RCA Relativity Certified Administrator Questions and Answers

The correct answer is A. By removing that user's security group from the workspace. In Relativity, workspace access is granted through groups , not by attaching workspace rights directly to individual users. Relativity’s official security documentation explains that you set permissions by adding groups to a workspace and configuring those group permissions there. Users then inherit access through their group memberships. As a result, the standard way to secure a workspace from a user is to remove the group that gives that user access, or remove the user from the relevant group.

The other options do not reflect how Relativity security is structured. User profile settings do not control workspace visibility in the manner described. IP-based security is not the mechanism for ordinary workspace access control in this scenario. Instance-level view security is also too narrow and does not remove the user’s overall workspace access; even if certain views were restricted, the user could still potentially access the workspace through other permitted objects or tabs. From an RCA perspective, this question tests a foundational principle: workspace security is group-based . Administrators grant or revoke access by managing the relationship between groups and workspaces, then managing which users belong to those groups. Therefore, to secure a workspace from a user, the correct action is to remove the user’s access-granting security group from that workspace.

The correct answer is B. A reviewer was originally part of the workspace and coded documents, but has since been removed from the workspace. Relativity’s official Review Center documentation explains that when documents were coded by reviewers who are not part of the current Relativity instance , those reviewers can appear in charts and tables as “Unknown User 1,” “Unknown User 2,” and so on. The documentation specifically notes that this can happen if a reviewer was removed from the workspace or if the workspace was archived and restored into a different instance. That directly supports option B.

The other options do not match Relativity’s documented explanation. Losing permission to code is not the stated reason for the “Unknown User” label. Likewise, an unprepared project is a separate project-state issue and does not explain why specific prior coding activity would be attributed to an anonymous placeholder. An error requiring queue re-preparation is also not the documented cause of this naming behavior. From a case administration perspective, this is an important concept because administrators often manage workspace users, permissions, and lifecycle changes over time. If prior reviewers are removed, their historical coding may still appear in analytics or project monitoring views, but the user identity may no longer resolve normally. In that circumstance, Review Center surfaces those coding records under a label such as “Unknown User 1.”

The correct answer is C. The video must be synced to one .MP4 video and uploaded at the same time. Relativity’s official Transcripts application documentation explicitly states that the video can be played in the Viewer in sync with the text of the transcript, and further notes: you must import videos at the same time you are uploading transcripts or the video and transcript cannot sync . The documentation also describes uploading the video as an .mp4 alongside the transcript during the transcript upload workflow.

This directly eliminates the other options. Option A is false because Relativity clearly supports synced transcript video playback. Option B is wrong because this is not a PST-based workflow. Option D is also incorrect because the documentation does not describe a later mass action that separately syncs already uploaded video and text files; instead, the sync relationship is established during the same upload process. Relativity even distinguishes that videos are not stored as normal documents in the document list, but rather as a file field within a transcript, reinforcing that the transcript upload workflow is the correct path.

From a case administration standpoint, this is important because transcript/video synchronization affects deposition and interview review usability. To ensure successful synchronization, the transcript and its associated .mp4 video must be uploaded together. Therefore, the correct answer is C .

The correct answer is C. Files must be generated using the RSMF specifications before they are imported into Relativity. Relativity’s official Short Message Format documentation explains that to use the Short Message Viewer, you first need to create an RSMF file, and the example/specification pages describe the required structure and header information that must be present before ingestion using Processing. Relativity also states that Processing is the recommended method of importing RSMF files into Relativity, which means the RSMF file already exists when Processing begins.

This rules out the other options. Relativity does not say that it automatically creates RSMF on-the-fly for all non-document data. It also does not describe a processing-profile feature that converts arbitrary XML from chat platforms into RSMF during import. Nor is there a document-list mass operation that converts conversations into RSMF. Instead, RSMF is a defined external format that must be constructed according to Relativity’s published specifications, then imported and processed to preserve message metadata, attachments, and near-native review behavior. Therefore, the correct answer is C.

The correct answer is A. The field to use for production numbering. Relativity’s documentation distinguishes between production set settings and production data source settings . The production set defines overarching settings such as document numbering , appearance of numbering, and related production-wide behaviors. By contrast, the production data source page includes settings such as production type , placeholder image format , burn redactions , burn native redactions , burn PDF redactions , and markup set .

This means the field used for production numbering is not configured at the individual data source level; it belongs to the production set itself. The other options are all part of production data source configuration. The documentation explicitly shows Burn Redactions and Markup Set , and placeholder behavior is also configured within the production data source settings.

