Karl White Karl White's Profile Page

Karl White Karl White

0 Course Enrolled • 0 Course Completed

Biography

Real Databricks Databricks-Generative-AI-Engineer-Associate Exam Environment with Our Practice Test Engine

It is acknowledged that there are numerous Databricks-Generative-AI-Engineer-Associate learning questions for candidates for the Databricks-Generative-AI-Engineer-Associate exam, however, it is impossible for you to summarize all of the key points in so many materials by yourself. But since you have clicked into this website for Databricks-Generative-AI-Engineer-Associate practice materials you need not to worry about that at all because our company is especially here for you to solve this problem. We have a lot of regular customers for a long-term cooperation now since they have understood how useful and effective our Databricks-Generative-AI-Engineer-Associate Actual Exam is.

Databricks Databricks-Generative-AI-Engineer-Associate Exam Syllabus Topics:

Topic
Details

Topic 1

Application Development: In this topic, Generative AI Engineers learn about tools needed to extract data, Langchain
similar tools, and assessing responses to identify common issues. Moreover, the topic includes questions about adjusting an LLM's response, LLM guardrails, and the best LLM based on the attributes of the application.

Topic 2

Data Preparation: Generative AI Engineers covers a chunking strategy for a given document structure and model constraints. The topic also focuses on filter extraneous content in source documents. Lastly, Generative AI Engineers also learn about extracting document content from provided source data and format.

Topic 3

Evaluation and Monitoring: This topic is all about selecting an LLM choice and key metrics. Moreover, Generative AI Engineers learn about evaluating model performance. Lastly, the topic includes sub-topics about inference logging and usage of Databricks features.

Topic 4

Design Applications: The topic focuses on designing a prompt that elicits a specifically formatted response. It also focuses on selecting model tasks to accomplish a given business requirement. Lastly, the topic covers chain components for a desired model input and output.

>> New Databricks-Generative-AI-Engineer-Associate Mock Test <<

Pass-sure Databricks-Generative-AI-Engineer-Associate Study Materials are the best Databricks-Generative-AI-Engineer-Associate exam dumps - GetValidTest

Practice is one of the essential factors in passing the exam. To perform at their best on the real exam, candidates must use Databricks Databricks-Generative-AI-Engineer-Associate practice test material. To this end, Databricks-Generative-AI-Engineer-Associate has developed three formats to help candidates prepare for their Databricks-Generative-AI-Engineer-Associate exam: desktop-based practice test software, web-based practice test, and a PDF format.

Databricks Certified Generative AI Engineer Associate Sample Questions (Q33-Q38):

NEW QUESTION # 33
A Generative Al Engineer is tasked with improving the RAG quality by addressing its inflammatory outputs.
Which action would be most effective in mitigating the problem of offensive text outputs?

A. Curate upstream data properly that includes manual review before it is fed into the RAG system
B. Inform the user of the expected RAG behavior
C. Restrict access to the data sources to a limited number of users
D. Increase the frequency of upstream data updates

Answer: A

Explanation:
Addressing offensive or inflammatory outputs in a Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) system is critical for improving user experience and ensuring ethical AI deployment. Here's whyDis the most effective approach:
* Manual data curation: The root cause of offensive outputs often comes from the underlying data used to train the model or populate the retrieval system. By manually curating the upstream data and conducting thorough reviews before the data is fed into the RAG system, the engineer can filter out harmful, offensive, or inappropriate content.
* Improving data quality: Curating data ensures the system retrieves and generates responses from a high-quality, well-vetted dataset. This directly impacts the relevance and appropriateness of the outputs from the RAG system, preventing inflammatory content from being included in responses.
* Effectiveness: This strategy directly tackles the problem at its source (the data) rather than just mitigating the consequences (such as informing users or restricting access). It ensures that the system consistently provides non-offensive, relevant information.
Other options, such as increasing the frequency of data updates or informing users about behavior expectations, may not directly mitigate the generation of inflammatory outputs.

NEW QUESTION # 34
A team wants to serve a code generation model as an assistant for their software developers. It should support multiple programming languages. Quality is the primary objective.
Which of the Databricks Foundation Model APIs, or models available in the Marketplace, would be the best fit?

A. Llama2-70b
B. MPT-7b
C. CodeLlama-34B
D. BGE-large

Answer: C

Explanation:
For a code generation model that supports multiple programming languages and where quality is the primary objective,CodeLlama-34Bis the most suitable choice. Here's the reasoning:
* Specialization in Code Generation:CodeLlama-34B is specifically designed for code generation tasks.
This model has been trained with a focus on understanding and generating code, which makes it particularly adept at handling various programming languages and coding contexts.
* Capacity and Performance:The "34B" indicates a model size of 34 billion parameters, suggesting a high capacity for handling complex tasks and generating high-quality outputs. The large model size typically correlates with better understanding and generation capabilities in diverse scenarios.
* Suitability for Development Teams:Given that the model is optimized for code, it will be able to assist software developers more effectively than general-purpose models. It understands coding syntax, semantics, and the nuances of different programming languages.
* Why Other Options Are Less Suitable:
* A (Llama2-70b): While also a large model, it's more general-purpose and may not be as fine- tuned for code generation as CodeLlama.
* B (BGE-large): This model may not specifically focus on code generation.
* C (MPT-7b): Smaller than CodeLlama-34B and likely less capable in handling complex code generation tasks at high quality.
Therefore, for a high-quality, multi-language code generation application,CodeLlama-34B(option D) is the best fit.

NEW QUESTION # 35
A Generative AI Engineer has created a RAG application which can help employees retrieve answers from an internal knowledge base, such as Confluence pages or Google Drive. The prototype application is now working with some positive feedback from internal company testers. Now the Generative Al Engineer wants to formally evaluate the system's performance and understand where to focus their efforts to further improve the system.
How should the Generative AI Engineer evaluate the system?

