciso - BART stations. There is a unique
BART station name that is not the same as the name of the place where the station is located.

The expectation for results returned for a different BART station that does not satisfy the user
intent is to be demoted to Bad when rating relevance. Many evaluators fail to demote results
that do not satisfy the user intent.

Here is an example from the guidelines on how to rate a scenario like that correctly:

Guidelines Reference ✍️ 5.16.1 Transit Queries

Confidential 6
 Location or Category Intent

When the query is for a transit station with a location intent, keep in mind that it may be a
transit station with a location modifier, or potentially the user looking for a transit station in
that location (category intent).

Many candidates fail to make that connection due to a lack of research and failing to make the
connection between when the query can be interpreted as both a category (i.e. Locality +
Station) or as an explicit location, (Direct Match Name).

Results inside the intended locality should get a high rating while results outside the locality
should be demoted accordingly based on distance and the number of available results.

Here is an example from the guidelines on how to rate a scenario like that correctly:

Guidelines Reference ✍️ 5.16.1 Transit Queries

Confidential 7
 Location Modifier Intent

When the query is for a chain-type business with a location modifier attached, results are
expected within the given location modifier and user/viewport position are to be
disregarded.

In cases where few results exist in the location modifier, results outside of the modifier can still
be viable options based on the distance from the intended location.

Many candidates fail to disregard the user and viewport location and rate results within or near
them with a high relevance rating when they should be disregarded.

Here is an example from the guidelines on how to rate a scenario like that correctly:

Guidelines Reference ✍️ 10.6.3.

Chain Business with Location Modifier

Confidential 8
 Find the Connection

If the result does not satisfy the user intent because there is no relationship between the
query intent and the result, or because the connection between the query intent and result
will not be immediately obvious to the user, rate the result relevance Bad.

Many candidates fail to do enough research to understand the user intent and what the result
returned is.

Here is an example from the guidelines on how to rate a scenario like that correctly:

Guidelines Reference ✍️ 5.1.8. Lack of Connection

Confidential 9
 Implicit Location Intent

If the user is outside of the viewport and the viewport is fresh, and the query is for a chain
business and a result matches the query intent perfectly, we use the fresh viewport as the
location modifier.

In cases like this, ratings should be based on the fresh viewport and results outside the viewport
should be demoted for distance if there are closer real-world options.

Many candidates fail to use the fresh viewport as the location modifier.

Guidelines Reference ✍️ 2.3.2 Implicit Location

(Fresh Viewport, User Outside Viewport)

Non-Specific Addresses

For queries where the location intent is not explicitly stated in the
query, you must infer the location intent from the user’s viewport and the user’s location.

One difficulty in evaluating address queries has to do with partial addresses, which could
refer to multiple locations. Generally, for partial addresses, users are looking for the location
closest to their position or within / near the fresh viewport.

Results that are farther away from an ideal result but can potentially satisfy the
user’s intent can be rated as high as Good (Distance/Prominence)
Results are demoted based on distance
Results are demoted based on the density of potential results in a given area
Results that are too far away will be rated Bad (Distance/Prominence)

Many candidates fail to do real-world research hence missing that there might be closer
results to the user or fresh viewport.

Guidelines Reference ✍️ 10.2. Non-Specific Address

Confidential 10
 Name Accuracy for Address Results

The n/a rating should be used for all address type results, including residential addresses,
streets, localities, and so on.

Many evaluators fail to rate name accuracy as n/a when rating street names, localities and so on.

Guidelines Reference ✍️ 6. Name Accuracy

Non-Specific Addresses

Ensure that the classification is correct in order to rate name accuracy as correct.

Many candidates fail to make the connection when rating name

accuracy between the name and the correct classification by only taking the name into
consideration and rating name accuracy correct when it should be demoted when the
classification is incorrect.

Guidelines Reference ✍️ 6.7. Final Name Accuracy Rating

Confidential 11
 Results to Rate

You are only required to rate tasks with rating options beneath them. Avoid greyed-out
results.

You may occasionally see one or more normal-looking or greyed-out results with no rating fields
beneath them. No rating is required for these results. This is expected and is not a technical issue
or a reason to release the survey.

Many candidates fail to remember this statement and get confused when they see 3 results, 2 of
which are greyed out with no rating fields beneath them. These other results are there for
context. In your exam, you are only going to be rating one result per task. Keep an eye out for
the result that you need to rate.

Result with no
Rating Choices

Result with
Rating Choices

Confidential 12