Exercises¶
Page Maps¶
graph LR
family["Reproducible Research"]
program["Deep Dive DVC"]
section["Data Identity Content Addressing"]
page["Exercises"]
capstone["Capstone evidence"]
family --> program --> section --> page
page -.applies in.-> capstone
flowchart LR
orient["Orient on the page map"] --> read["Read the main claim and examples"]
read --> inspect["Inspect the related code, proof, or capstone surface"]
inspect --> verify["Run or review the verification path"]
verify --> apply["Apply the idea back to the module and capstone"]
Use these exercises to practice identity and state-layer judgment, not only DVC command vocabulary.
The strongest answers will explain which layer is being discussed and what kind of trust claim is actually being made.
Exercise 1: Explain why the path is too weak¶
A teammate says:
the dataset is
data/train.csv, so as long as that file exists, the identity problem is solved.
Write a short response that explains:
- what the path does tell you
- what it does not tell you
- why that difference matters for reproducibility
Exercise 2: Separate pointer, cache, and workspace¶
Suppose you have run dvc add data/raw.csv.
Explain in plain language:
- what the
.dvcfile is doing - what the cache is doing
- why the workspace file is still a different layer from both
Your answer should avoid jargon where possible.
Exercise 3: Name the authoritative layer¶
For each question below, say which layer you would inspect first:
- what did the pipeline actually record as executed?
- what may a downstream reviewer safely trust?
- what survives local cache loss?
- what files are visible in the working tree right now?
Use the vocabulary from the module rather than generic phrases like "the repo."
Exercise 4: Explain the commands as state moves¶
Write a short explanation of what changes when you run:
dvc pushdvc pulldvc checkout
Your answer should focus on which layer each command affects and what new trust it adds or does not add.
Exercise 5: Diagnose a recovery claim¶
A team says:
we rebuilt the workspace after deleting local files, so the published release and the full repository are both fully proven.
Explain:
- what this recovery success does prove
- what it does not prove yet
- which additional boundary the team may be confusing with recovery
Mastery check¶
You have a strong grasp of this module if your answers consistently keep four ideas visible:
- paths are locators, not identity
- content identity needs recorded references and storage layers
- different repository layers answer different trust questions
- recovery is a bounded proof, not a magic guarantee about everything