Free MLA-C01 Practice Test Questions and Answers (2026)

Last Update Check

View Mode
Q: 1
A company uses a hybrid cloud environment. A model that is deployed on premises uses data in Amazon 53 to provide customers with a live conversational engine. The model is using sensitive dat a. An ML engineer needs to implement a solution to identify and remove the sensitive data. Which solution will meet these requirements with the LEAST operational overhead?
Options
38 comments in the community discussion
1
I don't think it's C. D.
1
C imo. Macie is literally made for S3 sensitive data discovery, and Lambda is just event-driven so you skip managing any servers. D looks tempting for flexibility but EC2 adds way more ops overhead.
Q: 2
A company has trained and deployed an ML model by using Amazon SageMaker. The company needs to implement a solution to record and monitor all the API call events for the SageMaker endpoint. The solution also must provide a notification when the number of API call events breaches a threshold. Use SageMaker Debugger to track the inferences and to report metrics. Create a custom rule to provide a notification when the threshold is breached. Which solution will meet these requirements?
Options
33 comments in the community discussion
6
Option D
5
Option D is the best fit. SageMaker automatically exports the Invocations metric to CloudWatch, so you just need to visualize and alarm on it. Debugger isn't meant for tracking endpoint API calls like this, pretty sure about D unless I'm missing something obvious.
Q: 3
An ML engineer has trained a neural network by using stochastic gradient descent (SGD). The neural network performs poorly on the test set. The values for training loss and validation loss remain high and show an oscillating pattern. The values decrease for a few epochs and then increase for a few epochs before repeating the same cycle. What should the ML engineer do to improve the training process?
Options
31 comments in the community discussion
5
D . The high and oscillating loss is usually a sign that the learning rate is too aggressive, causing SGD to overshoot minima. Trap here is C, but increasing it would make the bounce worse. If someone disagrees let me know.
1
D is the way I'd go. When both training and validation loss are up and down like that, usually means the learning rate’s just too high and SGD keeps overshooting. Lowering it helps things converge more smoothly. Not 100% but this lines up with what I've seen.
Q: 4

A company is building a web-based AI application by using Amazon SageMaker. The application will provide the following capabilities and features: ML experimentation, training, a central model registry, model deployment, and model monitoring. The application must ensure secure and isolated use of training data during the ML lifecycle. The training data is stored in Amazon S3. The company needs to use the central model registry to manage different versions of models in the application. Which action will meet this requirement with the LEAST operational overhead?

