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

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

 According to the official exam guide1, one of the skills assessed in the exam is to “track the lineage of pipeline artifacts”. Vertex ML Metadata2 is a service that allows you to store, query, and visualize metadata associated with your ML workflows, such as datasets, models, metrics, and executions. Vertex ML Metadata helps you track the provenance and lineage of your ML artifacts and understand the relationships between them. Vertex AI Experiments3 is a service that allows you to track and compare the results of your model training runs. Vertex AI Experiments automatically logs metadata such as hyperparameters, metrics, and artifacts for each training run. You can use Vertex AI Experiments to train your custom model using TensorFlow, PyTorch, XGBoost, or scikit-learn. Vertex AI TensorBoard4 is a service that allows you to visualize and monitor your ML experiments using TensorBoard, an open source tool for ML visualization. Vertex AI TensorBoard helps you track the model’s training parameters and the metrics per training epoch, and compare the performance of each version of the model. Therefore, option C is the best way to determine which Vertex AI services to include in the workflow for the given use case. The other options are not relevant or optimal for this scenario. References:

Professional ML Engineer Exam Guide

Vertex ML Metadata

Vertex AI Experiments

Vertex AI TensorBoard

Google Professional Machine Learning Certification Exam 2023

Latest Google Professional Machine Learning Engineer Actual Free Exam Questions

The best option for resolving the training-serving skew alert is to update the model monitoring job to use the more recent training data that was used to retrain the model. This option can help align the baseline distribution of the model monitoring job with the current distribution of the production data, and eliminate the false positive alerts. Model Monitoring is a service that can track and compare the results of multiple machine learning runs. Model Monitoring can monitor the model’s prediction input data for feature skew and drift. Training-serving skew occurs when the feature data distribution in production deviates from the feature data distribution used to train the model. If the original training data is available, you can enable skew detection to monitor your models for training-serving skew. 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 distance score for a feature exceeds an alerting threshold that you set, Model Monitoring sends you an email alert. However, if you retrain the model with more recent training data, and deploy it back to the Vertex AI endpoint, the baseline distribution of the model monitoring job may become outdated and inconsistent with the current distribution of the production data. This can cause the model monitoring job to generate false positive alerts, even if the model performance is not deteriorated. To avoid this problem, you need to update the model monitoring job to use the more recent training data that was used to retrain the model. This can help the model monitoring job to recalculate the baseline distribution and the distance scores, and compare them with the current distribution of the production data. This can also help the model monitoring job to detect any true positive alerts, such as a sudden change in the production data that causes the model performance to degrade1.

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

Option A: Updating the model monitoring job to use a lower sampling rate would not resolve the training-serving skew alert, and could reduce the accuracy and reliability of the model monitoring job. The 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 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 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. Moreover, using a lower sampling rate would not address the root cause of the training-serving skew alert, which is the mismatch between the baseline distribution and the current distribution of the production data2.

Option C: Temporarily disabling the alert, and enabling the alert again after a sufficient amount of new production traffic has passed through the Vertex AI endpoint, would not resolve the training-serving skew alert, and could expose the model to potential risks and errors. Disabling the alert would stop the model monitoring job from sending email notifications when the distance score for a feature exceeds the alerting threshold, but it would not stop the model monitoring job from calculating and comparing the distributions and distance scores. Therefore, disabling the alert would not address the root cause of the training-serving skew alert, which is the mismatch between the baseline distribution and the current distribution of the production data. Moreover, disabling the alert would prevent the model monitoring job from detecting any true positive alerts, such as a sudden change in the production data that causes the model performance to degrade. This can expose the model to potential risks and errors, and affect the user satisfaction and trust1.

Option D: Temporarily disabling the alert until the model can be retrained again on newer training data, and retraining the model again after a sufficient amount of new production traffic has passed through the Vertex AI endpoint, would not resolve the training-serving skew alert, and could cause unnecessary costs and efforts. Disabling the alert would stop the model monitoring job from sending email notifications when the distance score for a feature exceeds the alerting threshold, but it would not stop the model monitoring job from calculating and comparing the distributions and distance scores. Therefore, disabling the alert would not address the root cause of the training-serving skew alert, which is the mismatch between the baseline distribution and the current distribution of the production data. Moreover, disabling the alert would prevent the model monitoring job from detecting any true positive alerts, such as a sudden change in the production data that causes the model performance to degrade. This can expose the model to potential risks and errors, and affect the user satisfaction and trust. Retraining the model again on newer training data would create a new model version, but it would not update the model monitoring job to use the newer training data as the baseline distribution. Therefore, retraining the model again on newer training data would not resolve the training-serving skew alert, and could cause unnecessary costs and efforts1.

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

Sampling rate