I'm building a convolutional autoencoder, but want the encoding to be in a linear form so I can more easily feed it as input into an MLP. I have two convolutional layers on the encoder along with a linear inner layer to reduce dimension. This encoding is then fed into the corresponding decoder.
When I flatten the output of the second convolutional layer, based on my calculation (using the standard formula: Calculate the Output size in Convolution layer) should come out to a 1x100352 rank 1 tensor. However, when I set the input dimension of the linear layer to be 100352, the flattened rank 1 tensor has dimension 1x50176. Then comes the weird part.
I tried changing the input dimension of the linear layer to be 50176, assuming I had miscalculated. When I do this, the reshaped rank 1 tensor confusingly becomes 1x100352, and then the aforementioned weight matrix becomes 50176x256 as expected.
This response to modifying the linear layer's input dimension doesn't make sense to me. That hyperparameter controls the weight matrix correctly, but I guess I'm uncertain why it has any bearing on the linear layer's input since that's just a reshaped tensor output from a convolutional layer whose hyperparameters are unrelated to the hyperparameter in question.
I apologize if I'm just missing something obvious. I'm very new to pytorch, and I couldn't find any other posts which discussed this sort of issue.
Here's what I believe to be the minimal reproducible example:
import os
import torch
import torchvision
import torchvision.transforms as transforms
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt
import torch.autograd as autograd
import torch.nn as nn
import torch.nn.functional as F
import torch.optim as optim
from torchvision import datasets
from torch.utils.data import DataLoader
from torchvision.utils import save_image
class convAutoEncoder(nn.Module):
def __init__(self,**kwargs):
super().__init__()
#Creating network structure
#Encoder portion of autoencoder
self.enc1 = nn.Conv2d(in_channels = kwargs["inputChannels"], out_channels = kwargs["channelsEncoderMid"], kernel_size = kwargs["kernelSize"])
self.enc2 = nn.Conv2d(in_channels = kwargs["channelsEncoderMid"], out_channels = kwargs["channelsEncoderInner"], kernel_size = kwargs["kernelSize"])
self.enc3 = nn.Linear(in_features = kwargs["intoLinear"], out_features = kwargs["linearEncoded"])
#Decoder portion of autoencoder
self.dec1 = nn.Linear(in_features = kwargs["linearEncoded"], out_features = kwargs["intoLinear"])
self.dec2 = nn.ConvTranspose2d(in_channels = kwargs["channelsEncoderInner"], out_channels = kwargs["channelsDecoderMid"], kernel_size = kwargs["kernelSize"])
self.dec3 = nn.ConvTranspose2d(in_channels = kwargs["channelsDecoderMid"], out_channels = kwargs["inputChannels"], kernel_size = kwargs["kernelSize"])
def forward(self,x):
#Encoding
x = F.relu(self.enc1(x))
x = F.relu(self.enc2(x))
x = x.reshape(1,-1)
x = x.squeeze()
x = F.relu(self.enc3(x))
#Decoding
x = F.relu(self.dec1(x))
x = x.reshape([32,4,28,28])
x = F.relu(self.dec2(x))
x = F.relu(self.dec3(x))
return x
def encodeDecodeConv(numEpochs = 20, input_Channels = 3, batchSize = 32,
channels_Encoder_Inner = 4, channels_Encoder_Mid = 8, into_Linear = 100352,
linear_Encoded = 256, channels_Decoder_Mid = 8, kernel_Size = 3,
learningRate = 1e-3):
#Pick a device. If GPU available, use that. Otherwise, use CPU.
device = torch.device("cuda" if torch.cuda.is_available() else "cpu")
#Define data transforms
transform = transforms.Compose([transforms.ToTensor(),transforms.Normalize((0.5, 0.5, 0.5), (0.5, 0.5, 0.5))])
#Define training dataset
trainSet = datasets.CIFAR10(root = './data', train = True, download = True, transform = transform)
#Define testing dataset
testSet = datasets.CIFAR10(root = './data', train = False, download = True, transform = transform)
#Define data loaders
trainLoader = DataLoader(trainSet, batch_size = batchSize, shuffle = True)
testLoader = DataLoader(testSet, batch_size = batchSize, shuffle = True)
#Initialize neural network
model = convAutoEncoder(inputChannels = input_Channels, channelsEncoderMid = channels_Encoder_Mid, channelsEncoderInner = channels_Encoder_Inner, intoLinear = into_Linear, linearEncoded = linear_Encoded, channelsDecoderMid = channels_Decoder_Mid, kernelSize = kernel_Size)
#Optimization setup
criterion = nn.MSELoss()
optimizer = optim.Adam(model.parameters(),lr = learningRate)
lossTracker = []
for epoch in range(numEpochs):
loss = 0
for data,_ in trainLoader:
data = data.to(device)
optimizer.zero_grad()
outputs = model(data)
train_loss = criterion(outputs,data)
train_loss.backward()
optimizer.step()
loss += train_loss.item()
loss = loss/len(trainLoader)
print('Epoch {} of {}, Train loss: {:.3f}'.format(epoch+1,numEpochs,loss))
encodeDecodeConv()
Edit2: Somewhere in the CIFAR10 dataset, the data appears to change dimension. After playing around with print statements more, I discovered that setting the relevant hyperparameter to 100352 works great for many entries, but then seemingly one image pops up that has a different size. Not sure why that would occur, though.