Options
30 comments in the community discussion
1
C vs D: If you really need consistent version control and central cataloging, Model Registry model groups (C) are built for that. Tags (D) help with metadata but don't enforce version lineage, so feels like C unless there's a custom tagging requirement. Could flip if the question emphasized metadata specifics.
1
D imo, tags let you track versions per model so that works too but maybe Model Groups are what AWS prefers.
Q: 5
A financial company receives a high volume of real-time market data streams from an external provider. The streams consist of thousands of JSON records every second. The company needs to implement a scalable solution on AWS to identify anomalous data points. Which solution will meet these requirements with the LEAST operational overhead?
Options
31 comments in the community discussion
4
Makes sense to pick A here, since Flink has built-in anomaly detection and keeps operational work minimal. Anyone disagree with that approach?
2
C/D? Both use Lambda but D sets up for batch, not real-time. Since the question wants real-time anomaly detection with low ops, I’m pretty sure A is right over these. Anyone seeing something I missed in B or C?
Q: 6
Case study An ML engineer is developing a fraud detection model on AWS. The training dataset includes transaction logs, customer profiles, and tables from an on-premises MySQL database. The transaction logs and customer profiles are stored in Amazon S3. The dataset has a class imbalance that affects the learning of the model's algorithm. Additionally, many of the features have interdependencies. The algorithm is not capturing all the desired underlying patterns in the data. Before the ML engineer trains the model, the ML engineer must resolve the issue of the imbalanced data. Which solution will meet this requirement with the LEAST operational effort?
Options
31 comments in the community discussion
6
Option D Data Wrangler automates balancing so it's the lowest effort compared to the others for this case.
4
Option D here. Data Wrangler's balance data is specifically designed for quick class balancing and sits right inside SageMaker, so fewer steps needed than Glue or Athena. Small catch: if the source data wasn't S3 or SageMaker, setup could be more involved, but in this scenario it's the fastest. Pretty sure that's wh
Q: 7
A company that has hundreds of data scientists is using Amazon SageMaker to create ML models. The models are in model groups in the SageMaker Model Registry. The data scientists are grouped into three categories: computer vision, natural language processing (NLP), and speech recognition. An ML engineer needs to implement a solution to organize the existing models into these groups to improve model discoverability at scale. The solution must not affect the integrity of the model artifacts and their existing groupings. Which solution will meet these requirements?
Options
35 comments in the community discussion
1
A for this. Tags give that extra layer of sorting without changing the model groups, so you keep existing structure. If you moved models to new groups (like B) you'd break the rule about not touching current groupings. Pretty sure that's what AWS expects here, but open to debate if I'm missing something.
1
It’s A, not B-moving models would mess with grouping integrity which the question says to avoid. Tags keep existing groupings untouched while adding category info. Pretty common exam trap here for thinking Model Groups are flexible.
Q: 8
A company has implemented a data ingestion pipeline for sales transactions from its ecommerce website. The company uses Amazon Data Firehose to ingest data into Amazon OpenSearch Service. The buffer interval of the Firehose stream is set for 60 seconds. An OpenSearch linear model generates real-time sales forecasts based on the data and presents the data in an OpenSearch dashboard. The company needs to optimize the data ingestion pipeline to support sub-second latency for the real-time dashboard. Which change to the architecture will meet these requirements?
Options
31 comments in the community discussion
5
Option A matches what I had in a mock. Setting Firehose buffer interval to zero is the only way here to cut batch delay, so you get almost instant updates in OpenSearch. None of the other options really get true sub-second unless you change the buffer itself. Pretty sure it's A, but lmk if you see it differently.
5
Option A looks right. If you want sub-second latency, you can't wait for the 60 second buffer-Firehose needs to send records as they come in. Setting buffering to zero pushes data through immediately. Tuning PutRecordBatch helps with efficiency but the main thing is removing that delay. Pretty sure that's what AWS reco
Q: 9
HOTSPOT An ML engineer is building a generative AI application on Amazon Bedrock by using large language models (LLMs). Select the correct generative AI term from the following list for each description. Each term should be selected one time or not at all. (Select three.) • Embedding • Retrieval Augmented Generation (RAG) • Temperature • Token AWS MLA-C01 Dumps question?
Your Answer
31 comments in the community discussion
6
Nah, I don't think Token fits here. Embedding, Retrieval Augmented Generation (RAG), Temperature.
5
Embedding, Retrieval Augmented Generation (RAG), TemperatureThese match the AWS generative AI patterns in official docs and labs. Used similar terms in practice tests too. I think this is what they're after, but open to other takes if someone disagrees!
Q: 10

HOTSPOT An ML engineer needs to use Amazon SageMaker Feature Store to create and manage features to train a model. Select and order the steps from the following list to create and use the features in Feature Store. Each step should be selected one time. (Select and order three.) • Access the store to build datasets for training. • Create a feature group. • Ingest the records.

Your Answer
34 comments in the community discussion
6
Would it make sense to start by ingesting records if the feature group hasn't been created yet, or must creation come first?
6
Makes sense to me. The sequence is create a feature group, ingest the records, access the store to build datasets for training.
Q: 11

HOTSPOT A company stores historical data in .csv files in Amazon S3. Only some of the rows and columns in the .csv files are populated. The columns are not labeled. An ML engineer needs to prepare and store the data so that the company can use the data to train ML models. Select and order the correct steps from the following list to perform this task. Each step should be selected one time or not at all. (Select and order three.) • Create an Amazon SageMaker batch transform job for data cleaning and feature engineering. • Store the resulting data back in Amazon S3. • Use Amazon Athena to infer the schemas and available columns. • Use AWS Glue crawlers to infer the schemas and available columns. • Use AWS Glue DataBrew for data cleaning and feature engineering.

