I'm trying to build a Siamese Network for https://www.kaggle.com/moltean/fruits dataset. I've picked 10 Images per class from this dataset. There are a total of 131 classes in this dataset. I'm using the below model to train my network. However, it is failing to converge. I saw a strange behaviour, after 3000 epochs my results are 0.5000003 irrespective of the input pair I give and my loss stops at 0.61. The specifications of the network are as specified in the paper. I tried changing the following things,
Changing Denes layer activation to ReLU
Importing 'ImageNet' weights of ResNet50
Tried increasing and decreasing learning rate.
I also checked the batch inputs to see if the correct input pair (x) is paired with the correct y value. However, I think I'm doing something basically wrong. Glad if you could help me. Thank you :)
The notebook is hosted in Kaggle https://www.kaggle.com/krishnaprasad96/siamese-network.
If you have some doubts on how certain parts of the code works refer https://medium.com/#krishnaprasad_54871/siamese-networks-line-by-line-explanation-for-beginners-55b8be1d2fc6
#Building a sequential model
input_shape=(100, 100, 3)
left_input = Input(input_shape)
right_input = Input(input_shape)
W_init = keras.initializers.RandomNormal(mean = 0.0, stddev = 1e-2)
b_init = keras.initializers.RandomNormal(mean = 0.5, stddev = 1e-2)
model = keras.models.Sequential([
keras.layers.Conv2D(64, (10,10), activation='relu', input_shape=input_shape, kernel_initializer=W_init, kernel_regularizer=l2(2e-4)),
keras.layers.MaxPooling2D(),
keras.layers.Conv2D(128, (7,7), activation='relu', kernel_initializer=W_init, bias_initializer=b_init, kernel_regularizer=l2(2e-4)),
keras.layers.MaxPooling2D(),
keras.layers.Conv2D(128, (4,4), activation='relu', kernel_initializer=W_init, bias_initializer=b_init, kernel_regularizer=l2(2e-4)),
keras.layers.MaxPooling2D(),
keras.layers.Conv2D(256, (4,4), activation='relu', kernel_initializer=W_init, bias_initializer=b_init, kernel_regularizer=l2(2e-4)),
keras.layers.MaxPooling2D(),
keras.layers.Flatten(),
keras.layers.Dense(4096, activation='sigmoid', kernel_initializer=W_init, bias_initializer=b_init, kernel_regularizer=l2(1e-3))
])
encoded_l = model(left_input)
encoded_r = model(right_input)
subtracted = keras.layers.Subtract()([encoded_l, encoded_r])
prediction = Dense(1, activation='sigmoid', bias_initializer=b_init)(subtracted)
siamese_net = Model(input=[left_input, right_input], output=prediction)
optimizer= Adam(learning_rate=0.0006)
siamese_net.compile(loss='binary_crossentropy', optimizer=optimizer)
plot_model(siamese_net, show_shapes=True, show_layer_names=True)
I have seen the notebook on kaggle. Thanks for all the information. But it seems that training and validation spilt is wrong. As this model trains on initial 91 classes only. What about remaining 40 classes. Train and validation spilt should be from the same class. Suppose I have 10 images in a class. I can use 8 image for train and 2 images for validation. Train and validation spilt should be on images not on classes. Also I couldn't see the testing script. It would be a great help if you can provide that also.
Related
So. First of all, I am new to Neural Network (NN).
As part of my PhD, I am trying to solve some problem through NN.
For this, I have created a program that creates some data set made of
a collection of input vectors (each with 63 elements) and its corresponding
output vectors (each with 6 elements).
So, my program looks like this:
Nₜᵣ = 25; # number of inputs in the data set
xtrain, ytrain = dataset_generator(Nₜᵣ); # generates In/Out vectors: xtrain/ytrain
datatrain = zip(xtrain,ytrain); # ensamble my data
Now, both xtrain and ytrain are of type Array{Array{Float64,1},1}, meaning that
if (say)Nₜᵣ = 2, they look like:
julia> xtrain #same for ytrain
2-element Array{Array{Float64,1},1}:
[1.0, -0.062, -0.015, -1.0, 0.076, 0.19, -0.74, 0.057, 0.275, ....]
[0.39, -1.0, 0.12, -0.048, 0.476, 0.05, -0.086, 0.85, 0.292, ....]
The first 3 elements of each vector is normalized to unity (represents x,y,z coordinates), and the following 60 numbers are also normalized to unity and corresponds to some measurable attributes.
