Expert Validation Use Up-to-Date Q&As to Pass the Databricks Databricks-Generative-AI-Engineer-Associate Exam

Blog Article

Tags: Test Databricks-Generative-AI-Engineer-Associate Prep, Relevant Databricks-Generative-AI-Engineer-Associate Questions, Test Databricks-Generative-AI-Engineer-Associate Dumps Free, Databricks-Generative-AI-Engineer-Associate Practice Guide, Databricks-Generative-AI-Engineer-Associate Latest Guide Files

We have tens of thousands of supporters around the world eager to pass the exam with our Databricks-Generative-AI-Engineer-Associate learning guide which are having a steady increase on the previous years. Exam candidates around the world are longing for learning from our practice materials. If you want to have an outline and brief understanding of our Databricks-Generative-AI-Engineer-Associate Preparation materials we offer free demos for your reference. You can have a look of our Databricks-Generative-AI-Engineer-Associate exam questions for realistic testing problems in them.

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

Topic	Details
Topic 1	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 2	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 3	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.
Topic 4	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.

>> Test Databricks-Generative-AI-Engineer-Associate Prep <<

Relevant Databricks-Generative-AI-Engineer-Associate Questions - Test Databricks-Generative-AI-Engineer-Associate Dumps Free

As is known to us, the quality is an essential standard for a lot of people consuming movements, and the high quality of the Databricks-Generative-AI-Engineer-Associate guide questions is always reflected in the efficiency. We are glad to tell you that the Databricks-Generative-AI-Engineer-Associate actual guide materials from our company have a high quality and efficiency. If you decide to choose Databricks-Generative-AI-Engineer-Associate actual guide materials as you first study tool, it will be very possible for you to pass the Databricks-Generative-AI-Engineer-Associate exam successfully, and then you will get the related certification in a short time.

Databricks Certified Generative AI Engineer Associate Sample Questions (Q10-Q15):

NEW QUESTION # 10
Generative AI Engineer at an electronics company just deployed a RAG application for customers to ask questions about products that the company carries. However, they received feedback that the RAG response often returns information about an irrelevant product.
What can the engineer do to improve the relevance of the RAG's response?

A. Use a different semantic similarity search algorithm
B. Use a different LLM to improve the generated response
C. Assess the quality of the retrieved context
D. Implement caching for frequently asked questions

Answer: C

Explanation:
In a Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) system, the key to providing relevant responses lies in the quality of the retrieved context. Here's why option A is the most appropriate solution:
* Context Relevance:The RAG model generates answers based on retrieved documents or context. If the retrieved information is about an irrelevant product, it suggests that the retrieval step is failing to select the right context. The Generative AI Engineer must first assess the quality of what is being retrieved and ensure it is pertinent to the query.
* Vector Search and Embedding Similarity:RAG typically uses vector search for retrieval, where embeddings of the query are matched against embeddings of product descriptions. Assessing the semantic similarity searchprocess ensures that the closest matches are actually relevant to the query.
* Fine-tuning the Retrieval Process:By improving theretrieval quality, such as tuning the embeddings or adjusting the retrieval strategy, the system can return more accurate and relevant product information.
* Why Other Options Are Less Suitable:
* B (Caching FAQs): Caching can speed up responses for frequently asked questions but won't improve the relevance of the retrieved content for less frequent or new queries.
* C (Use a Different LLM): Changing the LLM only affects the generation step, not the retrieval process, which is the core issue here.
* D (Different Semantic Search Algorithm): This could help, but the first step is to evaluate the current retrieval context before replacing the search algorithm.
Therefore, improving and assessing the quality of the retrieved context (option A) is the first step to fixing the issue of irrelevant product information.

NEW QUESTION # 11
A Generative AI Engineer is building an LLM to generate article summaries in the form of a type of poem, such as a haiku, given the article content. However, the initial output from the LLM does not match the desired tone or style.
Which approach will NOT improve the LLM's response to achieve the desired response?

A. Include few-shot examples in the prompt to the LLM
B. Provide the LLM with a prompt that explicitly instructs it to generate text in the desired tone and style
C. Use a neutralizer to normalize the tone and style of the underlying documents
D. Fine-tune the LLM on a dataset of desired tone and style

