Databricks Databricks-Generative-AI-Engineer-Associate日本語版試験解答、Databricks-Generative-AI-Engineer-Associate模擬問題集
P.S.It-PassportsがGoogle Driveで共有している無料の2025 Databricks Databricks-Generative-AI-Engineer-Associateダンプ：https://drive.google.com/open?id=1-mPK7JV7EQuZLsrrFnyXOwaIXjtrEU9i
It-Passportsは生徒を常に惹きつけ、Databricks熱心な顧客からの世界的なフィードバックの進歩に情熱を移します。Databricks-Generative-AI-Engineer-Associate試験で彼らが夢をかなえるためにこの分野でナンバーワンであることを証明します。 Databricks-Generative-AI-Engineer-Associate試験問題の質の高さを保証しているため、Databricks-Generative-AI-Engineer-Associate練習教材はより優れた教育効果をもたらします。 また、学習の後方情報の蓄積が生徒に大きな負担を感じさせる代わりに、最新のDatabricks-Generative-AI-Engineer-AssociateのDatabricks Certified Generative AI Engineer Associate試験ガイドは、あらゆる種類の生徒の有効性または正確性のニーズを満たすことができます。
Databricks Databricks-Generative-AI-Engineer-Associate 認定試験の出題範囲：
トピック
出題範囲
トピック 1
トピック 2
トピック 3
トピック 4
>> Databricks Databricks-Generative-AI-Engineer-Associate日本語版試験解答 <<
試験の準備方法-最新なDatabricks-Generative-AI-Engineer-Associate日本語版試験解答試験-効率的なDatabricks-Generative-AI-Engineer-Associate模擬問題集
Databricks-Generative-AI-Engineer-Associate試験問題は、重要なことに焦点を当て、目標を達成するのに役立ちます。レビュープロセスに緊張が生じると、Databricks-Generative-AI-Engineer-Associate練習資料が問題を効率的に解決します。高品質のDatabricks-Generative-AI-Engineer-Associateガイド資料と学習モードの柔軟な選択により、それらはあなたに便利さと容易さをもたらします。すべてのページは、明確なレイアウトと覚えておくと役立つ知識を持つ専門家によって慎重に配置されています。レビューのすべての段階で、Databricks-Generative-AI-Engineer-Associate練習準備はあなたを満足させます。
Databricks Certified Generative AI Engineer Associate 認定 Databricks-Generative-AI-Engineer-Associate 試験問題 (Q38-Q43):
質問 # 38
A Generative Al Engineer has already trained an LLM on Databricks and it is now ready to be deployed.
Which of the following steps correctly outlines the easiest process for deploying a model on Databricks?
正解：B
質問 # 39
A Generative AI Engineer developed an LLM application using the provisioned throughput Foundation Model API. Now that the application is ready to be deployed, they realize their volume of requests are not sufficiently high enough to create their own provisioned throughput endpoint. They want to choose a strategy that ensures the best cost-effectiveness for their application.
What strategy should the Generative AI Engineer use?
正解：B
解説：
* Problem Context: The engineer needs a cost-effective deployment strategy for an LLM application with relatively low request volume.
* Explanation of Options:
* Option A: Switching to external models may not provide the required control or integration necessary for specific application needs.
* Option B: Using a pay-per-token model is cost-effective, especially for applications with variable or low request volumes, as it aligns costs directly with usage.
* Option C: Changing to a model with fewer parameters could reduce costs, but might also impact the performance and capabilities of the application.
* Option D: Manually throttling requests is a less efficient and potentially error-prone strategy for managing costs.
OptionBis ideal, offering flexibility and cost control, aligning expenses directly with the application's usage patterns.
質問 # 40
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?
正解：B
解説：
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.
質問 # 41
A Generative Al Engineer is helping a cinema extend its website's chat bot to be able to respond to questions about specific showtimes for movies currently playing at their local theater. They already have the location of the user provided by location services to their agent, and a Delta table which is continually updated with the latest showtime information by location. They want to implement this new capability In their RAG application.
Which option will do this with the least effort and in the most performant way?
正解：B
解説：
The task is to extend a cinema chatbot to provide movie showtime information using a RAG application, leveraging user location and a continuously updated Delta table, with minimal effort and high performance.
Let's evaluate the options.
* Option A: Create a Feature Serving Endpoint from a FeatureSpec that references an online store synced from the Delta table. Query the Feature Serving Endpoint as part of the agent logic / tool implementation
* Databricks Feature Serving provides low-latency access to real-time data from Delta tables via an online store. Syncing the Delta table to a Feature Serving Endpoint allows the chatbot to query showtimes efficiently, integrating seamlessly into the RAG agent'stool logic. This leverages Databricks' native infrastructure, minimizing effort and ensuring performance.
* Databricks Reference:"Feature Serving Endpoints provide real-time access to Delta table data with low latency, ideal for production systems"("Databricks Feature Engineering Guide," 2023).
* Option B: Query the Delta table directly via a SQL query constructed from the user's input using a text-to-SQL LLM in the agent logic / tool
* Using a text-to-SQL LLM to generate queries adds complexity (e.g., ensuring accurate SQL generation) and latency (LLM inference + SQL execution). While feasible, it's less performant and requires more effort than a pre-built serving solution.
