🔶 AI Engineer Notebooks – free, framework-free RAG/agents/evals on Colab
英文标题:🔶 AI Engineer Notebooks – free, framework-free RAG/agents/evals on Colab
⬆️ 22 pts | 💬 0 comments | by calmrocks
126.2 KB
中文
⬆️ 22 pts | 💬 0 comments | by calmrocks
中文全文翻译正在补齐,可先查看下方英文原文。
English / 原文
Learn the applied-LLM stack the way you'll actually be interviewed on it — framework-free, on a free API, from prompting all the way to serving, fine-tuning, and a red-team benchmark.
Runnable Colab notebooks for the AI Engineer / Forward Deployed Engineer (FDE) skill set: building working systems on top of foundation models — model APIs, RAG, evals, agents, adaptation, serving — using raw APIs, not frameworks.
What makes this different
- Framework-free, on purpose. You write the agent loop, RAG, and evals from raw API calls first — so you understand what LangChain/LlamaIndex actually do before you reach for them (and can judge when not to). Patterns are durable; wrappers churn.
- Evals are the spine. "Measure before you tune" is installed early and returns in every section — the habit that separates an engineer who shipped a system from one who built a demo.
- Free to run, end to end. Everything runs on the freeGroq API (no credit card). The two topics Groq can't host — LoRA fine-tuning (06) and self-hosted serving (09) — are concept-first with optional, fenced Colab-GPU appendices, verified on a real Colab T4.
- Real case studies, not toy demos. Three end-to-end case studies show the skills combined under real constraints — a support assistant debugged in production , a pipeline-vs-agent cost showdown, and a red-team robustness benchmark.
- OpenAI-compatible throughout , so every pattern transfers directly to OpenAI and (with small changes) Anthropic — the seam is swappable, the skills aren't.
Built as the hands-on companion to Plan: Transitioning to Forward Deployed Engineer / AI Engineer. The plan explains what to learn and why; these notebooks are where you run it.
Backend or full-stack engineers moving into AI Engineer, FDE, Applied AI, or Solutions Engineer (AI) roles — different titles, largely the same job. You can ship production code; you want the applied-model layer on top.
Work top to bottom. Each notebook is self-contained (installs its own dependencies, reads API keys from Colab secrets) and ends with exercises.
| Notebook | What you'll learn |
|---|---|
| Prompting fundamentals | |
| Clear instructions, few-shot, output-format specs, step-by-step reasoning — the cheapest lever, each shown moving a number | |
| Structured output | |
| Getting reliable JSON out of a model, and where it breaks | |
| Tool calling | |
| Function/tool calling end to end, error paths included | |
| Streaming | |
| Streaming responses and what UIs need from them | |
| Context & caching | |
| Context-window budgeting, prompt caching, batch vs real-time pricing |
02 — Evals I: measuring outputs
| Notebook | What you'll learn |
|---|---|
| Measuring outputs | |
| Golden sets and metrics on the section-01 task — install the "measure before you tune" habit before building anything you'd need to tune. Evals is the spine; it returns in every section after this | |
| Notebook | What you'll learn |
| --- | --- |
| What is RAG? | |
| The retrieve → augment → generate loop, why RAG beats a plain LLM, and why RAG isn't the same as embeddings — with a 15-line working demo | |
| Embeddings & retrieval | |
| Embedding choice, vector search, similarity pitfalls — get retrieval working first | |
| Hybrid & reranking | |
| Keyword + vector hybrid retrieval, rerankers, when each earns its cost | |
| Chunking | |
| Chunking strategies on a real messy corpus — revisited last, once you can judge them against retrieval | |
| Why RAG fails | |
| Diagnosing bad answers: retrieval quality, not generation, is usually the bottleneck |
04 — Evals II: the differentiator
| Notebook | What you'll learn |
|---|---|
| Golden sets | |
| Building a golden set for the RAG system from section 03 | |
| LLM as judge | |
| Judge prompts, agreement with humans, and the judge's own failure modes | |
| Regression evals | |
| Evals as CI: catching quality regressions when you change a prompt or model | |
| Notebook | What you'll learn |
| --- | --- |
| Agent loop from scratch | |
| A working agent loop in raw API calls — no framework | |
| Tool design | |
| Designing tools the model can actually use well | |
| Guardrails & budgets | |
| Stopping conditions, cost/latency budgets, when a pipeline beats an agent | |
| MCP & the tool ecosystem | |
| Concept: what the Model Context Protocol standardizes, how it maps to the raw tool loop, and when to reach for it | |
| Skills & progressive disclosure | |
Concept: packaging reusable know-how an agent loads on demand — the SKILL.md pattern, the context-budget payoff, and Tools/MCP/Skills as one story |
|
| Harness engineering | |
