Questions and published explanations below are available without starting a test. Some questions may not have a published solution yet.
0 / 20 published solutions
Question 2 MCQ · 2.0 marks
Consider the following Assertion (A) and Reason (R) about the Transformer encoder.
**Assertion (A):** In a Transformer encoder, each token can attend to every other token in the input
sequence through self-attention.
**Reason (R):** The encoder's self-attention mechanism uses a causal mask to prevent each token
from attending to tokens that appear later in the sequence.
Choose the correct option:
6406537408066.
Both Assertion (A) and Reason (R) are true, and Reason (R) is the correct
explanation of Assertion (A).
6406537408067.
Both Assertion (A) and Reason (R) are true, but Reason (R) is not the correct
explanation of Assertion (A).
6406537408068.
Assertion (A) is true, but Reason (R) is false.
6406537408069.
Assertion (A) is false, but Reason (R) is true
6406537408070.
Both Assertion (A) and Reason (R) are false.
A published solution is not available for this question yet.
Which of the following statements regarding one-hot positional encoding and sinusoidal
positional encoding is incorrect?
6406537408072.
The dot product between two sinusoidal positional encoding vectors strictly
increases as the relative distance between their positions increases, taking values in the range [0,
)
6406537408073.
The squared Euclidean norm of a sinusoidal positional encoding vector is a
constant value independent of the position index
6406537408074.
For any two distinct positions, the dot product of their corresponding one-hot
encoded vectors is zero, and the Euclidean distance between them is strictly constant
6406537408075.
One-hot positional encoding is incapable of mathematically representing
relative distance between tokens
A published solution is not available for this question yet.
You are designing an LLM to translate a sentence from English to Spanish with low computational
complexity. The system has to consider a few possible sequences of words rather than committing
to the single highest-probability word at every step. Which of the following decoding strategies is
the most appropriate?
6406537408078.
Beam search
6406537408079.
Exhaustive search
6406537408080.
Top-p sampling with p = 0.85
6406537408081.
Greedy decoding
A published solution is not available for this question yet.
Consider a mini-batch of 3 samples, each with 2 features. The input matrix X is given below, where
rows represent individual samples and columns represent features:
Layer Normalization is applied on this with a learned scale parameter
and a shift parameter
.
What is the final output value of the first feature for the third sample?
A published solution is not available for this question yet.
Consider a tokenizer processing the word "lion".
The vocabulary contains the following tokens along with the assigned log-probabilities.
To determine the optimal tokenization, the tokenizer uses the forward decoding algorithm (Viterbi
approach). Determine the most likely tokenization for the word "lion" using the algorithm.
Instructions: Enter your answer as a lowercase string with the segments separated by a comma.
For example, if the word is whereby and the answer has two segments where and by, enter the
answer as **where,by**
**NOTE:** Enter the exact answer without any extra space in the beginning or at the end.
A published solution is not available for this question yet.
Match the following unsupervised objectives (I,II,III) to their corresponding Target output
structures (A,B,C) based on the following:
I. Prefix Language Modelling
II. Masked Seq-to-Seq pretraining
III. Random spans
A. Interleaved sentinel tokens and missing text
B. The entire original text sequence
C. The suffix of the original text
6406537408090.
I-A, II-B, III-C
6406537408091.
I-B, II-C, III-A
6406537408092.
I-C, II-A, III-B
6406537408093.
I-C, II-B, III-A
6406537408094.
I-B, II-A, III-C
A published solution is not available for this question yet.
Consider the original text "The quick brown fox jumps over the lazy dog". If the input for a prefix
language modelling objective is "The quick brown fox", what will the target be?
Consider a transformer model that uses strided local attention with a fixed window size c. If the
sequence length T is doubled, by what factor does the computational time complexity of the
attention mechanism change?
6406537408101.
1
6406537408102.
2
6406537408103.
4
6406537408104.
8
A published solution is not available for this question yet.
A Large Language model uses Grouped Query Attention with a KV cache during inference.
Consider the following model configuration:
• Precision: FP16 (16-bit floating point)
• Number of Transformer layers : 32
• Number of Query attention heads : 32
• Number of Key attention heads : 8
• Number of Value attention heads : 8
• Head dimension : 128
• Batch size : 4
• Maximum sequence length per request : 1024 tokens
**Assume 2 bytes per FP16 value and 1 MB = 1048576 bytes**
**calculate the total memory required for the KV cache expressed in MB. Enter the value**
**rounded to the nearest integer**
A published solution is not available for this question yet.
Which of the following statements about length generalization in Large Language Models (LLMs)
are correct?
6406537408109.
Length generalization is the ability of an LLM to maintain effective
performance on sequences longer than the sequence lengths predominantly used during
training.
6406537408110.
Length generalization refers specifically to improving computational efficiency
when processing longer sequences.
6406537408111.
Length generalization can depend on the model architecture, positional
encoding scheme, training procedure, and the nature of the task.
6406537408112.
Exposure to a wider range of sequence lengths during training can improve an
LLM's ability to generalize to longer sequences.
A published solution is not available for this question yet.