Related
Python version: 3.8
Pytorch version: 1.9.0+cpu
Platform: Anaconda Spyder5.0
To reproduce this problem, just copy every code below to a single file.
The ILSVRC2012_val_00000293.jpg file used in this code is shown below, you also need to download it and then change its destination in the code.
Some background of this problem:
I am now working on a project that aims to develop a hardware accelerator to complete the inference process of the MobileNet V2 network. I used pretrained quantized Pytorch model to simulate the outcome, and the result comes out very well.
In order to use hardware to complete this task, I wish to know every inputs and outputs as well as intermidiate variables during runing this piece of pytorch code. I used a package named torchextractor to fetch the outcomes of first layer, which in this case, is a 3*3 convolution layer.
import numpy as np
import torchvision
import torch
from torchvision import transforms, datasets
from PIL import Image
from torchvision import transforms
import torchextractor as tx
import math
#########################################################################################
##### Processing of input image
#########################################################################################
normalize = transforms.Normalize(mean=[0.485, 0.456, 0.406],
std=[0.229, 0.224, 0.225])
test_transform = transforms.Compose([
transforms.Resize(256),
transforms.CenterCrop(224),
transforms.ToTensor(),
normalize,])
preprocess = transforms.Compose([
transforms.Resize(256),
transforms.CenterCrop(224),
transforms.ToTensor(),
transforms.Normalize(mean=[0.485, 0.456, 0.406], std=[0.229, 0.224, 0.225]),
])
#image file destination
filename = "D:\Project_UM\MobileNet_VC709\MobileNet_pytorch\ILSVRC2012_val_00000293.jpg"
input_image = Image.open(filename)
input_tensor = preprocess(input_image)
input_batch = input_tensor.unsqueeze(0)
#########################################################################################
#########################################################################################
#########################################################################################
#----First verify that the torchextractor class should not influent the inference outcome
# ofmp of layer1 before putting into torchextractor
a,b,c = quantize_tensor(input_batch)# to quantize the input tensor and return an int8 tensor, scale and zero point
input_qa = torch.quantize_per_tensor(torch.tensor(input_batch.clone().detach()), b, c, torch.quint8)# Using quantize_per_tensor method of torch
# Load a quantized mobilenet_v2 model
model_quantized = torchvision.models.quantization.mobilenet_v2(pretrained=True, quantize=True)
model_quantized.eval()
with torch.no_grad():
output = model_quantized.features[0][0](input_qa)# Ofmp of layer1, datatype : quantized_tensor
# print("FM of layer1 before tx_extractor:\n",output.int_repr())# Ofmp of layer1, datatype : int8 tensor
output1_clone = output.int_repr().detach().numpy()# Clone ofmp of layer1, datatype : ndarray
#########################################################################################
#########################################################################################
#########################################################################################
# ofmp of layer1 after adding torchextractor
model_quantized_ex = tx.Extractor(model_quantized, ["features.0.0"])#Capture of the module inside first layer
model_output, features = model_quantized_ex(input_batch)# Forward propagation
# feature_shapes = {name: f.shape for name, f in features.items()}
# print(features['features.0.0']) # Ofmp of layer1, datatype : quantized_tensor
out1_clone = features['features.0.0'].int_repr().numpy() # Clone ofmp of layer1, datatype : ndarray
if(out1_clone.all() == output1_clone.all()):
print('Model with torchextractor attached output the same value as the original model')
else:
print('Torchextractor method influence the outcome')
Here I define a numpy quantization scheme based on the quantization scheme proposed by
Quantization and Training of Neural Networks for Efficient
Integer-Arithmetic-Only Inference
# Convert a normal regular tensor to a quantized tensor with scale and zero_point
def quantize_tensor(x, num_bits=8):# to quantize the input tensor and return an int8 tensor, scale and zero point
qmin = 0.
qmax = 2.**num_bits - 1.