The program continues like:
layer1 = Dense(length(xtrain[1]),46,tanh); # setting 6 layers
layer2 = Dense(46,36,tanh) ;
layer3 = Dense(36,26,tanh) ;
layer4 = Dense(26,16,tanh) ;
layer5 = Dense(16,6,tanh) ;
layer6 = Dense(6,length(ytrain[1])) ;
m = Chain(layer1,layer2,layer3,layer4,layer5,layer6); # composing the layers
squaredCost(ym,y) = (1/2)*norm(y - ym).^2;
loss(x,y) = squaredCost(m(x),y); # define loss function
ps = Flux.params(m); # initializing mod.param.
opt = ADAM(0.01, (0.9, 0.8)); #
and finally:
trainmode!(m,true)
itermax = 700; # set max number of iterations
losses = [];
for iter in 1:itermax
Flux.train!(loss,ps,datatrain,opt);
push!(losses, sum(loss.(xtrain,ytrain)));
end
It runs perfectly, however, it comes to my attention that as I train my model with an increasing data set(Nₜᵣ = 10,15,25, etc...), the loss function seams to increase. See the image below:
Where: y1: Nₜᵣ=10, y2: Nₜᵣ=15, y3: Nₜᵣ=25.
So, my main question:
Why is this happening?. I can not see an explanation for this behavior. Is this somehow expected?
Remarks: Note that
All elements from the training data set (input and output) are normalized to [-1,1].
I have not tryed changing the activ. functions
I have not tryed changing the optimization method
Considerations: I need a training data set of near 10000 input vectors, and so I am expecting an even worse scenario...
Some personal thoughts:
Am I arranging my training dataset correctly?. Say, If every single data vector is made of 63 numbers, is it correctly to group them in an array? and then pile them into an ´´´Array{Array{Float64,1},1}´´´?. I have no experience using NN and flux. How can I made a data set of 10000 I/O vectors differently? Can this be the issue?. (I am very inclined to this)
Can this behavior be related to the chosen act. functions? (I am not inclined to this)
Can this behavior be related to the opt. algorithm? (I am not inclined to this)
Am I training my model wrong?. Is the iteration loop really iterations or are they epochs. I am struggling to put(differentiate) this concept of "epochs" and "iterations" into practice.
loss(x,y) = squaredCost(m(x),y); # define loss function
Your losses aren't normalized, so adding more data can only increase this cost function. However, the cost per data doesn't seem to be increasing. To get rid of this effect, you might want to use a normalized cost function by doing something like using the mean squared cost.
I use AdaBoostClassifier from sklearn.ensemble. I trained my model using 1000 estimators:
model = AdaBoostClassifier(
base_estimator = DecisionTreeClassifier(max_depth = 6),
n_estimators = 1000,
learning_rate = 0.2
)
model.fit(X_train, y_train)
then using generator model.staged_predict_proba(X_test) I get know that the best accuracy for X_test data is for 814 estimators.
Now I don't want to use generator model.staged_predict_proba(X_test) to make prediction for new test data X_test_2 because it is a lot of time to calculate predictions for each number of estimators (the dataset is really big). I just want to calculate predictions for model based on 814 estimators. I didn't find a way to do it. Is it possible for AdaBoostClassifier? I think it should be.
I am working with a Boston housing price. I have my X and Y with a shape of (506, 13). Then, i define my model
def basic_model_1():
t_model = Sequential()
t_model.add(Dense(13, activation="tanh", input_dim = 13))
t_model.add(Dense(10, activation="tanh"))
t_model.add(Dropout(0.2))
t_model.add(Dense(6, activation="tanh"))
t_model.add(Dense(3, activation="tanh"))
t_model.add(Dense(1))
print(t_model.summary())
t_model.compile(loss='mean_squared_error',
optimizer='adam',
metrics=['accuracy'])
t_model.fit(X,Y, nb_epoch = 200 , batch_size= 10, validation_split= 0.20)
return(t_model)
When i run this model, i get pretty bad performance of val_acc 0.0098. I changed activation function to sigmoid or relu. Performance increases slightly. What do i need to increase model performance?
In my opinion you could:
1) Add more neurons at every layer (use a multiple of 2 for better performance, try 64, 128, 256).
2) Add more dropout layers, one after every Dense layer.
3) Add much more data.