A. Use an LLM-as-a-judge to evaluate the quality of the final answers generated.
B. Curate a dataset that can test the retrieval and generation components of the system separately. Use MLflow's built in evaluation metrics to perform the evaluation on the retrieval and generation components.
C. Benchmark multiple LLMs with the same data and pick the best LLM for the job.
D. Use cosine similarity score to comprehensively evaluate the quality of the final generated answers.

Answer: B

Explanation:
* Problem Context: After receiving positive feedback for the RAG application prototype, the next step is to formally evaluate the system to pinpoint areas for improvement.
* Explanation of Options:
* Option A: While cosine similarity scores are useful, they primarily measure similarity rather than the overall performance of an RAG system.
* Option B: This option provides a systematic approach to evaluation by testing both retrieval and generation components separately. This allows for targeted improvements and a clear understanding of each component's performance, using MLflow's metrics for a structured and standardized assessment.
* Option C: Benchmarking multiple LLMs does not focus on evaluating the existing system's components but rather on comparing different models.
* Option D: Using an LLM as a judge is subjective and less reliable for systematic performance evaluation.
OptionBis the most comprehensive and structured approach, facilitating precise evaluations and improvements on specific components of the RAG system.

NEW QUESTION # 36
A Generative Al Engineer is building a system that will answer questions on currently unfolding news topics.
As such, it pulls information from a variety of sources including articles and social media posts. They are concerned about toxic posts on social media causing toxic outputs from their system.
Which guardrail will limit toxic outputs?

A. Implement rate limiting
B. Reduce the amount of context Items the system will Include in consideration for its response.
C. Use only approved social media and news accounts to prevent unexpected toxic data from getting to the LLM.
D. Log all LLM system responses and perform a batch toxicity analysis monthly.

Answer: C

Explanation:
The system answers questions on unfolding news topics using articles and social media, with a concern about toxic outputs from toxic inputs. A guardrail must limit toxicity in the LLM's responses. Let's evaluate the options.
* Option A: Use only approved social media and news accounts to prevent unexpected toxic data from getting to the LLM
* Curating input sources (e.g., verified accounts) reduces exposure to toxic content at the data ingestion stage, directly limiting toxic outputs. This is a proactive guardrail aligned with data quality control.
* Databricks Reference:"Control input data quality to mitigate unwanted LLM behavior, such as toxicity"("Building LLM Applications with Databricks," 2023).
* Option B: Implement rate limiting
* Rate limiting controls request frequency, not content quality. It prevents overload but doesn't address toxicity in social media inputs or outputs.
* Databricks Reference: Rate limiting is for performance, not safety:"Use rate limits to manage compute load"("Generative AI Cookbook").
* Option C: Reduce the amount of context items the system will include in consideration for its response
* Reducing context might limit exposure to some toxic items but risks losing relevant information, and it doesn't specifically target toxicity. It's an indirect, imprecise fix.
* Databricks Reference: Context reduction is for efficiency, not safety:"Adjust context size based on performance needs"("Databricks Generative AI Engineer Guide").
* Option D: Log all LLM system responses and perform a batch toxicity analysis monthly
* Logging and analyzing responses is reactive, identifying toxicity after it occurs rather than preventing it. Monthly analysis doesn't limit real-time toxic outputs.
* Databricks Reference: Monitoring is for auditing, not prevention:"Log outputs for post-hoc analysis, but use input filters for safety"("Building LLM-Powered Applications").
Conclusion: Option A is the most effective guardrail, proactively filtering toxic inputs from unverified sources, which aligns with Databricks' emphasis on data quality as a primary safety mechanism for LLM systems.

NEW QUESTION # 37
A Generative AI Engineer is tasked with deploying an application that takes advantage of a custom MLflow Pyfunc model to return some interim results.
How should they configure the endpoint to pass the secrets and credentials?

A. Add credentials using environment variables
B. Use spark.conf.set ()
C. Pass the secrets in plain text
D. Pass variables using the Databricks Feature Store API

Answer: A

Explanation:
Context: Deploying an application that uses an MLflow Pyfunc model involves managing sensitive information such as secrets and credentials securely.
Explanation of Options:
* Option A: Use spark.conf.set(): While this method can pass configurations within Spark jobs, using it for secrets is not recommended because it may expose them in logs or Spark UI.
* Option B: Pass variables using the Databricks Feature Store API: The Feature Store API is designed for managing features for machine learning, not for handling secrets or credentials.
* Option C: Add credentials using environment variables: This is a common practice for managing credentials in a secure manner, as environment variables can be accessed securely by applications without exposing them in the codebase.
* Option D: Pass the secrets in plain text: This is highly insecure and not recommended, as it exposes sensitive information directly in the code.
Therefore,Option Cis the best method for securely passing secrets and credentials to an application, protecting them from exposure.

NEW QUESTION # 38
......

We try our best to provide the most efficient and intuitive learning methods to the learners and help them learn efficiently. Our Databricks-Generative-AI-Engineer-Associate exam reference provides the instances to the clients so as to they can understand them intuitively. Based on the consideration that there are the instances to our Databricks-Generative-AI-Engineer-Associate test guide to concretely demonstrate the knowledge points. Through the stimulation of the Real Databricks-Generative-AI-Engineer-Associate Exam the clients can have an understanding of the mastery degrees of our Databricks-Generative-AI-Engineer-Associate exam practice question in practice. Thus our clients can understand the abstract concepts in an intuitive way.

Databricks-Generative-AI-Engineer-Associate Latest Test Fee: https://www.getvalidtest.com/Databricks-Generative-AI-Engineer-Associate-exam.html

Karl White Karl White

Biography

Quick Links

Social Media