| Synthesis: the scaffold around the call — context assembly & compaction, tool-result shaping, and verification loops. Names the discipline the section has been teaching piece by piece | |
| Notebook | What you'll learn |
| --- | --- |
| Fine-tune vs RAG vs prompt | |
| When to change the model's weights vs its inputs; what LoRA/QLoRA are and cost; the argument you'll have in the room — plus an optional real LoRA fine-tune on a free GPU | |
| Notebook | What you'll learn |
| --- | --- |
| Prompt injection & the trust boundary | |
| Direct & indirect prompt injection, output handling, PII, excessive agency — the OWASP LLM Top 10 risks, failing live then defended | |
| Notebook | What you'll learn |
| --- | --- |
| Observability & LLMOps | |
| Tracing every call, safe prompt logging, cost/latency/error metrics, drift detection, and the observe→eval feedback loop | |
| Reliability & fallbacks | |
| Retries with backoff, timeouts, fallback models, output validation, circuit breakers, graceful degradation | |
| Experiment tracking & registry | |
| MLflow end to end: log runs/params/metrics from the section-04 eval harness, register and version a model, and promote by stage — the tooling that turns "I ran an eval" into a tracked, reproducible workflow |
09 — Serving & inference performance
Where the free Groq API can't run the topic (these frameworks need a GPU), the notebook teaches it concept-first and fences an optional Colab-GPU appendix — the same pattern as the section-06 LoRA appendix.
| Notebook | What you'll learn |
|---|---|
| Serving frameworks | |
| The serving stack an AI engineer actually picks between — vLLM, TGI, Triton, TensorRT-LLM — what each optimizes, how they map onto the raw API you've been calling, and when to reach for which | |
| Inference performance | |
| The levers behind throughput and latency: continuous batching, the KV cache, quantization, and the throughput-vs-latency trade — with the napkin math to size a deployment |
10 — ML system design & performance
| Notebook | What you'll learn |
|---|---|
| Designing an inference service | |
| Concept: the ML system design interview, worked end to end — QPS/VRAM/latency/cost estimation, replica scaling, queueing, caching, and the SLA trade-offs, on a realistic LLM-serving prompt |
11 — Customer craft (the FDE differentiator)
| Notebook | What you'll learn |
|---|---|
| Scoping & discovery | |
| Turn a vague customer ask into a scoped, evaluable system: discovery questions, a one-page scoping doc, the demo discipline — the customer-scenario interview round most engineers can't evidence |
12 — Case Studies & Capstone
Where the skills come together into projects. First a case study — one realistic scenario worked end to end, runnable — then the capstone , the deployed repo you build yourself. (Section overview.)
| Notebook | What you'll learn |
|---|---|
| Case study A — Customer-support assistant | |
| One scenario scoped → built → served → debugged in production : a vague ask becomes a deployed, evaluated RAG+agent assistant, then a live quality regression (a stale index after a corpus migration) that you diagnose and fix. A build-to-debug arc threading sections 02–11 | |
| Case study B — Contract extraction: pipeline vs agent | |
| The judgment call interviewers love: build the same extraction task as both an agent and a pipeline, then prove with accuracy + token cost that the pipeline wins when the steps are known | |
| Case study C — Red-team robustness benchmark | |
| A different kind of system — a harness that evaluates a model instead of serving one: an attacker→target→judge (PAIR) loop that measures attack success rate, composing the agent loop, LLM-judge, security, and evals |
Capstone: the brief for the deployed project that goes on your resume — a real repo with a serving component and an eval report. Case studies are for learning; the capstone is for hiring.
- Raw model APIs, no frameworks. Patterns are durable; wrappers churn.
- One shared corpus (
data/) across RAG and eval sections, so evals measure the retrieval you actually built. - Self-contained notebooks. First cell installs, second cell calls
from aien import setup; client, MODEL = setup()to load your key from Colab secrets (or a local env var). No hidden state between notebooks.aienis the tiny shared-setup package in this repo — one place to change credential loading — installed automatically by the first cell. - Every notebook ends with exercises — do them before moving on.
- Get a free API key at console.groq.com — no credit card required.
- In Colab: the key icon in the left sidebar → add
GROQ_API_KEYas a secret, and toggle notebook access on. - Open any notebook via its badge and run top to bottom.
Running locally instead: pip install -r requirements.txt && pip install -e . (the second installs the aien setup helper), export GROQ_API_KEY=..., open with Jupyter.