min_val, max_val = x.min(), x.max()
scale = (max_val - min_val) / (qmax - qmin)
initial_zero_point = qmin - min_val / scale
zero_point = 0
if initial_zero_point < qmin:
zero_point = qmin
elif initial_zero_point > qmax:
zero_point = qmax
else:
zero_point = initial_zero_point
# print(zero_point)
zero_point = int(zero_point)
q_x = zero_point + x / scale
q_x.clamp_(qmin, qmax).round_()
q_x = q_x.round().byte()
return q_x, scale, zero_point
#%%
# #############################################################################################
# --------- Simulate the inference process of layer0: conv33 using numpy
# #############################################################################################
# get the input_batch quantized buffer data
input_scale = b.item()
input_zero = c
input_quantized = a[0].detach().numpy()
# get the layer0 output scale and zero_point
output_scale = model_quantized.features[0][0].state_dict()['scale'].item()
output_zero = model_quantized.features[0][0].state_dict()['zero_point'].item()
# get the quantized weight with scale and zero_point
weight_scale = model_quantized.features[0][0].state_dict()["weight"].q_scale()
weight_zero = model_quantized.features[0][0].state_dict()["weight"].q_zero_point()
weight_quantized = model_quantized.features[0][0].state_dict()["weight"].int_repr().numpy()
# print(weight_quantized)
# print(weight_quantized.shape)
# bias_quantized,bias_scale,bias_zero= quantize_tensor(model_quantized.features[0][0].state_dict()["bias"])# to quantize the input tensor and return an int8 tensor, scale and zero point
# print(bias_quantized.shape)
bias = model_quantized.features[0][0].state_dict()["bias"].detach().numpy()
# print(input_quantized)
print(type(input_scale))
print(type(output_scale))
print(type(weight_scale))
Then I write a quantized 2D convolution using numpy, hope to figure out every details in pytorch data flow during the inference.
#%% numpy simulated layer0 convolution function define
def conv_cal(input_quantized, weight_quantized, kernel_size, stride, out_i, out_j, out_k):
weight = weight_quantized[out_i]
input = np.zeros((input_quantized.shape[0], kernel_size, kernel_size))
for i in range(weight.shape[0]):
for j in range(weight.shape[1]):
for k in range(weight.shape[2]):
input[i][j][k] = input_quantized[i][stride*out_j+j][stride*out_k+k]
# print(np.dot(weight,input))
# print(input,"\n")
# print(weight)
return np.multiply(weight,input).sum()
def QuantizedConv2D(input_scale, input_zero, input_quantized, output_scale, output_zero, weight_scale, weight_zero, weight_quantized, bias, kernel_size, stride, padding, ofm_size):
output = np.zeros((weight_quantized.shape[0],ofm_size,ofm_size))
input_quantized_padding = np.full((input_quantized.shape[0],input_quantized.shape[1]+2*padding,input_quantized.shape[2]+2*padding),0)
zero_temp = np.full(input_quantized.shape,input_zero)
input_quantized = input_quantized - zero_temp
for i in range(input_quantized.shape[0]):
for j in range(padding,padding + input_quantized.shape[1]):
for k in range(padding,padding + input_quantized.shape[2]):
input_quantized_padding[i][j][k] = input_quantized[i][j-padding][k-padding]
zero_temp = np.full(weight_quantized.shape, weight_zero)
weight_quantized = weight_quantized - zero_temp
for i in range(output.shape[0]):
for j in range(output.shape[1]):
for k in range(output.shape[2]):
# output[i][j][k] = (weight_scale*input_scale)*conv_cal(input_quantized_padding, weight_quantized, kernel_size, stride, i, j, k) + bias[i] #floating_output
output[i][j][k] = weight_scale*input_scale/output_scale*conv_cal(input_quantized_padding, weight_quantized, kernel_size, stride, i, j, k) + bias[i]/output_scale + output_zero
output[i][j][k] = round(output[i][j][k])
# int_output
return output
Here I input the same image, weight, and bias together with their zero_point and scale, then compare this "numpy simulated" result to the PyTorch calculated one.
quantized_model_out1_int8 = np.squeeze(features['features.0.0'].int_repr().numpy())
print(quantized_model_out1_int8.shape)
print(quantized_model_out1_int8)
out1_np = QuantizedConv2D(input_scale, input_zero, input_quantized, output_scale, output_zero, weight_scale, weight_zero, weight_quantized, bias, 3, 2, 1, 112)
np.save("out1_np.npy",out1_np)
for i in range(quantized_model_out1_int8.shape[0]):
for j in range(quantized_model_out1_int8.shape[1]):
for k in range(quantized_model_out1_int8.shape[2]):
if(out1_np[i][j][k] < 0):
out1_np[i][j][k] = 0
print(out1_np)
flag = np.zeros(quantized_model_out1_int8.shape)
for i in range(quantized_model_out1_int8.shape[0]):
for j in range(quantized_model_out1_int8.shape[1]):
for k in range(quantized_model_out1_int8.shape[2]):
if(quantized_model_out1_int8[i][j][k] == out1_np[i][j][k]):
flag[i][j][k] = 1
out1_np[i][j][k] = 0
quantized_model_out1_int8[i][j][k] = 0
# Compare the simulated result to extractor fetched result, gain the total hit rate
print(flag.sum()/(112*112*32)*100,'%')
If the "numpy simulated" results are the same as the extracted one, call it a hit. Print the total hit rate, it shows that numpy gets 92% of the values right. Now the problem is, I have no idea why the rest 8% of values come out wrong.
