I'm trying to implement a neural network to generate sentences (image captions), and I'm using Pytorch's LSTM (nn.LSTM) for that.
The input I want to feed in the training is from size batch_size * seq_size * embedding_size, such that seq_size is the maximal size of a sentence. For example - 64*30*512.
After the LSTM there is one FC layer (nn.Linear).
As far as I understand, this type of networks work with hidden state (h,c in this case), and predict the next word each time.
My question is- in the training - do we have to manually feed the sentence word by word to the LSTM in the forward function, or the LSTM knows how to do it itself?
My forward function looks like this:
def forward(self, features, caption, h = None, c = None):
batch_size = caption.size(0)
caption_size = caption.size(1)
no_hc = False
if h == None and c == None:
no_hc = True
h,c = self.init_hidden(batch_size)
embeddings = self.embedding(caption)
output = torch.empty((batch_size, caption_size, self.vocab_size)).to(device)
for i in range(caption_size): #go over the words in the sentence
if i==0:
lstm_input = features.unsqueeze(1)
else:
lstm_input = embeddings[:,i-1,:].unsqueeze(1)
out, (h,c) = self.lstm(lstm_input, (h,c))
out = self.fc(out)
output[:,i,:] = out.squeeze()
if no_hc:
return output
return output, h,c
(took inspiration from here)
The output of the forward here is from size batch_size * seq_size * vocab_size, which is good because it can be compared with the original batch_size * seq_size sized caption in the loss function.
The question is whether this for loop inside the forward that feeds the words one after the other is really necessary, or I can somehow feed the entire sentence at once and get the same results?
(I saw some example that do that, for example this one, but I'm not sure if it's really equivalent)
The answer is, LSTM knows how to do it on its own. You do not have to manually feed each word one by one.
An intuitive way to understand is that the shape of the batch that you send, contains seq_length (batch.shape[1]), using which it decides the number of words in the sentence. The words are passed through LSTM Cell generating the hidden states and C.
Related
I am trying to classify sequences by a binary feature. I have a dataset of sequence/label pairs and am using a simple one-layer LSTM to classify each sequence. Before I implemented minibatching, I was getting reasonable accuracy on a test set (80%), and the training loss would go from 0.6 to 0.3 (averaged).
I implemented minibatching, using parts of this tutorial: https://pytorch.org/tutorials/beginner/chatbot_tutorial.html
However, now my model won’t do better than 70-72% (70% of the data has one label) with batch size set to 1 and all other parameters exactly the same. Additionally, the loss starts out at 0.0106 and quickly gets really really small, with no significant change in results. I feel like the results between no batching and batching with size 1 should be the same, so I probably have a bug, but for the life of me I can’t find it. My code is below.
Training code (one epoch):
for i in t:
model.zero_grad()
# prep inputs
last = i+self.params['batch_size']
last = last if last < len(train_data) else len(train_data)
batch_in, lengths, batch_targets = self.batch2TrainData(train_data[shuffled][i:last], word_to_ix, label_to_ix)
iters += 1
# forward pass.
tag_scores = model(batch_in, lengths)
# compute loss, then do backward pass, then update gradients
loss = loss_function(tag_scores, batch_targets)
loss.backward()
# Clip gradients: gradients are modified in place
nn.utils.clip_grad_norm_(model.parameters(), 50.0)
optimizer.step()
Functions:
def prep_sequence(self, seq, to_ix):
idxs = [to_ix[w] for w in seq]
return torch.tensor(idxs, dtype=torch.long)
# transposes batch_in
def zeroPadding(self, l, fillvalue=0):
return list(itertools.zip_longest(*l, fillvalue=fillvalue))
# Returns padded input sequence tensor and lengths
def inputVar(self, batch_in, word_to_ix):
idx_batch = [self.prep_sequence(seq, word_to_ix) for seq in batch_in]
lengths = torch.tensor([len(idxs) for idxs in idx_batch])
padList = self.zeroPadding(idx_batch)
padVar = torch.LongTensor(padList)
return padVar, lengths
# Returns all items for a given batch of pairs
def batch2TrainData(self, batch, word_to_ix, label_to_ix):
# sort by dec length
batch = batch[np.argsort([len(x['turn']) for x in batch])[::-1]]
input_batch, output_batch = [], []
