Patrick Powell Patrick Powell

0 Course Enrolled 0 Course Completed

Biography

Databricks-Generative-AI-Engineer-Associate Quiz & Authentic Databricks-Generative-AI-Engineer-Associate Exam Questions

Although a lot of products are cheap, but the quality is poor, perhaps users have the same concern for our latest Databricks-Generative-AI-Engineer-Associate exam dump. Here, we solemnly promise to users that our product error rate is zero. Everything that appears in our products has been inspected by experts. In our Databricks-Generative-AI-Engineer-Associate practice materials, users will not even find a small error, such as spelling errors or grammatical errors. It is believed that no one is willing to buy defective products, so, the Databricks-Generative-AI-Engineer-Associate Study Guide has established a strict quality control system. The entire compilation and review process for latest Databricks-Generative-AI-Engineer-Associate exam dump has its own set of normative systems, and the Databricks-Generative-AI-Engineer-Associate practice materials have a professional proofreader to check all content. Only through our careful inspection, the study material can be uploaded to our platform. So, please believe us, 0 error rate is our commitment.

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

Topic	Details
Topic 1	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 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	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 4	Assembling and Deploying Applications: In this topic, Generative AI Engineers get knowledge about coding a chain using a pyfunc mode, coding a simple chain using langchain, and coding a simple chain according to requirements. Additionally, the topic focuses on basic elements needed to create a RAG application. Lastly, the topic addresses sub-topics about registering the model to Unity Catalog using MLflow.

>> Databricks-Generative-AI-Engineer-Associate Quiz <<

Rely on Real Databricks Databricks-Generative-AI-Engineer-Associate Questions For Success

BraindumpsPrep offers latest braindumps pdf, braindumps sheet and braindumps questions. Real Databricks Certified Generative AI Engineer Associate Databricks-Generative-AI-Engineer-Associate Exams can help customers success in their career. Databricks with best Databricks Certified Generative AI Engineer Associate study material help customers pass the Databricks Certified Generative AI Engineer Associate Databricks-Generative-AI-Engineer-Associate test. And the Databricks Certified Generative AI Engineer Associate Databricks-Generative-AI-Engineer-Associate price is affordable. With 365 days updates.

Databricks Certified Generative AI Engineer Associate Sample Questions (Q43-Q48):

NEW QUESTION # 43
After changing the response generating LLM in a RAG pipeline from GPT-4 to a model with a shorter context length that the company self-hosts, the Generative AI Engineer is getting the following error:

What TWO solutions should the Generative AI Engineer implement without changing the response generating model? (Choose two.)

A. Use a smaller embedding model to generate
B. Reduce the maximum output tokens of the new model
C. Decrease the chunk size of embedded documents
D. Reduce the number of records retrieved from the vector database
E. Retrain the response generating model using ALiBi

Answer: C,D

Explanation:
* Problem Context: After switching to a model with a shorter context length, the error message indicating that the prompt token count has exceeded the limit suggests that the input to the model is too large.
* Explanation of Options:
* Option A: Use a smaller embedding model to generate- This wouldn't necessarily address the issue of prompt size exceeding the model's token limit.
* Option B: Reduce the maximum output tokens of the new model- This option affects the output length, not the size of the input being too large.
* Option C: Decrease the chunk size of embedded documents- This would help reduce the size of each document chunk fed into the model, ensuring that the input remains within the model's context length limitations.
* Option D: Reduce the number of records retrieved from the vector database- By retrieving fewer records, the total input size to the model can be managed more effectively, keeping it within the allowable token limits.
* Option E: Retrain the response generating model using ALiBi- Retraining the model is contrary to the stipulation not to change the response generating model.
OptionsCandDare the most effective solutions to manage the model's shorter context length without changing the model itself, by adjusting the input size both in terms of individual document size and total documents retrieved.

NEW QUESTION # 44
A Generative AI Engineer is developing a patient-facing healthcare-focused chatbot. If the patient's question is not a medical emergency, the chatbot should solicit more information from the patient to pass to the doctor' s office and suggest a few relevant pre-approved medical articles for reading. If the patient's question is urgent, direct the patient to calling their local emergency services.
Given the following user input:
"I have been experiencing severe headaches and dizziness for the past two days." Which response is most appropriate for the chatbot to generate?

A. Here are a few relevant articles for your browsing. Let me know if you have questions after reading them.
B. Please call your local emergency services.
C. Please provide your age, recent activities, and any other symptoms you have noticed along with your headaches and dizziness.
D. Headaches can be tough. Hope you feel better soon!