Comparison of two outcomes:
The picture below shows the different values between Numpy one and PyTorch one, the sample channel is index[1]. The left upper corner is Numpy one, and the upright corner is PyTorch one, I have set all values that are the same between them to 0, as you can see, most of the values just have a difference of 1(This can be view as the error brought by the precision loss of fixed point arithmetics), but some have large differences, e.g. the value[1][4], 121 vs. 76 (I don't know why)
Focus on one strange value:
This code is used to replay the calculation process of the value[1][4], originally I was expecting a trial and error process could lead me to solve this problem, to get my wanted number of 76, but no matter how I tried, it didn't output 76. If you want to try this, I paste this code for your convenience.
#%% A test code to check the calculation process
weight_quantized_sample = weight_quantized[2]
M_t = input_scale * weight_scale / output_scale
ifmap_t = np.int32(input_quantized[:,1:4,7:10])
weight_t = np.int32(weight_quantized_sample)
bias_t = bias[2]
bias_q = bias_t/output_scale
res_t = 0
for ch in range(3):
ifmap_offset = ifmap_t[ch]-np.int32(input_zero)
weight_offset = weight_t[ch]-np.int32(weight_zero)
res_ch = np.multiply(ifmap_offset, weight_offset)
res_ch = res_ch.sum()
res_t = res_t + res_ch
res_mul = M_t*res_t
# for n in range(1, 30):
# res_mul = multiply(n, M_t, res_t)
res_t = round(res_mul + output_zero + bias_q)
print(res_t)
Could you help me out of this, have been stuck here for a long time.
I implemented my own version of quantized convolution and got from 99.999% to 100% hitrate (and mismatch of a single value is by 1 that I can consider to be a rounding issue). The link on the paper in the question helped a lot.
But I found that your formulas are the same as mine. So I don't know what was your issue. As I understand quantization in pytorch is hardware dependent.
Here is my code:
def my_Conv2dRelu_b2(input_q, conv_layer, output_shape):
'''
Args:
input_q: quantized tensor
conv_layer: quantized tensor
output_shape: the pre-computed shape of the result
Returns:
'''
output = np.zeros(output_shape)
# extract needed float numbers from quantized operations
weights_scale = conv_layer.weight().q_per_channel_scales()
input_scale = input_q.q_scale()
weights_zp = conv_layer.weight().q_per_channel_zero_points()
input_zp = input_q.q_zero_point()
# extract needed convolution parameters
padding = conv_layer.padding
stride = conv_layer.stride
# extract float numbers for results
output_zp = conv_layer.zero_point
output_scale = conv_layer.scale
conv_weights_int = conv_layer.weight().int_repr()
input_int = input_q.int_repr()
biases = conv_layer.bias().numpy()
for k in range(input_q.shape[0]):
for i in range(conv_weights_int.shape[0]):
output[k][i] = manual_convolution_quant(
input_int[k].numpy(),
conv_weights_int[i].numpy(),
biases[i],
padding=padding,
stride=stride,
image_zp=input_zp, image_scale=input_scale,
kernel_zp=weights_zp[i].item(), kernel_scale=weights_scale[i].item(),
result_zp=output_zp, result_scale=output_scale
)
return output
def manual_convolution_quant(image, kernel, b, padding, stride, image_zp, image_scale, kernel_zp, kernel_scale,
result_zp, result_scale):
H = image.shape[1]
W = image.shape[2]
new_H = H // stride[0]
new_W = W // stride[1]
results = np.zeros([new_H, new_W])
M = image_scale * kernel_scale / result_scale
bias = b / result_scale
paddedIm = np.pad(
image,
[(0, 0), (padding[0], padding[0]), (padding[1], padding[1])],
mode="constant",
constant_values=image_zp,
)
s = kernel.shape[1]
for i in range(new_H):
for j in range(new_W):
patch = paddedIm[
:, i * stride[0]: i * stride[0] + s, j * stride[1]: j * stride[1] + s
]
res = M * ((kernel - kernel_zp) * (patch - image_zp)).sum() + result_zp + bias
if res < 0:
res = 0
results[i, j] = round(res)
return results
Code to compare pytorch and my own version.
def calc_hit_rate(array1, array2):
good = (array1 == array2).astype(np.int).sum()
all = array1.size
return good / all
# during inference
y2 = model.conv1(y1)
y2_int = torch.int_repr(y2)
y2_int_manual = my_Conv2dRelu_b2(y1, model.conv1, y2.shape)
print(f'y2 hit rate= {calc_hit_rate(y2.int_repr().numpy(), y2_int_manual)}') #hit_rate=1.0
My network just refuses to train. To make code reading less of a hassle, I abbreviate some complicated logic. Would update more if needed.
