Google Professional-Machine-Learning-Engineer Exam With Confidence Using Practice Dumps

The most likely reason for the observed result is that the model is overfitting in areas with less traffic and underfitting in areas with more traffic. Overfitting means that the model learns the specific patterns and noise in the training data, but fails to generalize well to new and unseen data. Underfitting means that the model is not able to capture the complexity and variability of the data, and performs poorly on both training and test data. In this case, the model might have learned to segment the images well when there is less traffic, but it might not have enough data or features to handle the more challenging scenarios when there is more traffic. This could lead to a decrease in the AUC metric, which measures the ability of the model to distinguish between different classes. AUC is a suitable metric for this classification model, as it is not affected by class imbalance or threshold selection. The other options are not likely to be the reason for the result, as they are not related to the traffic density. Too much data representing congested areas would not cause the model to fail in those areas, but rather help the model learn better. Gradients vanishing or exploding is a problem that occurs during the training process, not after the deployment, and it affects the whole model, not specific scenarios. References:

Image Segmentation: U-Net For Self Driving Cars

Intelligent Semantic Segmentation for Self-Driving Vehicles Using Deep Learning

Sharing Pixelopolis, a self-driving car demo from Google I/O built with TensorFlow Lite

Google Cloud launches machine learning engineer certification

Google Professional Machine Learning Engineer Certification

Professional ML Engineer Exam Guide

Preparing for Google Cloud Certification: Machine Learning Engineer Professional Certificate

The best option for using Vertex AI Model Monitoring for drift detection and minimizing the cost is to use the features and the feature attributions for monitoring, and set a prediction-sampling-rate value that is closer to 0 than 1. This option allows you to leverage the power and flexibility of Google Cloud to detect feature drift in the input predict requests for custom models, and reduce the storage and computation costs of the model monitoring job. Vertex AI Model Monitoring is a service that can track and compare the results of multiple machine learning runs. Vertex AI Model Monitoring can monitor the model’s prediction input data for feature skew and drift. Feature drift occurs when the feature data distribution in production changes over time. If the original training data is not available, you can enable drift detection to monitor your models for feature drift. Vertex AI Model Monitoring uses TensorFlow Data Validation (TFDV) to calculate the distributions and distance scores for each feature, and compares them with a baseline distribution. The baseline distribution is the statistical distribution of the feature’s values in the training data. If the training data is not available, the baseline distribution is calculated from the first 1000 prediction requests that the model receives. If the distance score for a feature exceeds an alerting threshold that you set, Vertex AI Model Monitoring sends you an email alert. However, if you use a custom model, you can also enable feature attribution monitoring, which can provide more insights into the feature drift. Feature attribution monitoring analyzes the feature attributions, which are the contributions of each feature to the prediction output. Feature attribution monitoring can help you identify the features that have the most impact on the model performance, and the features that have the most significant drift over time. Feature attribution monitoring can also help you understand the relationship between the features and the prediction output, and the correlation between the features1. The prediction-sampling-rate is a parameter that determines the percentage of prediction requests that are logged and analyzed by the model monitoring job. Using a lower prediction-sampling-rate can reduce the storage and computation costs of the model monitoring job, but also the quality and validity of the data. Using a lower prediction-sampling-rate can introduce sampling bias and noise into the data, and make the model monitoring job miss some important features or patterns of the data. However, using a higher prediction-sampling-rate can increase the storage and computation costs of the model monitoring job, and also the amount of data that needs to be processed and analyzed. Therefore, there is a trade-off between the prediction-sampling-rate and the cost and accuracy of the model monitoring job, and the optimal prediction-sampling-rate depends on the business objective and the data characteristics2. By using the features and the feature attributions for monitoring, and setting a prediction-sampling-rate value that is closer to 0 than 1, you can use Vertex AI Model Monitoring for drift detection and minimize the cost.

The other options are not as good as option D, for the following reasons:

Option A: Using the features for monitoring and setting a monitoring-frequency value that is higher than the default would not enable feature attribution monitoring, and could increase the cost of the model monitoring job. The monitoring-frequency is a parameter that determines how often the model monitoring job analyzes the logged prediction requests and calculates the distributions and distance scores for each feature. Using a higher monitoring-frequency can increase the frequency and timeliness of the model monitoring job, but also the computation costs of the model monitoring job. Moreover, using the features for monitoring would not enable feature attribution monitoring, which can provide more insights into the feature drift and the model performance1.

Option B: Using the features for monitoring and setting a prediction-sampling-rate value that is closer to 1 than 0 would not enable feature attribution monitoring, and could increase the cost of the model monitoring job. The prediction-sampling-rate is a parameter that determines the percentage of prediction requests that are logged and analyzed by the model monitoring job. Using a higher prediction-sampling-rate can increase the quality and validity of the data, but also the storage and computation costs of the model monitoring job. Moreover, using the features for monitoring would not enable feature attribution monitoring, which can provide more insights into the feature drift and the model performance12.

Option C: Using the features and the feature attributions for monitoring and setting a monitoring-frequency value that is lower than the default would enable feature attribution monitoring, but could reduce the frequency and timeliness of the model monitoring job. The monitoring-frequency is a parameter that determines how often the model monitoring job analyzes the logged prediction requests and calculates the distributions and distance scores for each feature. Using a lower monitoring-frequency can reduce the computation costs of the model monitoring job, but also the frequency and timeliness of the model monitoring job. This can make the model monitoring job less responsive and effective in detecting and alerting the feature drift1.

References:

Preparing for Google Cloud Certification: Machine Learning Engineer, Course 3: Production ML Systems, Week 4: Evaluation

Google Cloud Professional Machine Learning Engineer Exam Guide, Section 3: Scaling ML models in production, 3.3 Monitoring ML models in production

Official Google Cloud Certified Professional Machine Learning Engineer Study Guide, Chapter 6: Production ML Systems, Section 6.3: Monitoring ML Models

Using Model Monitoring

Understanding the score threshold slider