Therefore, the option that cannot be configured when creating a new production data source is the field to use for production numbering , because that is a production-set-level setting rather than a data-source-level one.

The correct answer is B. Run the Set native file size field script. In Relativity, the purpose of the Set native file size field script is to populate a decimal field with the size of each document’s native file. This is the most efficient and direct administrative method when a workspace already contains produced native files and the case team wants a usable field showing file size. Relativity’s documentation states that the script stores the native file size for each document in the workspace in a decimal field, making it specifically aligned to this requirement. It is intended for administrators who need to backfill or populate this metadata after files have already been loaded, rather than relying on manual calculations or unrelated operations.

The other options are not correct. A tally/sum/average mass operation works on values that already exist in fields; it does not inspect native files and write their file sizes into a document field. The Set extracted text size field script applies to extracted text size, not native file size, so it addresses a different metadata requirement. The statement that native file size is automatically populated for documents is also incorrect in this context, because Relativity provides a dedicated script precisely for populating that field when needed. Therefore, from a Relativity Certified Administrator perspective under Data loading , the correct and most efficient administrative action is to run the Set native file size field script.

The correct answer is C. Use Integration Points with the Links Only option for natives. Relativity’s repository workspace documentation explicitly says that to take advantage of reduced repository data costs, they strongly recommend promoting sets of documents via links only to standard review workspaces instead of storing duplicates of the files in the review workspace . The repository workflow page describes using Integration Points to move selected documents to the review workspace, and the billing guidance explains that if you promote actual files instead of links only, you incur both repository and review storage charges.

That makes option C the documented best practice. Uninstalling the repository application is actually listed as a condition that can affect repository billing adversely, so option A is incorrect. Exporting and re-importing with Import/Export duplicates the files and defeats the reduced-cost repository workflow. ARM restore is also not the recommended method for promoting data into active review while preserving the repository cost advantages. Therefore, the correct answer is use Integration Points with Links Only for natives .

The correct answer is D. Remove key terms from the dtSearch index noise words. Relativity’s dtSearch documentation explains that if a word in the search phrase is part of the noise words list, and that word is important to the search, you must remove it from the dtSearch noise words list and then rebuild the index. The documentation gives this exact type of guidance for terms like “and” when the term must be treated as part of the actual phrase instead of being ignored.

This makes options B and C incorrect because changing or deleting the attorney’s search terms would alter the intended search logic rather than making the index capable of respecting the requested phrase. Option A is also incorrect because the alphabet file is for searchable characters and tokenization behavior, not for managing ignored noise words. Therefore, before running the Search Terms Report, the correct step is to remove those key terms from the dtSearch index noise words list and rebuild the index if needed.

The correct answer is D. Regular expression filter. Relativity’s Structured Analytics documentation states that a Regular expression filter can be linked to a structured analytics set as an optional setting, and that it is used to clean up extracted text before analysis . The documentation further explains that this setting is implemented through a repeated content filter whose type must be Regular Expression . This directly matches the question’s wording about excluding document text before analytics processing begins.

This capability is especially useful when documents contain extraneous content such as dates, URLs, page numbers, Bates numbers, standard disclaimers, or other repeated text that can interfere with email threading or textual near duplicate results. Relativity notes that the filter applies only to the field being analyzed, which is usually Extracted Text unless another field is selected. By removing this noise before the algorithm runs, administrators can improve the quality of structured analytics outcomes.

The other options are not the correct named filter for this function in Relativity’s structured analytics workflow. The official setting is specifically the Regular expression filter . Therefore, the correct answer is D .

The correct answer is A. After updating fields in the searchable set. Relativity’s dtSearch index documentation states that you must perform a full build when you add an additional field to the index, change any index settings, change fields of the searchable set, or overlay text on existing fields . That directly matches option A.

By contrast, Relativity documents that an incremental build is used after adding or removing documents . That makes options B and D incorrect. “After using Swap Index” is not listed as a required trigger for a full build in the dtSearch console documentation. Therefore, the correct answer is that a full build is required after updating fields in the searchable set .

The correct answer is C. Build dtSearch Index . In Relativity, Automated Workflows consists of two major components: triggers and actions . Triggers determine when a workflow starts, while actions determine what task the workflow performs once it begins. Relativity’s official Automated Workflows documentation lists Build dtSearch index as one of the available actions that can be added to a workflow. When selected, this action allows the workflow to automatically build a dtSearch index, either as a full build or incrementally depending on the configuration.