model = DistMultNN()
optimizer = optim.SGD(model.parameters(), lr=0.0001)
for t in range(500):
e1_neg = sampling_logic()
e2_neg = sampling_logic()
e1_pos = sampling_logic()
r = sampling_logic()
e2_pos = sampling_logic()
optimizer.zero_grad()
y_pred = model(tuple(zip(e1_pos, r, e2_pos)), e1_neg, e2_neg)
loss = model.loss(y_pred)
loss.backward()
optimizer.step()
I define my network as follow
class DistMultNN(nn.Module):
def __init__(self):
super().__init__()
self.seed = 42
self.entities_embedding = nn.init.xavier_uniform_(
torch.zeros((self.NO_ENTITIES, self.ENCODING_DIM), requires_grad=True))
self.relation_embedding = nn.init.xavier_uniform_(
torch.zeros((self.NO_RELATIONSHIPS, self.ENCODING_DIM), requires_grad=True))
self.W = torch.rand(self.ENCODING_DIM, self.ENCODING_DIM, requires_grad=True) # W is symmetric, todo: requireGrad?
self.W = (self.W + self.W.t()) / 2
self.b = torch.rand(self.ENCODING_DIM, 1, requires_grad=True)
self.lambda_ = 1.
self.rnn = torch.nn.RNN(input_size=encoding_dim, hidden_size=1, num_layers=1, nonlinearity='relu')
self.loss_func = torch.nn.LogSoftmax(dim=1)
def loss(self, y_pred):
softmax = -1 * self.loss_func(y_pred)
result = torch.mean(softmax[:, 0])
result.requires_grad = True
return result
def forward(self, samples, e1neg, e2neg):
batch_size = len(samples)
batch_result = np.zeros((batch_size, len(e1neg[0]) + 1))
for datapoint_id in range(batch_size):
entity_1 = entities_embed_lookup(datapoint_id[0])
entity_2 = entities_embed_lookup(datapoint_id[2])
r = relation_embed_lookup(datapoint_id[1])
x = self.some_fourier_transform(entity_1, r, entity_2)
batch_result[datapoint_id][0] = self.some_matmul(x)
for negative_example_id in range(len(e1neg[0])):
same_thing_with_negative_examples()
batch_result[datapoint_id][negative_example_id + 1] = self.some_matmul(x)
batch_result_tensor = torch.tensor(data=batch_result)
return batch_result_tensor
I tried checking weights using e.g. print(model.rnn.all_weights) in the training loop but they do not change. What did I do wrong?
So first of all the result.requires_grad = True should not be needed and in fact should throw an error, because results would normally not be a leaf variable.
So in your forward at the end you create a new tensor out of a numpy array:
batch_result_tensor = torch.tensor(data=batch_result)
and out of this result you calculate the loss and want to backward it. This doesn't work because batch_result_tensor is not part of any computation graph needed to calculate a gradient. You can't just mix numpy and torch this way.
The forward function has to consists of operations with torch tensors, which require grad, if you want to update and optimize them. So the default case is you have layers, which have weight tensors which requires grad. You have a input which you pass to the layers and so the computational graph is build and all the operations are recorded in it.
So I would start making batch_result a torch tensor and remove batch_result_tensor = torch.tensor(data=batch_result) and result.requires_grad = True. You might have to change more.
I'm trying to implement a very simple one layered MLP for a toy regression problem with one variable (dimension = 1) and one target (dimension = 1). It's a simple curve fitting problem with zero noise.
Matlab\Deep Learning Toolbox
Using levenberg-marquardt backpropagation on a MLP with a single hidden layer with 100 neurons and hyperbolic tangent activation I got pretty decent performance with almost zero effort:
MSE = 7.18e-08
Plotting the predictions and the targets I get a very precise fitting.
Python\Tensorflow\Keras
With the same network settings I used in matlab there's almost no training. No matter how hard I try to tune the training parameters or switch the optimizer.
MSE = 0.12900154
In this case the plot of the predictions is a curve that is not even able to follow the oscillations of the target curve.
I can obtain something better using RELU activations for the hidden layer but we're still far:
MSE = 0.0582045
This is the code I used in Python:
# IMPORT LIBRARIES
import numpy as np
import pandas as pd
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt
import tensorflow as tf
from tensorflow import keras
# IMPORT DATASET FROM CSV FILE, SHUFFLE TRAINING SET
# AND MAKE NUMPY ARRAY FOR TRAINING (DATA ARE ALREADY NORMALIZED)
dataset_path = "C:/Users/Rob/Desktop/Learning1.csv"
Learning_Dataset = pd.read_csv(dataset_path
, comment='\t',sep=","
,skipinitialspace=False)
Learning_Dataset = Learning_Dataset.sample(frac = 1) # SHUFFLING
test_dataset_path = "C:/Users/Rob/Desktop/Test1.csv"
Test_Dataset = pd.read_csv(test_dataset_path
, comment='\t',sep=","
,skipinitialspace=False)
Learning_Target = Learning_Dataset.pop('Target')
Test_Target = Test_Dataset.pop('Target')
Learning_Dataset = np.array(Learning_Dataset,dtype = "float32")
Test_Dataset = np.array(Test_Dataset,dtype = "float32")
Learning_Target = np.array(Learning_Target,dtype = "float32")
Test_Target = np.array(Test_Target,dtype = "float32")
# DEFINE SIMPLE MLP MODEL
inputs = tf.keras.layers.Input(shape=(1,))
x = tf.keras.layers.Dense(100, activation='relu')(inputs)
y = tf.keras.layers.Dense(1)(x)
model = tf.keras.Model(inputs=inputs, outputs=y)
# TRAIN MODEL
opt = tf.keras.optimizers.RMSprop(learning_rate = 0.001,
rho = 0.9,
momentum = 0.0,
epsilon = 1e-07,
centered = False)
early_stop = keras.callbacks.EarlyStopping(monitor='val_loss', patience=100)
model.compile(optimizer = opt,
loss = 'mse',
metrics = ['mse'])
model.fit(Learning_Dataset,
Learning_Target,
epochs=500,
validation_split = 0.2,
verbose=0,
callbacks=[early_stop],
shuffle = False,
batch_size = 100)
# INFERENCE AND CHECK ACCURACY
Predictions = model.predict(Test_Dataset)
Predictions = Predictions.reshape(10000)
print(np.square(np.subtract(Test_Target,Predictions)).mean()) # MSE
plt.plot(Test_Dataset,Test_Target,'o',Test_Dataset,Predictions,'o')
plt.legend(('Target','Model Prediction'))
plt.show()
What am i doing wrong?