There is nothing wrong with your model architecture. Only thing I would suggest is to use kernel_initializer='normal', activation='relu' in all Dense layers (specially in output layer) since it's a regression model.
A Triplet network (inspired by "Siamese network") is comprised of 3 instances of the same feed-forward network (with shared parameters). When fed with 3 samples, the network outputs 2 intermediate values - the L2 (Euclidean) distances between the embedded representation of two of its inputs from
the representation of the third.
I'm using pairs of three images for feeding the network (x = anchor image, a standard image, x+ = positive image, an image containing the same object as x - actually, x+ is same class as x, and x- = negative image, an image with different class than x.
I'm using the triplet loss cost function described here.
How do I determine the network's accuracy?
I am assuming that your are doing work for image retrieval or similar tasks.
You should first generate some triplet, either randomly or using some hard (semi-hard) negative mining method. Then you split your triplet into train and validation set.
If you do it this way, then you can define your validation accuracy as proportion of the number of triplet in which feature distance between anchor and positive is less than that between anchor and negative in your validation triplet. You can see an example here which is written in PyTorch.
As another way, you can directly measure in term of your final testing metric. For example, for image retrieval, typically, we measure the performance of model on test set using mean average precision. If you use this metric, you should first define some queries on your validation set and their corresponding ground truth image.
Either of the above two metric is fine. Choose whatever you think fit your case.
So I am performing a similar task of using Triplet loss for classification. Here is how I used the novel loss method with a classifier.
First, train your model using the standard triplet loss function for N epochs. Once you are sure that the model ( we shall refer to this as the embedding generator) is trained, save the weights as we shall be using these weights ahead.
Let's say that your embedding generator is defined as:
class EmbeddingNetwork(nn.Module):
def __init__(self):
super(EmbeddingNetwork, self).__init__()
self.conv1 = nn.Sequential(
nn.Conv2d(1, 64, (7,7), stride=(2,2), padding=(3,3)),
nn.BatchNorm2d(64),
nn.LeakyReLU(0.001),
nn.MaxPool2d((3, 3), 2, padding=(1,1))
)
self.conv2 = nn.Sequential(
nn.Conv2d(64,64,(1,1), stride=(1,1)),
nn.BatchNorm2d(64),
nn.LeakyReLU(0.001),
nn.Conv2d(64,192, (3,3), stride=(1,1), padding=(1,1)),
nn.BatchNorm2d(192),
nn.LeakyReLU(0.001),
nn.MaxPool2d((3,3),2, padding=(1,1))
)
self.fullyConnected = nn.Sequential(
nn.Linear(7*7*256,32*128),
nn.BatchNorm1d(32*128),
nn.LeakyReLU(0.001),
nn.Linear(32*128,128)
)
def forward(self,x):
x = self.conv1(x)
x = self.conv2(x)
x = self.fullyConnected(x)
return torch.nn.functional.normalize(x, p=2, dim=-1)
Now we shall using this embedding generator to create another classifier, fit the weights we saved before to this part of the network and then freeze this part so our classifier trainer does not interfere with the triplet model. This can be done as:
class classifierNet(nn.Module):
def __init__(self, EmbeddingNet):
super(classifierNet, self).__init__()
self.embeddingLayer = EmbeddingNet
self.classifierLayer = nn.Linear(128,62)
self.dropout = nn.Dropout(0.5)
def forward(self, x):
x = self.dropout(self.embeddingLayer(x))
x = self.classifierLayer(x)
return F.log_softmax(x, dim=1)
Now we shall load the weights we saved before and freeze them using:
embeddingNetwork = EmbeddingNetwork().to(device)
embeddingNetwork.load_state_dict(torch.load('embeddingNetwork.pt'))
classifierNetwork = classifierNet(embeddingNetwork)
Now train this classifier network using the standard classification losses like BinaryCrossEntropy or CrossEntropy.
I have a network model that is trained using batch training. Once it is trained, I want to predict the output for a single example.
Here is my model code:
model = Sequential()
model.add(Dense(32, batch_input_shape=(5, 1, 1)))
model.add(LSTM(16, stateful=True))
model.add(Dense(1, activation='linear'))
model.compile(loss='mean_squared_error', optimizer='adam', metrics=['accuracy'])
I have a sequence of single inputs to single outputs. I'm doing some test code to map characters to next characters (A->B, B->C, etc).
