证据表
1) 留存、显著性、拆解贡献
| 项目 | pre(3/10~3/13) | dip(3/14~3/16) | post(3/17~3/20) | dip-pre |
| all D1 | 57.18% | 49.70% | 58.51% | -7.48ppt |
| all D3 | 50.34% | 40.81% | 51.58% | -9.52ppt |
| new D3 | 24.08% | 18.23% | 23.53% | -5.86ppt |
| old D3 | 52.67% | 42.98% | 53.92% | -9.69ppt |
| new/old 构成效应 | - | - | - | -0.20ppt |
| new/old 质量效应 | - | - | - | -9.35ppt |
说明:构成效应=人群占比变化带来的影响;质量效应=分层内留存本身变化带来的影响。
1.5) dip期人群质量为什么变浅
| 分层 | 指标 | pre | dip | post | dip-pre |
| new | past7d_silent_rate | 53.13% | 59.86% | 52.87% | +6.72ppt |
| new | past7d_low_active_rate | 73.32% | 81.71% | 72.04% | +8.39ppt |
| new | avg_past_launch_cnt_d7 | 10.93 | 8.33 | 11.81 | -2.60 |
| old | past7d_silent_rate | 21.85% | 27.88% | 20.77% | +6.03ppt |
| old | past7d_low_active_rate | 33.83% | 43.30% | 32.43% | +9.47ppt |
| old | avg_past_launch_cnt_d7 | 30.19 | 24.70 | 31.73 | -5.50 |
2) 版本/平台/网络/机型:是否出现“外部结构突变”
版本结构(Top)
| 版本 | pre | dip | post | dip-pre |
| 6.8.0 | 63.37% | 32.46% | 24.99% | -30.90ppt |
| 6.9.0 | 9.57% | 38.48% | 47.03% | +28.91ppt |
| 6.9.6 | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.94% | +0.00ppt |
平台D3(Android/iOS)
| 平台 | pre | dip | post | dip-pre |
| Android | 50.69% | 40.75% | 52.07% | -9.94ppt |
| iOS | 47.41% | 41.01% | 47.77% | -6.40ppt |
3) 环境结构(业务读法)
| 网络类型 | pre | dip | post | dip-pre |
| wifi | 64.49% | 68.95% | 64.87% | +4.46ppt |
| mobile | 25.46% | 21.30% | 25.03% | -4.16ppt |
| WIFI | 9.02% | 8.73% | 9.10% | -0.29ppt |
| unknown | 0.56% | 0.61% | 0.57% | +0.05ppt |
| 4g | 0.24% | 0.25% | 0.24% | +0.01ppt |
| 5g | 0.21% | 0.15% | 0.18% | -0.06ppt |
| 机型品牌 | pre | dip | post | dip-pre |
| 华为 | 16.93% | 18.12% | 17.28% | +1.19ppt |
| vivo | 15.02% | 15.42% | 14.87% | +0.40ppt |
| 荣耀 | 11.03% | 11.22% | 10.94% | +0.19ppt |
| oppo | 11.12% | 11.21% | 11.00% | +0.09ppt |
| 苹果 | 11.59% | 10.73% | 11.55% | -0.87ppt |
| 红米 | 8.69% | 8.15% | 8.88% | -0.54ppt |
| 小米 | 7.47% | 7.55% | 7.47% | +0.08ppt |
| iqoo | 6.49% | 5.78% | 6.44% | -0.71ppt |
结论:平台/网络/机型存在周末结构波动,但幅度不足以解释近 10ppt 的 D3 跌幅。
4) 显著性检验(pre vs dip)
- all D3:pre 50.04% → dip 39.46%,下降 -10.57ppt,p=<1e-6
- new D3:pre 23.88% → dip 17.25%,下降 -6.62ppt,p=<1e-6
- old D3:pre 52.36% → dip 41.66%,下降 -10.70ppt,p=<1e-6
5) 任务层拆解(你问的“什么任务能查”)
| 指标 | pre | dip | post | dip-pre |
| 任务中心访问用户占比 | 65.98% | 65.52% | 67.44% | -0.45ppt |
| 任务中心“完成任务”点击用户占比 | 15.63% | 19.41% | 18.75% | +3.78ppt |
| 至少完成1个任务用户占比 | 34.67% | 37.44% | 37.73% | +2.77ppt |
| 完成“点赞任务”用户占比 | 29.23% | 29.98% | 30.80% | +0.75ppt |
| 完成“发布任务”用户占比 | 16.72% | 18.56% | 18.14% | +1.83ppt |
| 完成“看广告任务”用户占比 | 7.67% | 10.36% | 9.29% | +2.69ppt |
| 人均任务完成次数 | 1.055 | 1.594 | 1.390 | +0.539 |
读法:dip 期“任务中心访问占比”并未同步抬升,但“完成任务占比”和“人均任务完成次数”显著上升,说明是任务执行强度被放大,而不是更多人去任务中心逛。
6) 任务结构变化(在任务完成人群内)
| 任务类型 | pre | dip | post | dip-pre |
| 完成“点赞任务”占任务完成人群比重 | 84.3% | 80.1% | 81.6% | -4.2ppt |
| 完成“发布任务”占任务完成人群比重 | 48.2% | 49.6% | 48.1% | +1.3ppt |
| 完成“看广告任务”占任务完成人群比重 | 22.1% | 27.7% | 24.6% | +5.5ppt |
读法:dip 期“看广告任务”占比明显上升,点赞任务占比下降,任务心智更偏“快速拿奖励”而不是内容探索。
7) 做完任务后,回访有没有更好?
| 人群 | pre D3 | dip D3 | post D3 | dip-pre |
| 完成任务用户 | 68.34% | 54.81% | 69.03% | -13.52ppt |
| 未完成任务用户 | 40.23% | 30.11% | 40.54% | -10.12ppt |
| 访问任务中心用户 | 62.81% | 50.70% | 63.61% | -12.11ppt |
| 未访问任务中心用户 | 24.61% | 17.42% | 25.20% | -7.19ppt |
结论:有任务行为的人本身留存更高,但 dip 期同样显著下降,所以“做任务”并没有抵消那几天的回访质量下滑。
8) 当前可追踪的任务清单(稳定口径)
| 任务代码 | 业务名称 | 指标字段 |
| SIGN | 签到任务 | quest_sign_task_success_cnt |
| LIKE_COLLECTION | 点赞任务 | quest_like_task_success_cnt |
| PUBLISH_COLLECTION | 发布任务 | quest_publish_task_success_cnt |
| REWARDED_VIDEO_AD | 看广告任务 | quest_ad_watch_task_success_cnt |
| VIP_SIGN | VIP签到任务 | quest_vip_sign_task_success_cnt |
备注:这份清单来自 dws 宽表稳定字段,适合做趋势监控。更细的 task_id/task_name 级别需要依赖 events 明细埋点联查。