for pair in batch:
input_batch.append(pair['turn'])
output_batch.append(pair['label'])
inp, lengths = self.inputVar(input_batch, word_to_ix)
output = self.prep_sequence(output_batch, label_to_ix)
return inp, lengths, output
Model:
class LSTMClassifier(nn.Module):
def __init__(self, params, vocab_size, tagset_size, weights_matrix=None):
super(LSTMClassifier, self).__init__()
self.hidden_dim = params['hidden_dim']
if weights_matrix is not None:
self.word_embeddings = nn.Embedding.from_pretrained(weights_matrix)
else:
self.word_embeddings = nn.Embedding(vocab_size, params['embedding_dim'])
self.lstm = nn.LSTM(params['embedding_dim'], self.hidden_dim, bidirectional=False)
# The linear layer that maps from hidden state space to tag space
self.hidden2tag = nn.Linear(self.hidden_dim, tagset_size)
def forward(self, batch_in, lengths):
embeds = self.word_embeddings(batch_in)
packed = nn.utils.rnn.pack_padded_sequence(embeds, lengths)
lstm_out, _ = self.lstm(packed)
outputs, _ = nn.utils.rnn.pad_packed_sequence(lstm_out)
tag_space = self.hidden2tag(outputs)
tag_scores = F.log_softmax(tag_space, dim=0)
return tag_scores[-1]
For anyone else with a similar issue, I got it to work. I removed the log_softmax calculation, so this:
tag_space = self.hidden2tag(outputs)
tag_scores = F.log_softmax(tag_space, dim=0)
return tag_scores[-1]
becomes this:
tag_space = self.hidden2tag(outputs)
return tag_space[-1]
I also changed NLLLoss to CrossEntropyLoss, (not shown above), and initialized CrossEntropyLoss with no parameters (aka no ignore_index).
I am not certain why these changes were necessary (the docs even say that NLLLoss should be run after a log_softmax layer), but they got my model working and brought my loss back to a reasonable range (~0.5).
I have the following configuration: One lstm network that receives a text with n-grams with size 2. Below a simple schematic:
After some tests, I noticed that for some classes I have an significant incrise on accuracy when I use ngrams with size 3. Now I want to train a new LSTM neural network with both ngram sizes at same time, like the following schematic:
How can I provide the data and build this model, using keras to perform this task?
I assume you already have a function to split words into n-grams, as you already have the 2-grams and 3-grams model working? Therefor I just construct a one-sample example of the word "cool" for a working example. I had to use embedding for my example, as an LSTM layer with 26^3=17576 nodes was a little too much for my computer to handle. I expect you did the same in your 3-grams code?
Below is a complete working example:
from tensorflow.keras.layers import Input, Embedding, LSTM, Dense, concatenate
from tensorflow.keras.models import Model
import numpy as np
# c->2 o->14 o->14 l->11
np_2_gram_in = np.array([[26*2+14,26*14+14,26*14+11]])#co,oo,ol
np_3_gram_in = np.array([[26**2*2+26*14+14,26**2*14+26*14+26*11]])#coo,ool
np_output = np.array([[1]])
output_shape=1
lstm_2_gram_embedding = 128
lstm_3_gram_embedding = 192
inputs_2_gram = Input(shape=(None,))
em_input_2_gram = Embedding(output_dim=lstm_2_gram_embedding, input_dim=26**2)(inputs_2_gram)
lstm_2_gram = LSTM(lstm_2_gram_embedding)(em_input_2_gram)
inputs_3_gram = Input(shape=(None,))
em_input_3_gram = Embedding(output_dim=lstm_3_gram_embedding, input_dim=26**3)(inputs_3_gram)
lstm_3_gram = LSTM(lstm_3_gram_embedding)(em_input_3_gram)
concat = concatenate([lstm_2_gram, lstm_3_gram])
output = Dense(output_shape,activation='sigmoid')(concat)
model = Model(inputs=[inputs_2_gram, inputs_3_gram], outputs=[output])
model.compile(optimizer='adam', loss='binary_crossentropy')
model.fit([np_2_gram_in, np_3_gram_in], [np_output], epochs=5)
model.predict([np_2_gram_in,np_3_gram_in])
I am new to word2vec. With applying this method, I am trying to form some clusters based on words extracted by word2vec from scientific publications' abstracts. To this end, I have first retrieved sentences from the abstracts via stanfordNLP and put each sentence into a line in a text file. Then the text file required by deeplearning4j word2vec was ready to process (http://deeplearning4j.org/word2vec).
Since the texts come from scientific fields, there are a lot of mathematical terms or brackets. See the sample sentences below:
The meta-analysis showed statistically significant effects of pharmacopuncture compared to conventional treatment = 3.55 , P = .31 , I-2 = 16 % ) .
