当社JPTestKingは、受験者向けのAI-103試験資料をMicrosoft編集するために設立されたプロフェッショナルブランドです。試験に合格するとともに、関連するAI-103認定をより効率的かつ簡単に取得することを目指しています。 当社のAI-103試験教材の優れた品質とリーズナブルな価格により、当社は国際市場で一流の会社になりました。 当社のAI-103のDeveloping AI Apps and Agents on Azure試験トレントは、国際分野の他のメーカーよりも価格が優れているだけでなく、多くの点で明らかに優れています。
| Section | Objectives |
|---|---|
| Plan and Manage Azure AI Solutions | - Responsible AI principles and governance - Azure AI resource provisioning and configuration - Model selection and lifecycle management |
| Implement Natural Language Processing Solutions | - Language understanding and intent recognition - Translation and multilingual support - Text analytics and summarization |
| Implement Computer Vision Solutions | - Image classification and object detection - OCR and document intelligence |
| Develop Generative AI Applications and Agents | - Azure OpenAI Service integration
|
| Knowledge Mining and Information Retrieval | - Azure AI Search configuration - RAG (Retrieval Augmented Generation) patterns - Indexing and semantic search |
AI-103トレーニング資料のPDFバージョン：Developing AI Apps and Agents on Azureは読みやすく、覚えやすく、印刷要求をサポートしているため、紙で印刷して練習することができます。 練習資料のソフトウェアバージョンは、シミュレーションテストシステムをサポートし、セットアップの時間を与えることには制限がありません。 このバージョンはWindowsシステムユーザーのみをサポートすることに注意してください。 AI-103試験問題のオンライン版は、Microsoftあらゆる種類の機器やデジタルデバイスに適しています。モバイルデータなしで練習することを条件に、オフラインでの運動をサポートします。 豊富な練習資料はお客様のさまざまなニーズに対応でき、これらのAI-103模擬練習にはすべて、Microsoftテストに合格するために知っておく必要がある新しい情報が含まれています。 あなたの個人的な好みに応じてそれらを選択することができます。
質問 # 74
You have an Azure AI agent solution.
You plan to create an agent-based app named App1 that will analyze and summarize data for users and generate data-driven recommendations. App1 will be used by non-technical business users and must adapt to new and unforeseen business challenges and improve its performance over time.
You need to identity which type of agent to use in App1. The solution must meet the following requirements:
- Adapt and improve the agents' performance over time based on user
feedback.
- Provide tailored recommendations to help users make informed
decisions.
- Provide the best possible performance of the app.
Which agent type should you identify?
正解：C
解説：
A cognitive agent is designed to mimic human thought processes, making it ideal for the complex, data-driven tasks described in the query.
Analyze and summarize data and generate data-driven recommendations:
Cognitive agents use machine learning and natural language processing to analyze historical data and act on their learnings, which includes generating insights and recommendations.
Adapt and improve over time based on user feedback:
They are designed to learn and adapt to user behavior and preferences over time, improving their responses and performance through feedback.
Used by non-technical business users:
These agents can be accessed through user-friendly interfaces, often natural language-based (like virtual assistants), making them suitable for non-technical users.
Provide tailored recommendations to help users make informed decisions:
By learning from data and interactions, they can deliver personalized recommendations that support better decision-making.
質問 # 75
You have a Microsoft Foundry project that contains a Retrieval Augmented Generation (RAG) chat solution used by customer support agents.
You are adding an automated pre-production evaluation step to a CI/CD pipeline named Pipeline1. The evaluation will run against a labeled test dataset that contains support questions and the expected grounding context.
You need to ensure that Pipeline1 fails if unsupported content or a retrieval mismatch exceeds a defined threshold:
- responses include claims not supported by the retrieved source
content
- retrieved source content does not align with the labeled expected
context
Which two built-in evaluators should you use in Pipeline1? Each correct answer presents pat of the solution.
NOTE: Each correct selection is worth one point.
正解：D、E
解説：
The Groundedness Evaluator evaluator validates that the model's responses include only claims supported by the retrieved source content It flags ungrounded content or hallucinations. If the average score drops below your defined threshold, it triggers a pipeline failure.
The correct additional built-in evaluator appropriate for the pipeline is Retrieval (specifically, the RetrievalEvaluator or DocumentRetrievalEvaluator).