Answer: B

Explanation:
* Problem Context: The task is to design responses for a healthcare-focused chatbot that appropriately addresses the urgency of a patient's symptoms.
* Explanation of Options:
* Option A: Suggesting articles might be suitable for less urgent inquiries but is inappropriate for symptoms that could indicate a serious condition.
* Option B: Given the description of severe symptoms like headaches and dizziness, directing the patient to emergency services is prudent. This aligns with medical guidelines that recommend immediate professional attention for such severe symptoms.
* Option C: Offering well-wishes does not address the potential seriousness of the symptoms and lacks appropriate action.
* Option D: While gathering more information is part of a detailed assessment, the immediate need here suggests a more urgent response.
Given the potential severity of the described symptoms,Option Bis the most appropriate, ensuring the chatbot directs patients to seek urgent care when needed, potentially saving lives.

NEW QUESTION # 45
A Generative Al Engineer is developing a RAG system for their company to perform internal document Q&A for structured HR policies, but the answers returned are frequently incomplete and unstructured It seems that the retriever is not returning all relevant context The Generative Al Engineer has experimented with different embedding and response generating LLMs but that did not improve results.
Which TWO options could be used to improve the response quality?
Choose 2 answers

A. Fine tune the response generation model
B. Split the document by sentence
C. Add the section header as a prefix to chunks
D. Increase the document chunk size
E. Use a larger embedding model

Answer: C,D

Explanation:
The problem describes a Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) system for HR policy Q&A where responses are incomplete and unstructured due to the retriever failing to return sufficient context. The engineer has already tried different embedding and response-generating LLMs without success, suggesting the issue lies in the retrieval process-specifically, how documents are chunked and indexed. Let's evaluate the options.
* Option A: Add the section header as a prefix to chunks
* Adding section headers provides additional context to each chunk, helping the retriever understand the chunk's relevance within the document structure (e.g., "Leave Policy: Annual Leave" vs. just "Annual Leave"). This can improve retrieval precision for structured HR policies.
* Databricks Reference:"Metadata, such as section headers, can be appended to chunks to enhance retrieval accuracy in RAG systems"("Databricks Generative AI Cookbook," 2023).
* Option B: Increase the document chunk size
* Larger chunks include more context per retrieval, reducing the chance of missing relevant information split across smaller chunks. For structured HR policies, this can ensure entire sections or rules are retrieved together.
* Databricks Reference:"Increasing chunk size can improve context completeness, though it may trade off with retrieval specificity"("Building LLM Applications with Databricks").
* Option C: Split the document by sentence
* Splitting by sentence creates very small chunks, which could exacerbate the problem by fragmenting context further. This is likely why the current system fails-it retrieves incomplete snippets rather than cohesive policy sections.
* Databricks Reference: No specific extract opposes this, but the emphasis on context completeness in RAG suggests smaller chunks worsen incomplete responses.
* Option D: Use a larger embedding model
* A larger embedding model might improve vector quality, but the question states that experimenting with different embedding models didn't help. This suggests the issue isn't embedding quality but rather chunking/retrieval strategy.
* Databricks Reference: Embedding models are critical, but not the focus when retrieval context is the bottleneck.
* Option E: Fine tune the response generation model
* Fine-tuning the LLM could improve response coherence, but if the retriever doesn't provide complete context, the LLM can't generate full answers. The root issue is retrieval, not generation.
* Databricks Reference: Fine-tuning is recommended for domain-specific generation, not retrieval fixes ("Generative AI Engineer Guide").
Conclusion: Options A and B address the retrieval issue directly by enhancing chunk context-either through metadata (A) or size (B)-aligning with Databricks' RAG optimization strategies. C would worsen the problem, while D and E don't target the root cause given prior experimentation.

NEW QUESTION # 46
A Generative AI Engineer is testing a simple prompt template in LangChain using the code below, but is getting an error.

Assuming the API key was properly defined, what change does the Generative AI Engineer need to make to fix their chain?

Answer: A

Explanation:
To fix the error in the LangChain code provided for using a simple prompt template, the correct approach is Option C. Here's a detailed breakdown of why Option C is the right choice and how it addresses the issue:
* Proper Initialization: In Option C, the LLMChain is correctly initialized with the LLM instance specified as OpenAI(), which likely represents a language model (like GPT) from OpenAI. This is crucial as it specifies which model to use for generating responses.
* Correct Use of Classes and Methods:
* The PromptTemplate is defined with the correct format, specifying that adjective is a variable within the template. This allows dynamic insertion of values into the template when generating text.
* The prompt variable is properly linked with the PromptTemplate, and the final template string is passed correctly.
* The LLMChain correctly references the prompt and the initialized OpenAI() instance, ensuring that the template and the model are properly linked for generating output.
Why Other Options Are Incorrect:
* Option A: Misuses the parameter passing in generate method by incorrectly structuring the dictionary.
* Option B: Incorrectly uses prompt.format method which does not exist in the context of LLMChain and PromptTemplate configuration, resulting in potential errors.
* Option D: Incorrect order and setup in the initialization parameters for LLMChain, which would likely lead to a failure in recognizing the correct configuration for prompt and LLM usage.
Thus, Option C is correct because it ensures that the LangChain components are correctly set up and integrated, adhering to proper syntax and logical flow required by LangChain's architecture. This setup avoids common pitfalls such as type errors or method misuses, which are evident in other options.