I create an input data of shape (15,1,1) and an output data of shape (15, 1) and call the function:
model.fit(x, y, nb_epoch=epochs, batch_size=5, shuffle=False, verbose=0)
The model trains, and now I want to take a single character and predict the next character (input A, it predicts B). I create an input of shape (1, 1, 1) and call:
pred = model.predict(x, batch_size=1, verbose=0)
This gives:
ValueError: Shape mismatch: x has 5 rows but z has 1 rows
I saw one solution was to add "dummy data" to your predict values, so the input shape for the prediction would be (5,1,1) with data [x 0 0 0 0] and you would just take the first element of the output as your value. However, this seems inefficient when dealing with larger batches.
I also tried to remove the batch size from the model creation, but I got the following message:
ValueError: If a RNN is stateful, a complete input_shape must be provided (including batch size).
Is there another way? Thanks for the help.
Currently (Keras v2.0.8) it takes a bit more effort to get predictions on single rows after training in batch.
Basically, the batch_size is fixed at training time, and has to be the same at prediction time.
The workaround right now is to take the weights from the trained model, and use those as the weights in a new model you've just created, which has a batch_size of 1.
The quick code for that is
model = create_model(batch_size=64)
mode.fit(X, y)
weights = model.get_weights()
single_item_model = create_model(batch_size=1)
single_item_model.set_weights(weights)
single_item_model.compile(compile_params)
Here's a blog post that goes into more depth:
https://machinelearningmastery.com/use-different-batch-sizes-training-predicting-python-keras/
I've used this approach in the past to have multiple models at prediction time- one that makes predictions on big batches, one that makes predictions on small batches, and one that makes predictions on single items. Since batch predictions are much more efficient, this gives us the flexibility to take in any number of prediction rows (not just a number that is evenly divisible by batch_size), while still getting predictions pretty rapidly.
#ClimbsRocks showed a nice workaround. I cannot provide a "correct" answer in sense of "this is how Keras intends it to be done", but I can share another workaround which might help somebody depending on the use-case.
In this workaround I use predict_on_batch(). This method allows to pass a single sample out of a batch without throwing an error. Unfortunately, it returns a vector in the shape the target has according to the training-settings. However, each sample in the target yields then the prediction for your single sample.
You can access it like this:
to_predict = #Some single sample that would be part of a batch (has to have the right shape)#
model.predict_on_batch(to_predict)[0].flatten() #Flatten is optional
The result of the prediction is exactly the same as if you would pass an entire batch to predict().
Here some cod-example.
The code is from my question which also deals with this issue (but in a sligthly different manner).
sequence_size = 5
number_of_features = 1
input = (sequence_size, number_of_features)
batch_size = 2
model = Sequential()
#Of course you can replace the Gated Recurrent Unit with a LSTM-layer
model.add(GRU(100, return_sequences=True, activation='relu', input_shape=input, batch_size=2, name="GRU"))
model.add(GRU(1, return_sequences=True, activation='relu', input_shape=input, batch_size=batch_size, name="GRU2"))
model.compile(optimizer='adam', loss='mse')
model.summary()
#Summary-output:
_________________________________________________________________
Layer (type) Output Shape Param #
=================================================================
GRU (GRU) (2, 5, 100) 30600
_________________________________________________________________
GRU2 (GRU) (2, 5, 1) 306
=================================================================
Total params: 30,906
Trainable params: 30,906
Non-trainable params: 0
def generator(data, batch_size, sequence_size, num_features):
"""Simple generator"""
while True:
for i in range(len(data) - (sequence_size * batch_size + sequence_size) + 1):
start = i
end = i + (sequence_size * batch_size)
yield data[start : end].reshape(batch_size, sequence_size, num_features), \
data[end - ((sequence_size * batch_size) - sequence_size) : end + sequence_size].reshape(batch_size, sequence_size, num_features)
#Task: Predict the continuation of a linear range
data = np.arange(100)
hist = model.fit_generator(
generator=generator(data, batch_size, sequence_size, num_features),
steps_per_epoch=total_batches,
epochs=200,
shuffle=False
)
to_predict = np.asarray([[np.asarray([x]) for x in range(95,100,1)]]) #Only single element of a batch
correct = np.asarray([100,101,102,103,104])
print( model.predict_on_batch(to_predict)[0].flatten() )
#Output:
[ 99.92908 100.95854 102.32129 103.28584 104.20213 ]