90 asymptomatic hypertensive subjects associated with LVH , DM , or RI were randomized to receive D&G herbal capsules 1 gm/day , 2 gm/day , or identical placebo capsules in double-blind and parallel fashion for 12 months .
After preparing the text file, I have run word2vec as below:
SentenceIterator iter = new LineSentenceIterator(new File(".../filename.txt"));
iter.setPreProcessor(new SentencePreProcessor() {
#Override
public String preProcess(String sentence) {
//System.out.println(sentence.toLowerCase());
return sentence.toLowerCase();
}
});
// Split on white spaces in the line to get words
TokenizerFactory t = new DefaultTokenizerFactory();
t.setTokenPreProcessor(new CommonPreprocessor());
log.info("Building model....");
Word2Vec vec = new Word2Vec.Builder()
.minWordFrequency(5)
.iterations(1)
.layerSize(100)
.seed(42)
.windowSize(5)
.iterate(iter)
.tokenizerFactory(t)
.build();
log.info("Fitting Word2Vec model....");
vec.fit();
log.info("Writing word vectors to text file....");
// Write word vectors
WordVectorSerializer.writeWordVectors(vec, "abs_terms.txt");
This script creates a text file containing many words withe their related vector values in each row as below:
pills -4.559159278869629E-4 0.028691953048110008 0.023867368698120117 ...
tricuspidata -0.00431067543104291 -0.012515762820839882 0.0074045853689312935 ...
As a subsequent step, this text file has been used to form some clusters via k-means in spark. See the code below:
val rawData = sc.textFile("...abs_terms.txt")
val extractedFeatureVector = rawData.map(s => Vectors.dense(s.split(' ').slice(2,101).map(_.toDouble))).cache()
val numberOfClusters = 10
val numberOfInterations = 100
//We use KMeans object provided by MLLib to run
val modell = KMeans.train(extractedFeatureVector, numberOfClusters, numberOfInterations)
modell.clusterCenters.foreach(println)
//Get cluster index for each buyer Id
val AltCompByCluster = rawData.map {
row=>
(modell.predict(Vectors.dense(row.split(' ').slice(2,101)
.map(_.toDouble))),row.split(',').slice(0,1).head)
}
AltCompByCluster.foreach(println)
As a result of the latest scala code above, I have retrieved 10 clusters based on the word vectors suggested by word2vec. However, when I have checked my clusters no obvious common words appeared. That is, I could not get reasonable clusters as I expected. Based on this bottleneck of mine I have a few questions:
1) From some tutorials for word2vec I have seen that no data cleaning is made. In other words, prepositions etc. are left in the text. So how should I apply cleaning procedure when applying word2vec?
2) How can I visualize the clustering results in a explanatory way?
3) Can I use word2vec word vectors as input to neural networks? If so which neural network (convolutional, recursive, recurrent) method would be more suitable for my goal?
4) Is word2vec meaningful for my goal?
Thanks in advance.
I'm using the Rotten Tomatoes dataset to train my net. It's divided in two groups, positive and negative examples. How can I configure my cnn in caffe to predict if a given text is a positive or a negative example?
I already formatted the data, each sentence has a size of 56 words. But using the following config does not give me even a satisfactory result.
n = caffe.NetSpec()
n.data, n.label = L.Data(batch_size=batch_size, backend=P.Data.LMDB,
source=db_path,
transform_param=dict(scale= 1 / mean),
ntop=2)
n.conv1 = L.Convolution(n.data, kernel_size=3, pad=1,
param=dict(lr_mult=1), num_output=10,
weight_filler=dict(type='xavier'))
n.pool1 = L.Pooling(n.conv1, kernel_size=n_classes,
stride=2, pool=P.Pooling.MAX)
n.ip1 = L.InnerProduct(n.pool1, num_output=100,
weight_filler=dict(type='xavier'))
n.relu1 = L.ReLU(n.ip1, in_place=True)
n.ip2 = L.InnerProduct(n.relu1, num_output=n_classes,
weight_filler=dict(type='xavier'))
n.loss = L.SoftmaxWithLoss(n.ip2, n.label)
My dataset is divided in two text files. One containing the positives examples and other containing negatives examples. Polarity dataset v1.1. To organize my data I get the length of the biggest sentence (59 words) so if a sentence is smaller than 59 words I add some text to it. I adapted from this code. For example, lets pretend that the biggest sentence has 3 words:
data = 'abc def ghijkl. mnopqrst uvwxyz. abcd.'