Thanks
I'm trying to build up both a Siamese neural network and triple neural network on a custom large dataset
Keras has ImageDataGenerator which makes the generation of input data to a regular neural network very easy.
I'm interesting to use ImageDataGenerator or similar ways in order to train a networks with 2(siamese) and 3(triple) inputs.
In mniset keras siamese example, The input generated by a pre-process stage which is done by create_pairs method. I don't think this kind of way fit for a large dataset.
Is it possible to use ImageDataGenerator in this case? What are my other options assuming the data-set is very big?
The idea of DataGenerators is to give fit_generator a stream of data in batches.. hence giving control to you how you want to produce the data, ie whether you load from files or you do some data augmentation like what is done in ImageDataGenerator.
Here I posting the modified version of mniset siamese example with custom DataGenerator, you can work it out from here.
import numpy as np
np.random.seed(1337) # for reproducibility
import random
from keras.datasets import mnist
from keras.models import Sequential, Model
from keras.layers import Dense, Dropout, Input, Lambda
from keras.optimizers import SGD, RMSprop
from keras import backend as K
class DataGenerator(object):
"""docstring for DataGenerator"""
def __init__(self, batch_sz):
# the data, shuffled and split between train and test sets
(X_train, y_train), (X_test, y_test) = mnist.load_data()
X_train = X_train.reshape(60000, 784)
X_test = X_test.reshape(10000, 784)
X_train = X_train.astype('float32')
X_test = X_test.astype('float32')
X_train /= 255
X_test /= 255
# create training+test positive and negative pairs
digit_indices = [np.where(y_train == i)[0] for i in range(10)]
self.tr_pairs, self.tr_y = self.create_pairs(X_train, digit_indices)
digit_indices = [np.where(y_test == i)[0] for i in range(10)]
self.te_pairs, self.te_y = self.create_pairs(X_test, digit_indices)
self.tr_pairs_0 = self.tr_pairs[:, 0]
self.tr_pairs_1 = self.tr_pairs[:, 1]
self.te_pairs_0 = self.te_pairs[:, 0]
self.te_pairs_1 = self.te_pairs[:, 1]
self.batch_sz = batch_sz
self.samples_per_train = (self.tr_pairs.shape[0]/self.batch_sz)*self.batch_sz
self.samples_per_val = (self.te_pairs.shape[0]/self.batch_sz)*self.batch_sz
self.cur_train_index=0
self.cur_val_index=0
def create_pairs(self, x, digit_indices):
'''Positive and negative pair creation.
Alternates between positive and negative pairs.
'''
pairs = []
labels = []
n = min([len(digit_indices[d]) for d in range(10)]) - 1
for d in range(10):
for i in range(n):
z1, z2 = digit_indices[d][i], digit_indices[d][i+1]
pairs += [[x[z1], x[z2]]]
inc = random.randrange(1, 10)
dn = (d + inc) % 10
z1, z2 = digit_indices[d][i], digit_indices[dn][i]
pairs += [[x[z1], x[z2]]]
labels += [1, 0]
return np.array(pairs), np.array(labels)
def next_train(self):
while 1:
self.cur_train_index += self.batch_sz
if self.cur_train_index >= self.samples_per_train:
self.cur_train_index=0
yield ([ self.tr_pairs_0[self.cur_train_index:self.cur_train_index+self.batch_sz],
self.tr_pairs_1[self.cur_train_index:self.cur_train_index+self.batch_sz]
],
self.tr_y[self.cur_train_index:self.cur_train_index+self.batch_sz]
)
def next_val(self):
while 1:
self.cur_val_index += self.batch_sz
if self.cur_val_index >= self.samples_per_val:
self.cur_val_index=0
yield ([ self.te_pairs_0[self.cur_val_index:self.cur_val_index+self.batch_sz],
self.te_pairs_1[self.cur_val_index:self.cur_val_index+self.batch_sz]
],
self.te_y[self.cur_val_index:self.cur_val_index+self.batch_sz]
)
def euclidean_distance(vects):
x, y = vects
return K.sqrt(K.sum(K.square(x - y), axis=1, keepdims=True))
def eucl_dist_output_shape(shapes):
shape1, shape2 = shapes
return (shape1[0], 1)
def contrastive_loss(y_true, y_pred):
'''Contrastive loss from Hadsell-et-al.'06
http://yann.lecun.com/exdb/publis/pdf/hadsell-chopra-lecun-06.pdf
'''
margin = 1
return K.mean(y_true * K.square(y_pred) + (1 - y_true) * K.square(K.maximum(margin - y_pred, 0)))
def create_base_network(input_dim):
'''Base network to be shared (eq. to feature extraction).