A standard RAG evaluation pipeline assesses both the generator (the LLM producing the answer) and the retriever (the search system pulling documentation). The CI/CD requirements specify two distinct failure thresholds:
Responses including claims not supported by the retrieved source content: This checks for model hallucinations and is handled by the Groundedness Evaluator.
Retrieved source content not aligning with the labeled expected context: This explicitly measures the performance of your search step against your ground-truth data. The built-in Retrieval evaluator maps to this requirement. It computes metrics like context recall to ensure your system successfully retrieves the exact reference documents specified in your labeled test dataset Reference:
https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-365/copilot/extensibility/evaluations-cli-evaluators
質問 # 76
You have a Microsoft Foundry project that contains a customer support agent. The agent calls an internal knowledge API tool before generating responses.
Users report the following issues:
* Some requests take more than 15 seconds to complete.
* Some responses are incorrect, even when the knowledge API returns the expected data.
You need to inspect individual agent runs to view the ordered sequence of large language model (LLM) calls, tool invocations, and timing information.
Which observability capability should you use?
正解：D
解説：
The correct capability is tracing because the requirement is to inspect the execution path of an individual agent run. Microsoft Foundry tracing captures detailed telemetry for agent behavior, including LLM calls, tool invocations, agent decision flows, inputs, outputs, tool results, token consumption, duration, and latency.
This is the appropriate observability mechanism when you need to determine which step introduced a delay, whether the agent called the internal knowledge API, what data the tool returned, and how the model used that data before producing the final response. Microsoft's Foundry observability guidance describes distributed tracing as the mechanism that provides visibility into LLM calls, tool invocations, agent decisions, and inter-service dependencies.
Token usage is useful for cost analysis and prompt optimization, but it does not show ordered run steps or tool-call sequencing. Safety metrics evaluate risk-related output behavior, not latency or tool execution.
General monitoring provides aggregate health, latency, success-rate, and dashboard views, but the question asks for per-run sequence inspection and timing breakdowns. Foundry agent tracing specifically supports debugging unexpected behavior and monitoring latency across requests. Reference topics: Microsoft Foundry observability, agent tracing, OpenTelemetry-based traces, tool invocations, LLM call inspection, and latency diagnostics.
質問 # 77
An application must translate a high volume of standard product descriptions into 20 languages quickly, consistently, and at the lowest cost. The text is straightforward, with no domain-specific nuance. Which approach best fits?
正解：B
解説：
Azure Translator in Foundry Tools provides deterministic, broad-language translation at scale and at lower cost, which suits high-volume, straightforward content.
質問 # 78
You have a Microsoft Foundry project that contains a deployed ticket-triage agent.
You discover that sometimes the agent responds without calling any tools, even when a tool is required.
You need to ensure that the agent calls a tool during execution.
How should you complete the Python code? To answer, drag the appropriate values to the correct targets.
Each value may be used
once, more than once, or not at all. You may need to drag the split bar between panes or scroll to view content.
NOTE: Each correct selection is worth one point.
正解：
解説：
Explanation:
" tool_choice " : " required "
The correct completion is " tool_choice " : " required " . In Microsoft Foundry Agent Service, tool_choice controls whether the model can answer directly or must invoke a tool during a run. The official Foundry tool guidance states that tool_choice provides deterministic control over tool calling: auto allows the model to decide whether to call tools, none prevents tool use, and required forces the model to call one or more tools.
This directly addresses the issue where the ticket-triage agent sometimes responds without invoking a required tool.
The completed payload should therefore add the tool_choice property beside assistant_id, with the value " required " . The value " auto " is incorrect because it preserves the current nondeterministic behavior. The values " tools " and " type " do not force execution-time tool invocation in this payload; they are used for tool definitions or typed objects in other contexts. response_format controls output formatting, not tool execution.
Reference topics: Microsoft Foundry Agent Service, tool calling reliability, run payload configuration, tool_choice, agent execution, and deterministic tool invocation.
質問 # 79
......
JPTestKingはもっぱらMicrosoftプロAI-103認証試験に関する知識を提供するのサイトで、ほかのサイト使った人はJPTestKingが最高の知識源サイトと比較しますた。JPTestKingの商品はとても頼もしいAI-103試験の練習問題と解答は非常に正確でございます。
AI-103日本語講座: https://www.jptestking.com/AI-103-exam.html