Get Professional-Machine-Learning-Engineer Dumps : Verified Google Professional Machine Learning Engineer

Option A is not the best answer because it requires storing the pickled model in Cloud Storage, which may incur additional cost and latency for loading the model. It also requires building a Flask-based app, which may not be necessary for a simple data preprocessing step.

Option B is not the best answer because it requires building a Flask-based app, which may not be necessary for a simple data preprocessing step. It also requires packaging the app and the pickled model in a custom container image, which may increase the size and complexity of the image.

Option C is not the best answer because it requires packaging the pickled model in a custom container image, which may increase the size and complexity of the image. It also does not leverage the Vertex built-in container image, which may provide some optimizations and integrations for XGBoost models.

Option D is the best answer because it leverages the Vertex built-in container image, which may provide some optimizations and integrations for XGBoost models. It also allows storing the pickled model in Cloud Storage, which may reduce the size and complexity of the image. It also allows building a custom predictor class based on XGBoost Predictor from the Vertex AI SDK, which may simplify the data preprocessing step and the prediction logic.

 The best option for building a recommendation system without any user event data is to use simple heuristics based on content metadata. This is a type of content-based filtering, which recommends items that are similar to the ones that the user has interacted with or selected, based on their attributes. For example, if a user selects a comedy movie from the US released in 2020, the system can recommend other comedy movies from the US released in 2020 or nearby years. This approach does not require any machine learning, but it can leverage the existing metadata of the videos to provide relevant recommendations. It also allows the system to start collecting user event data, such as views, likes, ratings, etc., which can be used to train a more sophisticated machine learning model in the future, such as a collaborative filtering model or a hybrid model that combines content and collaborative information. References:

Recommendation Systems

Content-Based Filtering

Collaborative Filtering

Hybrid Recommender Systems: A Systematic Literature Review

This answer is correct because it allows you to use the trained TensorFlow model for batch predictions on text data stored in BigQuery without any additional processing or overhead. Al Platform provides a service for running batch prediction jobs that can take input data from BigQuery or Cloud Storage and write the output to BigQuery or Cloud Storage. You can use the SavedModel format to export your TensorFlow model to Cloud Storage and then submit a batch prediction job that points to the model location and the input data location. Al Platform will handle the scaling and distribution of the prediction requests and return the results in the specified output location. References:

[Al Platform: Batch prediction overview]

[Al Platform: Exporting a SavedModel for prediction]

Option A is incorrect because creating a collaborative filtering system that recommends articles to a user based on the user’s past behavior is not the best approach to suggest articles that are similar to the articles they are currently reading. Collaborative filtering is a method of recommendation that uses the ratings or preferences of other users to predict the preferences of a target user1. However, this method does not consider the content or features of the articles, and may not be able to find articles that are similar in terms of topic, style, or sentiment.

Option B is correct because encoding all articles into vectors using word2vec, and building a model that returns articles based on vector similarity is a suitable approach to suggest articles that are similar to the articles they are currently reading. Word2vec is a technique that learns low-dimensional and dense representations of words from a large corpus of text, such that words that are semantically similar have similar vectors2. By applying word2vec to the articles, we can obtain vector representations of the articles that capture their meaning and usage. Then, we can use a similarity measure, such as cosine similarity, to find articles that have similar vectors to the current article3.

Option C is incorrect because building a logistic regression model for each user that predicts whether an article should be recommended to a user is not a feasible approach to suggest articles that are similar to the articles they are currently reading. Logistic regression is a supervised learning method that models the probability of a binary outcome (such as recommend or not) based on some input features (such as user profile or article content)4. However, this method requires a large amount of labeled data for each user, which may not be available or scalable. Moreover, this method does not directly measure the similarity between articles, but rather the likelihood of a user’s preference.

Option D is incorrect because manually labeling a few hundred articles, and then training an SVM classifier based on the manually classified articles that categorizes additional articles into their respective categories is not an effective approach to suggest articles that are similar to the articles they are currently reading. SVM (support vector machine) is a supervised learning method that finds a hyperplane that separates the data into different classes (such as news categories) with the maximum margin5. However, this method also requires a large amount of labeled data, which may be costly and time-consuming to obtain. Moreover, this method does not account for the fine-grained similarity between articles within the same category, or the cross-category similarity between articles from different categories.

References:

Collaborative filtering

Word2vec

Cosine similarity

Logistic regression

SVM

Option A is incorrect because training a time-series model to predict the machines’ performance values, and configuring an alert if a machine’s actual performance values significantly differ from the predicted performance values, is not the best way to build a predictive maintenance solution that uses monitoring data from the VMs to detect potential failures and then alerts the service desk team. This option assumes that the performance values follow a predictable pattern, which may not be the case for complex systems. Moreover, this option does not use any historical incident data, which may contain useful information for identifying failures. Furthermore, this option does not involve any model evaluation or validation, which are essential steps for ensuring the quality and reliability of the model.

Option B is correct because implementing a simple heuristic (e.g., based on z-score) to label the machines’ historical performance data, and training a model to predict anomalies based on this labeled dataset, is a reasonable way to build a predictive maintenance solution that uses monitoring data from the VMs to detect potential failures and then alerts the service desk team. This option uses a simple and fast method to label the historical performance data, which is necessary for supervised learning. A z-score is a measure of how many standard deviations a value is away from the mean of a distribution1. By using a z-score, we can label the performance values that are unusually high or low as anomalies, which may indicate failures. Then, we can train a model to learn the patterns of normal and anomalous performance values, and use it to predict anomalies on new data. We can also evaluate and validate the model using metrics such as precision, recall, or F1-score, and compare it with other models or methods.

Option C is incorrect because developing a simple heuristic (e.g., based on z-score) to label the machines’ historical performance data, and testing this heuristic in a production environment, is not a safe way to build a predictive maintenance solution that uses monitoring data from the VMs to detect potential failures and then alerts the service desk team. This option does not involve any model training or evaluation, which are essential steps for ensuring the quality and reliability of the solution. Moreover, this option does not test the heuristic on a separate dataset, such as a validation or test set, before deploying it to production, which may lead to errors or failures in the production environment.

Option D is incorrect because hiring a team of qualified analysts to review and label the machines’ historical performance data, and training a model based on this manually labeled dataset, is not a feasible way to build a predictive maintenance solution that uses monitoring data from the VMs to detect potential failures and then alerts the service desk team. This option may produce high-quality labels, but it is also costly, time-consuming, and prone to human errors or biases. Moreover, this option may not scale well with large or complex datasets, which may require more analysts or more time to label.

References:

Z-score

[Predictive maintenance]

[Anomaly detection]

[Time-series analysis]

[Model evaluation]