Amazon Web Services Updated MLS-C01 Exam Questions and Answers by baxter

For a model with low accuracy on both training and testing datasets, the following two strategies are effective:

Increase the number of passes and perform hyperparameter tuning: This approach allows the model to better learn from the existing data and improve performance through optimized hyperparameters.

Add domain-specific features and use more complex models: Adding relevant features that capture additional information from domain knowledge and using more complex model architectures can help the model capture patterns better, potentially improving accuracy.

Options B, D, and E would either reduce feature complexity or training data volume, which is less likely to improve performance when accuracy is low on both training and testing sets.

Stratified sampling is a technique that preserves the class distribution of the original dataset when creating a smaller or split dataset. This means that the proportion of examples from each class in the original dataset is maintained in the smaller or split dataset. Stratified sampling can help improve the validation accuracy of the model by ensuring that the validation dataset is representative of the original dataset and not biased towards any class. This can reduce the variance and overfitting of the model and increase its generalization ability. Stratified sampling can be applied to both oversampling and undersampling methods, depending on whether the goal is to increase or decrease the size of the dataset.

The other options are not effective ways to improve the validation accuracy of the model. Acquiring additional data about the majority classes in the original dataset will only increase the imbalance and make the model more biased towards the majority classes. Using a smaller, randomly sampled version of the training dataset will not guarantee that the class distribution is preserved and may result in losing important information from the minority classes. Performing systematic sampling on the original dataset will also not ensure that the class distribution is preserved and may introduce sampling bias if the original dataset is ordered or grouped by class.

References:

•Stratified Sampling for Imbalanced Datasets

•Imbalanced Data

•Tour of Data Sampling Methods for Imbalanced Classification

 Transfer learning is a technique that allows us to use a model trained for a certain task as a starting point for a machine learning model for a different task. For image classification, a common practice is to use a pre-trained model that was trained on a large and general dataset, such as ImageNet, and then customize it for the specific task. One way to customize the model is to replace the last fully connected layer, which is responsible for the final classification, with a new layer that has the same number of units as the number of classes in the new task. This way, the model can leverage the features learned by the previous layers, which are generic and useful for many image recognition tasks, and learn to map them to the new classes. The new layer can be initialized with random weights, and the rest of the model can be initialized with the pre-trained weights. This method is also known as feature extraction, as it extracts meaningful features from the pre-trained model and uses them for the new task. References:

Transfer learning and fine-tuning

Deep transfer learning for image classification: a survey

 The best solution to reduce the cost of the notebook instance and the data preprocessing job is to change the notebook instance type to a smaller general-purpose instance, stop the notebook when it is not in use, and run data preprocessing on an ml.r5 instance with the same memory size as the ml.m5.4xlarge instance by using Amazon SageMaker Processing. This solution will result in the most cost savings because:

Changing the notebook instance type to a smaller general-purpose instance will reduce the hourly cost of running the notebook, since the feature engineering development does not require high CPU and memory resources. For example, an ml.t3.medium instance costs $0.0464 per hour, while an ml.m5.4xlarge instance costs $0.888 per hour1.

Stopping the notebook when it is not in use will also reduce the cost, since the notebook will only incur charges when it is running. For example, if the notebook is used for 8 hours per day, 5 days per week, then stopping it when it is not in use will save about 76% of the monthly cost compared to leaving it running all the time2.

Running data preprocessing on an ml.r5 instance with the same memory size as the ml.m5.4xlarge instance by using Amazon SageMaker Processing will reduce the cost of the data preprocessing job, since the ml.r5 instance is optimized for memory-intensive workloads and has a lower cost per GB of memory than the ml.m5 instance. For example, an ml.r5.4xlarge instance has 128 GB of memory and costs $1.008 per hour, while an ml.m5.4xlarge instance has 64 GB of memory and costs $0.888 per hour1. Therefore, the ml.r5.4xlarge instance can process the same amount of data in half the time and at a lower cost than the ml.m5.4xlarge instance. Moreover, using Amazon SageMaker Processing will allow the data preprocessing job to run on a separate, fully managed infrastructure that can be scaled up or down as needed, without affecting the notebook instance.

The other options are not as effective as option C for the following reasons:

Option A is not optimal because changing the notebook instance type to a memory optimized instance with the same vCPU number as the ml.m5.4xlarge instance has will not reduce the cost of the notebook, since the memory optimized instances have a higher cost per vCPU than the general-purpose instances. For example, an ml.r5.4xlarge instance has 16 vCPUs and costs $1.008 per hour, while an ml.m5.4xlarge instance has 16 vCPUs and costs $0.888 per hour1. Moreover, running both data preprocessing and feature engineering development on the same instance will not take advantage of the scalability and flexibility of Amazon SageMaker Processing.

Option B is not suitable because running data preprocessing on a P3 instance type with the same memory as the ml.m5.4xlarge instance by using Amazon SageMaker Processing will not reduce the cost of the data preprocessing job, since the P3 instance type is optimized for GPU-based workloads and has a higher cost per GB of memory than the ml.m5 or ml.r5 instance types. For example, an ml.p3.2xlarge instance has 61 GB of memory and costs $3.06 per hour, while an ml.m5.4xlarge instance has 64 GB of memory and costs $0.888 per hour1. Moreover, the data preprocessing job does not require GPU, so using a P3 instance type will be wasteful and inefficient.

Option D is not feasible because running data preprocessing on an R5 instance with the same memory size as the ml.m5.4xlarge instance by using the Reserved Instance option will not reduce the cost of the data preprocessing job, since the Reserved Instance option requires a commitment to a consistent amount of usage for a period of 1 or 3 years3. However, the data preprocessing job only runs once a day on average and completes in only 2 hours, so it does not have a consistent or predictable usage pattern. Therefore, using the Reserved Instance option will not provide any cost savings and may incur additional charges for unused capacity.

References:

Amazon SageMaker Pricing

Manage Notebook Instances - Amazon SageMaker

Amazon EC2 Pricing - Reserved Instances