* Databricks Reference:"Direct SQL queries are flexible but may introduce overhead in real-time applications"("Building LLM Applications with Databricks").
* Option C: Write the Delta table contents to a text column, then embed those texts using an embedding model and store these in the vector index. Look up the information based on the embedding as part of the agent logic / tool implementation
* Converting structured Delta table data (e.g., showtimes) into text, embedding it, and using vector search is inefficient for structured lookups. It's effort-intensive (preprocessing, embedding) and less precise than direct queries, undermining performance.
* Databricks Reference:"Vector search excels for unstructured data, not structured tabular lookups"("Databricks Vector Search Documentation").
* Option D: Set up a task in Databricks Workflows to write the information in the Delta table periodically to an external database such as MySQL and query the information from there as part of the agent logic / tool implementation
* Exporting to an external database (e.g., MySQL) adds setup effort (workflow, external DB management) and latency (periodic updates vs. real-time). It's less performant and more complex than using Databricks' native tools.
* Databricks Reference:"Avoid external systems when Delta tables provide real-time data natively"("Databricks Workflows Guide").
Conclusion: Option A minimizes effort by using Databricks Feature Serving for real-time, low-latency access to the Delta table, ensuring high performance in a production-ready RAG chatbot.
質問 # 42
A Generative Al Engineer is ready to deploy an LLM application written using Foundation Model APIs. They want to follow security best practices for production scenarios Which authentication method should they choose?
正解：A
解説：
The task is to deploy an LLM application using Foundation Model APIs in a production environment while adhering to security best practices. Authentication is critical for securing access to Databricks resources, such as the Foundation Model API. Let's evaluate the options based on Databricks' security guidelines for production scenarios.
* Option A: Use an access token belonging to service principals
* Service principals are non-human identities designed for automated workflows and applications in Databricks. Using an access token tied to a service principal ensures that the authentication is scoped to the application, follows least-privilege principles (via role-based access control), and avoids reliance on individual user credentials. This is a security best practice for production deployments.
* Databricks Reference:"For production applications, use service principals with access tokens to authenticate securely, avoiding user-specific credentials"("Databricks Security Best Practices,"
2023). Additionally, the "Foundation Model API Documentation" states:"Service principal tokens are recommended for programmatic access to Foundation Model APIs."
* Option B: Use a frequently rotated access token belonging to either a workspace user or a service principal
* Frequent rotation enhances security by limiting token exposure, but tying the token to a workspace user introduces risks (e.g., user account changes, broader permissions). Including both user and service principal options dilutes the focus on application-specific security, making this less ideal than a service-principal-only approach. It also adds operational overhead without clear benefits over Option A.
* Databricks Reference:"While token rotation is a good practice, service principals are preferred over user accounts for application authentication"("Managing Tokens in Databricks," 2023).
* Option C: Use OAuth machine-to-machine authentication
* OAuth M2M (e.g., client credentials flow) is a secure method for application-to-service communication, often using service principals under the hood. However, Databricks' Foundation Model API primarily supports personal access tokens (PATs) or service principal tokens over full OAuth flows for simplicity in production setups. OAuth M2M adds complexity (e.g., managing refresh tokens) without a clear advantage in this context.
* Databricks Reference:"OAuth is supported in Databricks, but service principal tokens are simpler and sufficient for most API-based workloads"("Databricks Authentication Guide," 2023).
* Option D: Use an access token belonging to any workspace user
* Using a user's access token ties the application to an individual's identity, violating security best practices. It risks exposure if the user leaves, changes roles, or has overly broad permissions, and it's not scalable or auditable for production.
* Databricks Reference:"Avoid using personal user tokens for production applications due to security and governance concerns"("Databricks Security Best Practices," 2023).
Conclusion: Option A is the best choice, as it uses a service principal's access token, aligning with Databricks' security best practices for production LLM applications. It ensures secure, application-specific authentication with minimal complexity, as explicitly recommended for Foundation Model API deployments.
質問 # 43
......
かつてないほどの才能の才能が大量に出てきたので、現代の才能はどのような能力を所有し、最終的に成功へと歩むべきでしょうか？まあ、もちろん、それはあなたに社会での地位の資本を与えるDatabricks-Generative-AI-Engineer-Associate試験資格認定です。 Databricks-Generative-AI-Engineer-Associate準備資料では、公式の試験銀行に最新の学習モデルと包括的な知識構造が表示されます。これは、技術スキルの向上と将来への価値の創造を目的としています。 Databricks-Generative-AI-Engineer-Associate試験の高度な質問とともにDatabricks-Generative-AI-Engineer-Associate試験に合格する必要があります。
Databricks-Generative-AI-Engineer-Associate模擬問題集: https://www.it-passports.com/Databricks-Generative-AI-Engineer-Associate.html
ちなみに、It-Passports Databricks-Generative-AI-Engineer-Associateの一部をクラウドストレージからダウンロードできます：https://drive.google.com/open?id=1-mPK7JV7EQuZLsrrFnyXOwaIXjtrEU9i
