DP-100 · Question #336
Note: This question is part of a series of questions that present the same scenario. Each question in the series contains a unique solution that might meet the stated goals. Some question sets might…
The correct answer is B. No. The proposed solution does not correctly pass the training_data path argument to the command job script in Azure ML SDK v2.
Question
Options
- AYes
- BNo
How the community answered
(50 responses)- A22% (11)
- B78% (39)
Why each option
The proposed solution does not correctly pass the training_data path argument to the command job script in Azure ML SDK v2.
The proposed solution does not correctly wire the data asset path to the training_data argument, so it does not meet the stated goal and cannot be selected as correct.
In Azure ML SDK v2, passing a data path to a command job requires defining an Input() object with the correct asset type (such as uri_file) and referencing it in the command string using the ${{inputs.<name>}} placeholder syntax. The proposed solution does not fulfill this requirement correctly, so the script cannot receive the training_data path as intended.
Concept tested: Passing data inputs to Azure ML command jobs
Source: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/machine-learning/how-to-train-model
Topics
Community Discussion
No community discussion yet for this question.