Free Amazon Web Services MLA-C01 Practice Exam with Questions & Answers | Set: 4

In regression problems such as house price prediction, extreme values can significantly distort model learning. In this dataset, the presence of a large mansion and an extremely small apartment represents clear outliers in the Square Meters feature. According to AWS Machine Learning best practices, outliers can disproportionately influence loss functions (such as mean squared error), leading to poor predictions for the majority of typical data points.

Removing these outliers helps the model focus on learning patterns that apply to the majority of houses and apartments, which aligns with the requirement to produce accurate predictions for typical properties. After removing outliers, applying a log transformation to the Square Meters feature further improves model performance by reducing skewness and stabilizing variance. Log transformations are commonly recommended in AWS and general ML documentation when numerical features span multiple orders of magnitude.

Option B is incorrect because normalization alone does not address the undue influence of extreme outliers. Option C and D are incorrect because one-hot encoding is intended for categorical variables, not continuous numerical features such as square meters.

Therefore, removing outliers and applying a log transformation is the most statistically sound preprocessing approach.

AWS Secrets Manager is designed for securely storing, managing, and automatically rotating secrets, including API tokens. By configuring a Lambda function for custom rotation logic, the solution can automatically rotate the API tokens every 3 months as required. Secrets Manager simplifies secret management and integrates seamlessly with other AWS services, making it the ideal choice for this use case.

Amazon SageMaker Serverless Inference is designed for irregular or unpredictable traffic patterns. It automatically provisions and scales compute resources based on request volume and scales down to zero when idle, making it the most cost-effective option.

Serverless inference supports payloads up to 6 MB and request durations up to 60 seconds, which comfortably meets the stated constraints. Customers are billed only for actual compute usage during inference execution, not for idle capacity.

Asynchronous inference is intended for long-running jobs (up to 1 hour) and large payloads (up to 1 GB). Real-time inference requires always-on instances, increasing cost during idle periods. Batch transform is designed for offline processing.

Therefore, serverless inference is the optimal choice.

Accuracy measures the proportion of correctly predicted labels (both positive and negative) out of the total predictions. It is the appropriate metric when the goal is to maximize the correct predictions of both positive and negative labels. However, it assumes that the classes are balanced; if the classes are imbalanced, other metrics like precision, recall, or specificity may be more relevant depending on the specific needs.

AWS enterprise ML best practices recommend using Amazon SageMaker Model Registry to manage models throughout their lifecycle. The Model Registry is designed specifically to catalog models, track versions, and associate metadata such as training metrics, approval status, and deployment history.

Model Registry introduces the concept of model groups, which act as logical containers for different versions of the same model. Each model version within a group automatically inherits versioning, metadata tracking, and governance controls. This eliminates the operational burden of manually managing model versions and ensures consistent lineage and traceability across development, testing, and production environments.

Option A is less optimal because manually tagging model versions increases operational complexity and does not take full advantage of the built-in version management features provided by model groups.

Options C and D are incorrect because Amazon ECR is a container image repository, not a model governance or lifecycle management service. Using ECR to manage ML model versions would require custom tooling and manual metadata handling, significantly increasing operational overhead.

By using model groups within SageMaker Model Registry, the company gains a centralized, scalable, and AWS-native solution for enterprise AI governance. This approach directly aligns with AWS documentation for managing model catalogs, version control, and metadata association while minimizing manual intervention.

For near real-time anomaly detection on streaming IoT data, AWS recommends Amazon Managed Service for Apache Flink. Flink is designed for stateful, low-latency stream processing and is well suited for time-series sensor analytics.

A key requirement is application resilience during deployments. Managed Flink supports system rollback, which automatically reverts to the last stable application version if a new deployment fails. This capability ensures uninterrupted processing even if application bugs are introduced, meeting the company’s reliability requirement.

Manual rollback (Option B) introduces operational risk and delays. Amazon Data Firehose (Options C and D) is a delivery service and does not support complex anomaly detection logic or application version rollback.

Therefore, using Managed Flink with system rollback enabled is the correct solution.

The issue is caused by oversized Parquet files that cannot be efficiently read into memory during training. The most effective and scalable solution is to repartition the dataset into smaller Parquet files.

AWS best practices for large-scale ML training recommend optimizing data layout, not simply increasing memory. By using Apache Spark on Amazon EMR, the ML engineer can repartition the Parquet files into smaller chunks that can be streamed and processed efficiently by SageMaker training jobs.

Attaching EBS volumes (Option A) increases storage capacity but does not solve in-memory constraints. Changing to memory-optimized instances (Option C) increases cost and does not address long-term scalability. SMDDP (Option D) distributes gradients and computation, not dataset file sizes.

Therefore, repartitioning the Parquet files is the correct solution.

When Model Monitor identifies data quality issues, it might be due to a shift in the data distribution compared to the original baseline. By creating a new baseline using the most recent production data and updating Model Monitor to evaluate against this baseline, the ML engineer ensures that the monitoring is aligned with the current data patterns. This approach mitigates false positives and reflects the updated data characteristics without immediately retraining the model.

Step 1:

Create a Shapley Additive Explanations (SHAP) baseline for the model by using Amazon SageMaker Clarify.

Step 2:

Schedule an hourly model explainability monitor.

Step 3:

Check the analysis results on the SageMaker Studio console.

When monitoring a deployed model for data drift and explainability, AWS prescribes a specific workflow using SageMaker Clarify and SageMaker Model Monitor:

Create a SHAP baseline (Step 1)Before any monitoring can occur, SageMaker Clarify must establish a baseline explainability configuration. This baseline captures the reference SHAP values for feature importance using training or baseline data. Model Monitor uses this baseline to compare future inferences and detect drift in feature attributions.

Schedule the model explainability monitor (Step 2)After the baseline is created, an explainability monitoring schedule must be configured (hourly in this case). The monitor periodically analyzes inference data, compares it against the SHAP baseline, and generates reports that highlight drift or anomalies in feature contributions.

Inspect results in SageMaker Studio (Step 3)Once monitoring jobs run, SageMaker stores the analysis results in Amazon S3 and surfaces them in the SageMaker Studio console, where engineers can review metrics, violations, and visual reports.

This sequence is mandatory because:

A monitor cannot run without a baseline

Results cannot be reviewed until the monitor executes

A lift-and-shift migration requires minimal architectural changes. The company already uses Kubernetes and standalone Docker images, which are fully compatible with Amazon Elastic Kubernetes Service.

The lowest-overhead approach is to push the existing Docker images to Amazon Elastic Container Registry and deploy them directly to the EKS cluster using standard Kubernetes manifests or Helm charts. This approach preserves the existing ML workflows, training logic, and inference services without refactoring.

Option A requires redesigning services with Kubeflow, significantly increasing complexity. Option C changes both data storage and training methodology. Option D requires retraining models and changing operational workflows.

Therefore, uploading Docker images to Amazon ECR and deploying them to EKS is the correct lift-and-shift solution.