Your Answer
25 comments in the community discussion
7
Use AWS Glue crawlers, then Glue DataBrew, then store the results in S3.
6
Glue crawler, DataBrew, then store in S3. Official guide covers this flow well if you want the detailed why.
Q: 12

HOTSPOT An ML engineer is working on an ML model to predict the prices of similarly sized homes. The model will base predictions on several features The ML engineer will use the following feature engineering techniques to estimate the prices of the homes: • Feature splitting • Logarithmic transformation • One-hot encoding • Standardized distribution Select the correct feature engineering techniques for the following list of features. Each feature engineering technique should be selected one time or not at all (Select three.)

Your Answer
30 comments in the community discussion
8
AWS always wants textbook preprocessing. For this, it's: CITY (NAME): ONE-HOT ENCODING TYPE_YEAR: FEATURE SPLITTING SIZE OF BUILDING: LOGARITHMIC TRANSFORMATION
6
Had something like this in a mock, it's CITY (NAME): ONE-HOT ENCODING TYPE_YEAR: FEATURE SPLITTING SIZE OF BUILDING: LOGARITHMIC TRANSFORMATION.
Q: 13

HOTSPOT A company wants to host an ML model on Amazon SageMaker. An ML engineer is configuring a continuous integration and continuous delivery (Cl/CD) pipeline in AWS CodePipeline to deploy the model. The pipeline must run automatically when new training data for the model is uploaded to an Amazon S3 bucket. Select and order the pipeline's correct steps from the following list. Each step should be selected one time or not at all. (Select and order three.) • An S3 event notification invokes the pipeline when new data is uploaded. • S3 Lifecycle rule invokes the pipeline when new data is uploaded. • SageMaker retrains the model by using the data in the S3 bucket. • The pipeline deploys the model to a SageMaker endpoint. • The pipeline deploys the model to SageMaker Model Registry.

Your Answer
27 comments in the community discussion
6
1. An S3 event notification invokes the pipeline, 2. SageMaker retrains the model using S3 data, 3. Deploy to a SageMaker endpoint.
5
Makes sense to kick off the pipeline with the S3 event notification, retrain with SageMaker, then deploy right to the endpoint. That's typical in these MLOps flows unless there's a versioning or review step in the requirements.
Q: 14
An ML engineer is using Amazon SageMaker to train a deep learning model that requires distributed training. After some training attempts, the ML engineer observes that the instances are not performing as expected. The ML engineer identifies communication overhead between the training instances. What should the ML engineer do to MINIMIZE the communication overhead between the instances?
Options
34 comments in the community discussion
5
C . Keeping training instances and data in the same AZ really cuts network latency for distributed jobs. Official AWS ML guide and practice exams talk about minimizing cross-AZ traffic for this exact reason, so pretty confident here.
4
Option C is it. Keeping compute and data in the same AZ (and subnet) really reduces network latency for distributed ML jobs, which exam guides and AWS whitepapers drill on. I remember labs where any cross-AZ setup added delays fast. Pretty sure about this but open to other interpretations if someone's seen different
Q: 15
A company stores time-series data about user clicks in an Amazon S3 bucket. The raw data consists of millions of rows of user activity every day. ML engineers access the data to develop their ML models. The ML engineers need to generate daily reports and analyze click trends over the past 3 days by using Amazon Athen a. The company must retain the data for 30 days before archiving the data. Which solution will provide the HIGHEST performance for data retrieval?
Options
22 comments in the community discussion
6
Option C
2
Option C but if Athena ever changed how it handled non-partitioned buckets that would flip this. Otherwise partitioning by date still wins.
Question 1 of 20

Premium Access Includes

  • Quiz Simulator
  • Exam Mode
  • Progress Tracking
  • Question Saving
  • Flash Cards
  • Drag & Drops
  • 3 Months Access
  • PDF Downloads
Get Premium Access
Scroll to Top