Answer: C

Explanation:
The task at hand is to improve the LLM's ability to generate poem-like article summaries with the desired tone and style. Using aneutralizerto normalize the tone and style of the underlying documents (option B) will not help improve the LLM's ability to generate the desired poetic style. Here's why:
* Neutralizing Underlying Documents:A neutralizer aims to reduce or standardize the tone of input data. However, this contradicts the goal, which is to generate text with aspecific tone and style(like haikus). Neutralizing the source documents will strip away the richness of the content, making it harder for the LLM to generate creative, stylistic outputs like poems.
* Why Other Options Improve Results:
* A (Explicit Instructions in the Prompt): Directly instructing the LLM to generate text in a specific tone and style helps align the output with the desired format (e.g., haikus). This is a common and effective technique in prompt engineering.
* C (Few-shot Examples): Providing examples of the desired output format helps the LLM understand the expected tone and structure, making it easier to generate similar outputs.
* D (Fine-tuning the LLM): Fine-tuning the model on a dataset that contains examples of the desired tone and style is a powerful way to improve the model's ability to generate outputs that match the target format.
Therefore, using a neutralizer (option B) isnotan effective method for achieving the goal of generating stylized poetic summaries.

NEW QUESTION # 12
A Generative Al Engineer needs to design an LLM pipeline to conduct multi-stage reasoning that leverages external tools. To be effective at this, the LLM will need to plan and adapt actions while performing complex reasoning tasks.
Which approach will do this?

A. Tram the LLM to generate a single, comprehensive response without interacting with any external tools, relying solely on its pre-trained knowledge.
B. Use a Chain-of-Thought (CoT) prompting technique to guide the LLM through a series of reasoning steps, then manually input the results from external tools for the final answer.
C. Implement a framework like ReAct which allows the LLM to generate reasoning traces and perform task-specific actions that leverage external tools if necessary.
D. Encourage the LLM to make multiple API calls in sequence without planning or structuring the calls, allowing the LLM to decide when and how to use external tools spontaneously.

Answer: C

Explanation:
The task requires an LLM pipeline for multi-stage reasoning with external tools, necessitating planning, adaptability, and complex reasoning. Let's evaluate the options based on Databricks' recommendations for advanced LLM workflows.
* Option A: Train the LLM to generate a single, comprehensive response without interacting with any external tools, relying solely on its pre-trained knowledge
* This approach limits the LLM to its static knowledge base, excluding external tools and multi- stage reasoning. It can't adapt or plan actions dynamically, failing the requirements.
* Databricks Reference:"External tools enhance LLM capabilities beyond pre-trained knowledge" ("Building LLM Applications with Databricks," 2023).
* Option B: Implement a framework like ReAct which allows the LLM to generate reasoning traces and perform task-specific actions that leverage external tools if necessary
* ReAct (Reasoning + Acting) combines reasoning traces (step-by-step logic) with actions (e.g., tool calls), enabling the LLM to plan, adapt, and execute complex tasks iteratively. This meets all requirements: multi-stage reasoning, tool use, and adaptability.
* Databricks Reference:"Frameworks like ReAct enable LLMs to interleave reasoning and external tool interactions for complex problem-solving"("Generative AI Cookbook," 2023).
* Option C: Encourage the LLM to make multiple API calls in sequence without planning or structuring the calls, allowing the LLM to decide when and how to use external tools spontaneously
* Unstructured, spontaneous API calls lack planning and may lead to inefficient or incorrect tool usage. This doesn't ensure effective multi-stage reasoning or adaptability.
* Databricks Reference: Structured frameworks are preferred:"Ad-hoc tool calls can reduce reliability in complex tasks"("Building LLM-Powered Applications").
* Option D: Use a Chain-of-Thought (CoT) prompting technique to guide the LLM through a series of reasoning steps, then manually input the results from external tools for the final answer
* CoT improves reasoning but relies on manual tool interaction, breaking automation and adaptability. It's not a scalable pipeline solution.
* Databricks Reference:"Manual intervention is impractical for production LLM pipelines" ("Databricks Generative AI Engineer Guide").
Conclusion: Option B (ReAct) is the best approach, as it integrates reasoning and tool use in a structured, adaptive framework, aligning with Databricks' guidance for complex LLM workflows.

NEW QUESTION # 13
A Generative AI Engineer is creating an agent-based LLM system for their favorite monster truck team. The system can answer text based questions about the monster truck team, lookup event dates via an API call, or query tables on the team's latest standings.
How could the Generative AI Engineer best design these capabilities into their system?

A. Ingest PDF documents about the monster truck team into a vector store and query it in a RAG architecture.
B. Write a system prompt for the agent listing available tools and bundle it into an agent system that runs a number of calls to solve a query.
C. Instruct the LLM to respond with "RAG", "API", or "TABLE" depending on the query, then use text parsing and conditional statements to resolve the query.
D. Build a system prompt with all possible event dates and table information in the system prompt. Use a RAG architecture to lookup generic text questions and otherwise leverage the information in the system prompt.