The other options are not actions. Scheduled Run and Manual Start are both documented by Relativity as trigger types , not actions. Scheduled Run starts a workflow on a defined daily, weekly, or hourly cadence, while Manual Start allows a user to launch the workflow by clicking the Manual Run button. Build a cluster is also not listed by Relativity as an Automated Workflows action. From an RCA perspective, it is important to distinguish triggers from actions because workflow design depends on choosing the correct combination of each. Administrators may configure a trigger such as Scheduled Run or Manual Start, and then assign one or more actions such as Run OCR Set, Run Imaging Set, Build Elasticsearch index, or Build dtSearch index . Therefore, among the options provided, the only valid available action is Build dtSearch Index .

The correct answer is B. Name conflicts: Rename or map Fields. Relativity’s Troubleshooting application installation errors documentation explains that for Name conflicts , the available resolution options include Rename and Map Field . The page specifically instructs admins to use the Resolve Errors drop-down and choose either Rename or Map Field to address the conflicting artifact during application installation.

The other choices are inconsistent with the documentation. For locking conflicts , Relativity says you can resolve them by selecting the Unlock checkbox, so option A is incorrect. For restricted file types , the documented resolution is to remove the external resource from the application and re-install , not simply “run a re-install,” so option D is incomplete and inaccurate. Option C is also too vague and not one of the documented named error-resolution pairings. Therefore, the correct expected application installation error and solution is Name conflicts: Rename or map Fields

The correct answer is A. Relativity. Relativity’s Processing throughput guidance states that internal performance testing has shown the Relativity text extraction method to be at least two times faster than the native method on Excel, Word, and PowerPoint file types, and also less error-prone than native extraction. Since the question asks for the best method to get a large Excel-only data set to review as quickly as possible, the documented speed advantage makes Relativity the best answer.

The native-based methods are slower according to that same documentation, even though they may have other use cases. The processing profile documentation also shows that native/failover combinations are available configurations, but the performance guidance specifically favors the Relativity extraction method for speed on Excel files. “Extract and place inline” is not the documented Excel text extraction method choice for this question. Therefore, the fastest and most review-efficient choice for large Excel files is Relativity.

The correct answer is A. Mass Image and Document Local Access. Relativity’s official Mass Delete permissions page lists the required rights to successfully mass delete documents. In addition to the Mass Delete permission itself under mass operations, the user must have several document-related permissions, including Delete , Edit , Image , and object-security rights such as Add Image and Delete Image on the Document object. In exam-style shorthand, this corresponds to having image-related deletion capability and document-level access beyond the Mass Delete toggle alone.

The other combinations do not match the documented permission model. Mass Convert is unrelated to deletion. Mass Edit alone does not satisfy the image/file handling aspects of document deletion. The question’s wording is a little compressed compared with the full Relativity permissions matrix, but among the answer choices, the only one that aligns with the need for image-related rights plus document-level access is Mass Image and Document Local Access . In practical administration, mass deleting documents can also involve deleting associated images and natives from storage, so Relativity requires more than a single Mass Delete checkbox. That is why administrators must ensure the deleting group has the necessary image and document permissions in addition to Mass Delete. Therefore, the best answer from the provided options is A .

The correct answer is C. The fields returned by the Searchable Set saved search are all empty for this document. Relativity documents that dtSearch indexes are built against a Searchable Set, and administrators must manually update those indexes when the underlying document search sets change. Relativity also describes dtSearch as indexing the content made available through the configured search/index setup rather than magically finding text that is not present in the indexed fields. If the document is part of the saved search but the fields being indexed for that document are empty, there is effectively no searchable text for dtSearch to return for that record.

Option B is not the best answer because an incremental build is a maintenance activity for adding new documents, not the documented reason a single already-known document cannot be found. Relativity notes that incremental builds look for new documents in the searchable set and do not re-index previously indexed records with changed content, which is a different issue. Option D is unrelated because Review Center queue assignment does not control whether a document is searchable through a dtSearch index. Option A is also not the best explanation for this question; dtSearch availability is driven by index/searchable-set configuration and accessible indexed text, not by parent-email folder access in the way the option suggests. So the best RCA-aligned answer is that the document has no indexed searchable content in the fields returned by the searchable set.