'''
seq = Sequential()
seq.add(Dense(128, input_shape=(input_dim,), activation='relu'))
seq.add(Dropout(0.1))
seq.add(Dense(128, activation='relu'))
seq.add(Dropout(0.1))
seq.add(Dense(128, activation='relu'))
return seq
def compute_accuracy(predictions, labels):
'''Compute classification accuracy with a fixed threshold on distances.
'''
return labels[predictions.ravel() < 0.5].mean()
input_dim = 784
nb_epoch = 20
batch_size=128
datagen = DataGenerator(batch_size)
# network definition
base_network = create_base_network(input_dim)
input_a = Input(shape=(input_dim,))
input_b = Input(shape=(input_dim,))
# because we re-use the same instance `base_network`,
# the weights of the network
# will be shared across the two branches
processed_a = base_network(input_a)
processed_b = base_network(input_b)
distance = Lambda(euclidean_distance, output_shape=eucl_dist_output_shape)([processed_a, processed_b])
model = Model(input=[input_a, input_b], output=distance)
# train
rms = RMSprop()
model.compile(loss=contrastive_loss, optimizer=rms)
model.fit_generator(generator=datagen.next_train(), samples_per_epoch=datagen.samples_per_train, nb_epoch=nb_epoch, validation_data=datagen.next_val(), nb_val_samples=datagen.samples_per_val)
Autoencoder networks seems to be way trickier than normal classifier MLP networks. After several attempts using Lasagne all what I get in the reconstructed output is something that resembles at its best a blurry averaging of all the images of the MNIST database without distinction on what the input digit actually is.
The networks structure I chose are the following cascade layers:
input layer (28x28)
2D convolutional layer, filter size 7x7
Max Pooling layer, size 3x3, stride 2x2
Dense (fully connected) flattening layer, 10 units (this is the bottleneck)
Dense (fully connected) layer, 121 units
Reshaping layer to 11x11
2D convolutional layer, filter size 3x3
2D Upscaling layer factor 2
2D convolutional layer, filter size 3x3
2D Upscaling layer factor 2
2D convolutional layer, filter size 5x5
Feature max pooling (from 31x28x28 to 28x28)
All the 2D convolutional layers have the biases untied, sigmoid activations and 31 filters.
All the fully connected layers have sigmoid activations.
The loss function used is squared error, the updating function is adagrad. The length of the chunk for the learning is 100 samples, multiplied for 1000 epochs.
Just for completeness, the following is the code I used:
import theano.tensor as T
import theano
import sys
sys.path.insert(0,'./Lasagne') # local checkout of Lasagne
import lasagne
from theano import pp
from theano import function
import gzip
import numpy as np
from sklearn.preprocessing import OneHotEncoder
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt
def load_mnist():
def load_mnist_images(filename):
with gzip.open(filename, 'rb') as f:
data = np.frombuffer(f.read(), np.uint8, offset=16)
# The inputs are vectors now, we reshape them to monochrome 2D images,
# following the shape convention: (examples, channels, rows, columns)
data = data.reshape(-1, 1, 28, 28)
# The inputs come as bytes, we convert them to float32 in range [0,1].
# (Actually to range [0, 255/256], for compatibility to the version
# provided at http://deeplearning.net/data/mnist/mnist.pkl.gz.)
return data / np.float32(256)
def load_mnist_labels(filename):
# Read the labels in Yann LeCun's binary format.
with gzip.open(filename, 'rb') as f:
data = np.frombuffer(f.read(), np.uint8, offset=8)