Answer: B

Explanation:
In this scenario, the Generative AI Engineer needs to design a system that can handle different types of queries about the monster truck team. The queries may involve text-based information, API lookups for event dates, or table queries for standings. The best solution is to implement atool-based agent system.
Here's how option B works, and why it's the most appropriate answer:
* System Design Using Agent-Based Model:In modern agent-based LLM systems, you can design a system where the LLM (Large Language Model) acts as a central orchestrator. The model can "decide" which tools to use based on the query. These tools can include API calls, table lookups, or natural language searches. The system should contain asystem promptthat informs the LLM about the available tools.
* System Prompt Listing Tools:By creating a well-craftedsystem prompt, the LLM knows which tools are at its disposal. For instance, one tool may query an external API for event dates, another might look up standings in a database, and a third may involve searching a vector database for general text-based information. Theagentwill be responsible for calling the appropriate tool depending on the query.
* Agent Orchestration of Calls:The agent system is designed to execute a series of steps based on the incoming query. If a user asks for the next event date, the system will recognize this as a task that requires an API call. If the user asks about standings, the agent might query the appropriate table in the database. For text-based questions, it may call a search function over ingested data. The agent orchestrates this entire process, ensuring the LLM makes calls to the right resources dynamically.
* Generative AI Tools and Context:This is a standard architecture for integrating multiple functionalities into a system where each query requires different actions. The core design in option B is efficient because it keeps the system modular and dynamic by leveraging tools rather than overloading the LLM with static information in a system prompt (like option D).
* Why Other Options Are Less Suitable:
* A (RAG Architecture): While relevant, simply ingesting PDFs into a vector store only helps with text-based retrieval. It wouldn't help with API lookups or table queries.
* C (Conditional Logic with RAG/API/TABLE): Although this approach works, it relies heavily on manual text parsing and might introduce complexity when scaling the system.
* D (System Prompt with Event Dates and Standings): Hardcoding dates and table information into a system prompt isn't scalable. As the standings or events change, the system would need constant updating, making it inefficient.
By bundling multiple tools into a single agent-based system (as in option B), the Generative AI Engineer can best handle the diverse requirements of this system.

NEW QUESTION # 14
A Generative Al Engineer has successfully ingested unstructured documents and chunked them by document sections. They would like to store the chunks in a Vector Search index. The current format of the dataframe has two columns: (i) original document file name (ii) an array of text chunks for each document.
What is the most performant way to store this dataframe?

A. Store each chunk as an independent JSON file in Unity Catalog Volume. For each JSON file, the key is the document section name and the value is the array of text chunks for that section
B. Flatten the dataframe to one chunk per row, create a unique identifier for each row, and save to a Delta table
C. First create a unique identifier for each document, then save to a Delta table
D. Split the data into train and test set, create a unique identifier for each document, then save to a Delta table

Answer: B

Explanation:
* Problem Context: The engineer needs an efficient way to store chunks of unstructured documents to facilitate easy retrieval and search. The current dataframe consists of document filenames and associated text chunks.
* Explanation of Options:
* Option A: Splitting into train and test sets is more relevant for model training scenarios and not directly applicable to storage for retrieval in a Vector Search index.
* Option B: Flattening the dataframe such that each row contains a single chunk with a unique identifier is the most performant for storage and retrieval. This structure aligns well with how data is indexed and queried in vector search applications, making it easier to retrieve specific chunks efficiently.
* Option C: Creating a unique identifier for each document only does not address the need to access individual chunks efficiently, which is critical in a Vector Search application.
* Option D: Storing each chunk as an independent JSON file creates unnecessary overhead and complexity in managing and querying large volumes of files.
OptionBis the most efficient and practical approach, allowing for streamlined indexing and retrieval processes in a Delta table environment, fitting the requirements of a Vector Search index.

NEW QUESTION # 15
......

Passing the Databricks-Generative-AI-Engineer-Associate exam with least time while achieving aims effortlessly is like a huge dreams for some exam candidates. Actually, it is possible with our proper Databricks-Generative-AI-Engineer-Associate learning materials. To discern what ways are favorable for you to practice and what is essential for exam syllabus, our experts made great contributions to them. All Databricks-Generative-AI-Engineer-Associate Practice Engine is highly interrelated with the exam. You will figure out this is great opportunity for you.

Relevant Databricks-Generative-AI-Engineer-Associate Questions: https://www.actual4test.com/Databricks-Generative-AI-Engineer-Associate_examcollection.html

Report this page

EXPERT VALIDATION USE UP-TO-DATE Q&AS TO PASS THE DATABRICKS DATABRICKS-GENERATIVE-AI-ENGINEER-ASSOCIATE EXAM

Expert Validation Use Up-to-Date Q&As to Pass the Databricks Databricks-Generative-AI-Engineer-Associate Exam