NEW QUESTION # 47
A Generative Al Engineer has created a RAG application to look up answers to questions about a series of fantasy novels that are being asked on the author's web forum. The fantasy novel texts are chunked and embedded into a vector store with metadata (page number, chapter number, book title), retrieved with the user' s query, and provided to an LLM for response generation. The Generative AI Engineer used their intuition to pick the chunking strategy and associated configurations but now wants to more methodically choose the best values.
Which TWO strategies should the Generative AI Engineer take to optimize their chunking strategy and parameters? (Choose two.)

A. Add a classifier for user queries that predicts which book will best contain the answer. Use this to filter retrieval.
B. Create an LLM-as-a-judge metric to evaluate how well previous questions are answered by the most appropriate chunk. Optimize the chunking parameters based upon the values of the metric.
C. Choose an appropriate evaluation metric (such as recall or NDCG) and experiment with changes in the chunking strategy, such as splitting chunks by paragraphs or chapters.
Choose the strategy that gives the best performance metric.
D. Pass known questions and best answers to an LLM and instruct the LLM to provide the best token count. Use a summary statistic (mean, median, etc.) of the best token counts to choose chunk size.
E. Change embedding models and compare performance.

Answer: B,C

Explanation:
To optimize a chunking strategy for a Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) application, the Generative AI Engineer needs a structured approach to evaluating the chunking strategy, ensuring that the chosen configuration retrieves the most relevant information and leads to accurate and coherent LLM responses.
Here's whyCandEare the correct strategies:
Strategy C: Evaluation Metrics (Recall, NDCG)
* Define an evaluation metric: Common evaluation metrics such as recall, precision, or NDCG (Normalized Discounted Cumulative Gain) measure how well the retrieved chunks match the user's query and the expected response.
* Recallmeasures the proportion of relevant information retrieved.
* NDCGis often used when you want to account for both the relevance of retrieved chunks and the ranking or order in which they are retrieved.
* Experiment with chunking strategies: Adjusting chunking strategies based on text structure (e.g., splitting by paragraph, chapter, or a fixed number of tokens) allows the engineer to experiment with various ways of slicing the text. Some chunks may better align with the user's query than others.
* Evaluate performance: By using recall or NDCG, the engineer can methodically test various chunking strategies to identify which one yields the highest performance. This ensures that the chunking method provides the most relevant information when embedding and retrieving data from the vector store.
Strategy E: LLM-as-a-Judge Metric
* Use the LLM as an evaluator: After retrieving chunks, the LLM can be used to evaluate the quality of answers based on the chunks provided. This could be framed as a "judge" function, where the LLM compares how well a given chunk answers previous user queries.
* Optimize based on the LLM's judgment: By having the LLM assess previous answers and rate their relevance and accuracy, the engineer can collect feedback on how well different chunking configurations perform in real-world scenarios.
* This metric could be a qualitative judgment on how closely the retrieved information matches the user's intent.
* Tune chunking parameters: Based on the LLM's judgment, the engineer can adjust the chunk size or structure to better align with the LLM's responses, optimizing retrieval for future queries.
By combining these two approaches, the engineer ensures that the chunking strategy is systematically evaluated using both quantitative (recall/NDCG) and qualitative (LLM judgment) methods. This balanced optimization process results in improved retrieval relevance and, consequently, better response generation by the LLM.

NEW QUESTION # 48
......

The software keeps track of the previous Databricks Certified Generative AI Engineer Associate (Databricks-Generative-AI-Engineer-Associate) practice exam attempts and shows the changes of each attempt. You don't need to wait days or weeks to get your performance report. The software displays the result of the Databricks Databricks-Generative-AI-Engineer-Associate Practice Test immediately, which is an excellent way to understand which area needs more attention.

Authentic Databricks-Generative-AI-Engineer-Associate Exam Questions: https://www.briandumpsprep.com/Databricks-Generative-AI-Engineer-Associate-prep-exam-braindumps.html

Patrick Powell Patrick Powell

Biography

Databricks-Generative-AI-Engineer-Associate Quiz & Authentic Databricks-Generative-AI-Engineer-Associate Exam Questions

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

Rely on Real Databricks Databricks-Generative-AI-Engineer-Associate Questions For Success

Databricks Certified Generative AI Engineer Associate Sample Questions (Q43-Q48):

Follow us on social media

ABOUT

CATEGORIES

SUPPORT

GET IN TOUCH