# The labels are vectors of integers now, that's exactly what we want.
return data
X_train = load_mnist_images('train-images-idx3-ubyte.gz')
y_train = load_mnist_labels('train-labels-idx1-ubyte.gz')
X_test = load_mnist_images('t10k-images-idx3-ubyte.gz')
y_test = load_mnist_labels('t10k-labels-idx1-ubyte.gz')
return X_train, y_train, X_test, y_test
def plot_filters(conv_layer):
W = conv_layer.get_params()[0]
W_fn = theano.function([],W)
params = W_fn()
ks = np.squeeze(params)
kstack = np.vstack(ks)
plt.imshow(kstack,interpolation='none')
plt.show()
def main():
#theano.config.exception_verbosity="high"
#theano.config.optimizer='None'
X_train, y_train, X_test, y_test = load_mnist()
ohe = OneHotEncoder()
y_train = ohe.fit_transform(np.expand_dims(y_train,1)).toarray()
chunk_len = 100
visamount = 10
num_epochs = 1000
num_filters=31
dropout_p=.0
print "X_train.shape",X_train.shape,"y_train.shape",y_train.shape
input_var = T.tensor4('X')
output_var = T.tensor4('X')
conv_nonlinearity = lasagne.nonlinearities.sigmoid
net = lasagne.layers.InputLayer((chunk_len,1,28,28), input_var)
conv1 = net = lasagne.layers.Conv2DLayer(net,num_filters,(7,7),nonlinearity=conv_nonlinearity,untie_biases=True)
net = lasagne.layers.MaxPool2DLayer(net,(3,3),stride=(2,2))
net = lasagne.layers.DropoutLayer(net,p=dropout_p)
#conv2_layer = lasagne.layers.Conv2DLayer(dropout_layer,num_filters,(3,3),nonlinearity=conv_nonlinearity)
#pool2_layer = lasagne.layers.MaxPool2DLayer(conv2_layer,(3,3),stride=(2,2))
net = lasagne.layers.DenseLayer(net,10,nonlinearity=lasagne.nonlinearities.sigmoid)
#augment_layer1 = lasagne.layers.DenseLayer(reduction_layer,33,nonlinearity=lasagne.nonlinearities.sigmoid)
net = lasagne.layers.DenseLayer(net,121,nonlinearity=lasagne.nonlinearities.sigmoid)
net = lasagne.layers.ReshapeLayer(net,(chunk_len,1,11,11))
net = lasagne.layers.Conv2DLayer(net,num_filters,(3,3),nonlinearity=conv_nonlinearity,untie_biases=True)
net = lasagne.layers.Upscale2DLayer(net,2)
net = lasagne.layers.Conv2DLayer(net,num_filters,(3,3),nonlinearity=conv_nonlinearity,untie_biases=True)
#pool_after0 = lasagne.layers.MaxPool2DLayer(conv_after1,(3,3),stride=(2,2))
net = lasagne.layers.Upscale2DLayer(net,2)
net = lasagne.layers.DropoutLayer(net,p=dropout_p)
#conv_after2 = lasagne.layers.Conv2DLayer(upscale_layer1,num_filters,(3,3),nonlinearity=conv_nonlinearity,untie_biases=True)
#pool_after1 = lasagne.layers.MaxPool2DLayer(conv_after2,(3,3),stride=(1,1))
#upscale_layer2 = lasagne.layers.Upscale2DLayer(pool_after1,4)
net = lasagne.layers.Conv2DLayer(net,num_filters,(5,5),nonlinearity=conv_nonlinearity,untie_biases=True)
net = lasagne.layers.FeaturePoolLayer(net,num_filters,pool_function=theano.tensor.max)
print "output_shape:",lasagne.layers.get_output_shape(net)
params = lasagne.layers.get_all_params(net, trainable=True)
prediction = lasagne.layers.get_output(net)
loss = lasagne.objectives.squared_error(prediction, output_var)
#loss = lasagne.objectives.binary_crossentropy(prediction, output_var)
aggregated_loss = lasagne.objectives.aggregate(loss)
updates = lasagne.updates.adagrad(aggregated_loss,params)
train_fn = theano.function([input_var, output_var], loss, updates=updates)
test_prediction = lasagne.layers.get_output(net, deterministic=True)
predict_fn = theano.function([input_var], test_prediction)
print "starting training..."
for epoch in range(num_epochs):
selected = list(set(np.random.random_integers(0,59999,chunk_len*4)))[:chunk_len]
X_train_sub = X_train[selected,:]
_loss = train_fn(X_train_sub, X_train_sub)
print("Epoch %d: Loss %g" % (epoch + 1, np.sum(_loss) / len(X_train)))
"""
chunk = X_train[0:chunk_len,:,:,:]
result = predict_fn(chunk)
vis1 = np.hstack([chunk[j,0,:,:] for j in range(visamount)])
vis2 = np.hstack([result[j,0,:,:] for j in range(visamount)])
plt.imshow(np.vstack([vis1,vis2]))
plt.show()
"""
print "done."
chunk = X_train[0:chunk_len,:,:,:]
result = predict_fn(chunk)
print "chunk.shape",chunk.shape
print "result.shape",result.shape
plot_filters(conv1)
for i in range(chunk_len/visamount):
vis1 = np.hstack([chunk[i*visamount+j,0,:,:] for j in range(visamount)])
vis2 = np.hstack([result[i*visamount+j,0,:,:] for j in range(visamount)])
plt.imshow(np.vstack([vis1,vis2]))
plt.show()
import ipdb; ipdb.set_trace()
if __name__ == "__main__":
main()
Any ideas on how to improve this network to get a reasonably functioning autoencoder?