##
#In this data I have 3 sentences:
##
sentence_one = 'abc def ghijkl
sentence_two = 'mnopqrst uvwxyz'
sentence_three = 'abcd'
The sentence_one is the biggest (3 words), so to format the others two sentence I did the following:
sentence_two = 'mnopqrst uvwxyz <PAD>'
sentence_three = 'abcd <PAD> <PAD>'
Saved each positive and negative sentence to a caffe datum and saved in lmdb:
datum = caffe.proto.caffe_pb2.Datum()
datum.channels = 1
datum.height = 59 #biggest sentence
datum.width = 1
datum.label = label # 0 or 1
datum.data = sentence.tobytes()
Using my datum database and the above caffe's configuration I get a poor accuracy (less than 3 percent). What am I doing wrong?
I'm using RandomForest for classification, and I got an unbalanced dataset, as: 5830-no, 1006-yes. I try to balance my dataset with class_weight and sample_weight, but I can`t.
My code is:
X_train,X_test,y_train,y_test = train_test_split(arrX,y,test_size=0.25)
cw='auto'
clf=RandomForestClassifier(class_weight=cw)
param_grid = { 'n_estimators': [10,50,100,200,300],'max_features': ['auto', 'sqrt', 'log2']}
sw = np.array([1 if i == 0 else 8 for i in y_train])
CV_clf = GridSearchCV(estimator=clf, param_grid=param_grid, cv= 10,fit_params={'sample_weight': sw})
But I don't get any improvement on my ratios TPR, FPR, ROC when using class_weight and sample_weight.
Why? Am I doing anything wrong?
Nevertheless, if I use the function called balanced_subsample, my ratios obtain a great improvement:
def balanced_subsample(x,y,subsample_size):
class_xs = []
min_elems = None
for yi in np.unique(y):
elems = x[(y == yi)]
class_xs.append((yi, elems))
if min_elems == None or elems.shape[0] < min_elems:
min_elems = elems.shape[0]
use_elems = min_elems
if subsample_size < 1:
use_elems = int(min_elems*subsample_size)
xs = []
ys = []
for ci,this_xs in class_xs:
if len(this_xs) > use_elems:
np.random.shuffle(this_xs)
x_ = this_xs[:use_elems]
y_ = np.empty(use_elems)
y_.fill(ci)
xs.append(x_)
ys.append(y_)
xs = np.concatenate(xs)
ys = np.concatenate(ys)
return xs,ys
My new code is:
X_train_subsampled,y_train_subsampled=balanced_subsample(arrX,y,0.5)
X_train,X_test,y_train,y_test = train_test_split(X_train_subsampled,y_train_subsampled,test_size=0.25)
cw='auto'
clf=RandomForestClassifier(class_weight=cw)
param_grid = { 'n_estimators': [10,50,100,200,300],'max_features': ['auto', 'sqrt', 'log2']}
sw = np.array([1 if i == 0 else 8 for i in y_train])
CV_clf = GridSearchCV(estimator=clf, param_grid=param_grid, cv= 10,fit_params={'sample_weight': sw})
This is not a full answer yet, but hopefully it'll help get there.
First some general remarks:
To debug this kind of issue it is often useful to have a deterministic behavior. You can pass the random_state attribute to RandomForestClassifier and various scikit-learn objects that have inherent randomness to get the same result on every run. You'll also need:
import numpy as np
np.random.seed()
import random
random.seed()
for your balanced_subsample function to behave the same way on every run.
Don't grid search on n_estimators: more trees is always better in a random forest.
Note that sample_weight and class_weight have a similar objective: actual sample weights will be sample_weight * weights inferred from class_weight.
Could you try:
Using subsample=1 in your balanced_subsample function. Unless there's a particular reason not to do so we're better off comparing the results on similar number of samples.
Using your subsampling strategy with class_weight and sample_weight both set to None.
EDIT: Reading your comment again I realize your results are not so surprising!
You get a better (higher) TPR but a worse (higher) FPR.
It just means your classifier tries hard to get the samples from class 1 right, and thus makes more false positives (while also getting more of those right of course!).
You will see this trend continue if you keep increasing the class/sample weights in the same direction.
There is a imbalanced-learn API that helps with oversampling/undersampling data that might be useful in this situation. You can pass your training set into one of the methods and it will output the oversampled data for you. See simple example below
from imblearn.over_sampling import RandomOverSampler
ros = RandomOverSampler(random_state=1)
x_oversampled, y_oversampled = ros.fit_sample(orig_x_data, orig_y_data)
Here it the link to the API: http://contrib.scikit-learn.org/imbalanced-learn/api.html
Hope this helps!