The correct answer is A. Configure the index to be accent sensitive. Relativity’s official dtSearch index documentation lists Create accent sensitive as a configurable Yes/No setting on a dtSearch index. When enabled, the index becomes sensitive to accents and other language-specific characters. This is an example of a valid dtSearch index modification that an administrator can configure.

The other options are incorrect. Relativity does not document a dtSearch feature that translates search terms into multiple languages, so option B is not a valid dtSearch index modification. A repeated content filter is associated with Analytics workflows, not dtSearch index configuration, so option C is also wrong. Option D is clearly incorrect because dtSearch indexes are not simply automatic and fixed upon import; Relativity provides a dedicated dtSearch object with editable settings such as searchable set, sub-index sizing behavior, skip malicious files, and accent sensitivity.

From an RCA perspective, this matters because dtSearch is a configurable search technology in Relativity, and administrators are responsible for tuning it for the needs of a workspace. Accent sensitivity can materially affect search precision in multilingual or language-specific datasets. Therefore, the correct answer is A .

The correct answer is A. Use a mass operation to update the Disable On Date field. Relativity’s Users documentation explicitly states that you can use a mass-operation to set the Disable On Date (UTC) field for multiple users . This is the exact documented method for updating that field across multiple user accounts at once.

The other options are not the documented answer for this workflow. Disabling a group is not the same thing as updating the Disable On Date field on user records. Overlay via Import/Export is not the method Relativity identifies for this task in the Users documentation. Setting the field individually works for a single user, but the question asks specifically about multiple users . Therefore, the correct answer is to use a mass operation to update the Disable On Date field.

The correct answer is A. At the User level, use the Disable on Date settings. Relativity’s Users documentation states that Disable on Date (UTC) is the field used to auto-disable users on a specific future date. It also explains that you can set this field when creating or editing an individual user, and that users will be automatically logged out and disabled on the specified date and time.

The other options are not the documented built-in mechanism for this feature. User Activity in Security Center allows admins to inspect and disable users, but it is not the setting used to preconfigure automatic disablement on a future date. Likewise, the question’s instance-level settings in options B and D are not the Relativity feature described in the official Users documentation for automatic disablement. Therefore, the correct answer is Disable on Date at the user level .

The correct answer is C. Possible cut-off content on imaged MSG or EML files. Relativity’s official Imaging Warnings documentation states that the Imaging Warnings object identifies possible cut-off content on imaged MSG or EML files and stores that information. It further explains that users can review these items on the Imaging Warnings tab after imaging completes.

The other choices describe imaging failures or limitations, but they are not what the Imaging Warnings tab is specifically designed to identify. Password-protected failures and general non-imageable content are handled through other imaging or processing error mechanisms. The Imaging Warnings feature is much narrower and is specifically meant to flag the risk that content in imaged MSG or EML items may have been cut off in the rendered output. Therefore, the correct answer is C .

The correct answer is D. Check the box to export multiple-choice fields as nested. Relativity’s official export documentation states that Export Multiple Choice Fields as Nested is the option used to maintain the hierarchy of Relativity multiple-choice lists during export. It further explains that the nested value delimiter is a backslash, which preserves the parent-child structure of those choices in the exported data.

This means the hierarchy is not lost by default if the appropriate export option is selected, so option A is incorrect. Sorting on the field does not preserve the nested hierarchy, making option B wrong. Exporting as CSV for Excel recognition is also not the documented mechanism, so option C is incorrect. From an RCA and data loading standpoint, this setting matters because exported hierarchical values often need to be re-used downstream, re-imported, or validated in a way that preserves their original structure. Without the nested export option, the relationship between parent and child values may not be represented correctly. Therefore, the proper way to maintain multiple-choice hierarchy when exporting a saved search through Import/Export is to check the box to export multiple-choice fields as nested .

The correct answer is C. The email and other parent emails in the thread are coded differently. Relativity’s Email thread visualization documentation explains the meaning of the visual warning icons used in the thread display. The red exclamation point is associated with a coding mismatch condition in the thread. In practice, this means related parent emails in the thread have been coded inconsistently, which is exactly the kind of review inconsistency ETV is designed to expose.

This is different from missing attachments, duplicate spare comparison, or a generic “Needs Review” state. ETV is focused on surfacing thread relationships, inclusiveness, missing emails, and coding consistency across the email conversation. From a Structured Analytics standpoint, the red exclamation point is a QC indicator that reviewers should inspect the thread because coding decisions across parent emails do not align. Therefore, the correct answer is C .