I started PyTorch with image recognition. Now I want to test (very basically) with pure NumPy arrays. I struggle with getting the setup to work, so basically I have vectors with values between 0 and 1 (normalized curves). Those vectors are always of length 1500 and I want to find e.g. "high values at the beginning" or "sine wave-like function", "convex", "concave" etc. stuff like that, so just shapes of those curves.
My training set consists of many vectors with their classes; I have chosen 7 classes. The net should be trained to classify a vector into one or more of those 7 classes (not one hot).
I'm struggling with multiple issues, but first my very basic Net
class Net(nn.Module):
def __init__(self, input_dim, hidden_dim, layer_dim, output_dim):
super(Net, self).__init__()
self.hidden_dim = hidden_dim
self.layer_dim = layer_dim
self.rnn = nn.RNN(input_dim, hidden_dim, layer_dim)
self.fc = nn.Linear(self.hidden_dim, output_dim)
def forward(self, x):
h0 = torch.zeros(self.layer_dim, x.size(1), self.hidden_dim).requires_grad_()
out, h0 = self.rnn(x, h0.detach())
out = out[:, -1, :]
out = self.fc(out)
return out
network = Net(1500, 70, 20, 7)
optimizer = optim.SGD(network.parameters(), lr=learning_rate, momentum=momentum)
This is just a copy-paste from an RNN demo. Here is my first issue. Is an RNN the right choice? It is a time series, but then again it is an image recognition problem when plotting the curve.
Now, this here is an attempt to batch the data. The data object contains all training curves together with the correct classifiers.
def train(epoch):
network.train()
network.float()
batching = True
index = 0
# monitor the cummulative loss for an epoch
cummloss = []
# start batching some curves
while batching:
optimizer.zero_grad()
# here I start clustering come curves to a batch and normalize the curves
_input = []
batch_size = min(len(data)-1, index+batch_size_train) - index
for d in data[index:min(len(data)-1, index+batch_size_train)]:
y = np.array(d['data']['y'], dtype='d')
y = np.multiply(y, y.max())
y = y[0:1500]
y = np.pad(y, (0, max(1500-len(y), 0)), 'edge')
if len(_input) == 0:
_input = y
else:
_input = np.vstack((_input, y))
input = torch.from_numpy(_input).float()
input = torch.reshape(input, (1, batch_size, len(y)))
target = np.zeros((1,7))
# the correct classes have indizes, to I create a vector with 1 at the correct locations
for _index in np.array(d['classifier']):
target[0,_index-1] = 1
target = torch.from_numpy(target)
# get the result form the network
output = network(input)
# is this a good loss function?
loss = F.l1_loss(output, target)
loss.backward()
cummloss.append(loss.item())
optimizer.step()
index = index + batch_size_train
if index > len(data):
print(np.mean(cummloss))
batching = False
for e in range(1, n_epochs):
print('Epoch: ' + str(e))
train(0)
The problem I'm facing right now is, the loss doesn't change very little, even with hundreds of epochs.
Are there existing examples of this kind of problem? I didn't find any, just pure png/jpg image recognition. When I convert the curves to png then I have a little issue to train a net, I took densenet and it worked just fine but it seems to be super overkill for this simple task.
This is just a copy-paste from an RNN demo. Here is my first issue. Is an RNN the right choice?
In theory what model you choose does not matter as much as "How" you formulate your problem.
But in your case the most obvious limitation you're going to face is your sequence length: 1500. RNN store information across steps and typically runs into trouble over long sequence with vanishing or exploding gradient.
LSTM net have been developed to circumvent this limitations with memory cell, but even then in the case of long sequence it will still be limited by the amount of information stored in the cell.
You could try using a CNN network as well and think of it as an image.
Are there existing examples of this kind of problem?
I don't know but I might have some suggestions : If I understood your problem correctly, you're going from a (1500, 1) input to a (7,1) output, where 6 of the 7 positions are 0 except for the corresponding class where it's 1.
I don't see any activation function, usually when dealing with multi class you don't use the output of the dense layer to compute the loss you apply a normalizing function like softmax and then you can compute the loss.
From your description of features you have in the form of sin like structures, the closes thing that comes to mind is frequency domain. As such, if you have and input image, just transform it to the frequency domain by a Fourier transform and use that as your feature input.
Might be best to look for such projects on the internet, one such project that you might want to read the research paper or video from this group (they have some jupyter notebooks for you to try) or any similar works. They use the furrier features, that go though a multi layer perceptron (MLP).
I am not sure what exactly you want to do, but seems like a classification task, you would use RNN if you want your neural network to work with a sequence. To me it seems like the 1500 dimensions are independent, and as such can be just treated as input.
Regarding the last layer, for a classification problem it usually is a probability distribution obtained by applying softmax (if only the classification is distinct - i.e. probability sums up to 1), in which, given an input, the net gives a probability of it being from each class. If we are predicting multiple classes we are going to use sigmoid as the last layer of the neural network.
Regarding your loss, there are many losses you can try and see if they are better. Once again, for different features you have to know what exactly is the measurement of distance (a.k.a. how different 2 things are). Check out this website, or just any loss function explanations on the net.
So you should try a simple MLP on top of fourier features as a starting point, assuming that is your feature vector.
Image Recognition is different from Time-Series data. In the imaging domain your data-set might have more similarity with problems like Activity-Recognition, Video-Recognition which have temporal component. So, I'd recommend looking into some models for those.
As for the current model, I'd recommend using LSTM instead of RNN. And also for classification you need to use an activation function in your final layer. This should softmax with cross entropy based loss or sigmoid with MSE loss.
Keras has a Timedistributed model which makes it easy to handle time components. You can use a similar approach with Pytorch by applying linear layers followed by LSTM.
Look into these for better undertsanding ::
Activity Recognition : https://www.narayanacharya.com/vision/2019-12-30-Action-Recognition-Using-LSTM
https://discuss.pytorch.org/t/any-pytorch-function-can-work-as-keras-timedistributed/1346
How to implement time-distributed dense (TDD) layer in PyTorch
Activation Function ::
https://pytorch.org/docs/stable/generated/torch.nn.Softmax.html
I am learning Neural network.
Here is the complete piece of code:
https://github.com/udacity/deep-learning-v2-pytorch/blob/master/intro-to-pytorch/Part%201%20-%20Tensors%20in%20PyTorch%20(Exercises).ipynb
When I transpose features, I get the following output:
import torch
def activation(x):
return 1/(1+torch.exp(-x))
### Generate some data
torch.manual_seed(7) # Set the random seed so things are predictable
# Features are 5 random normal variables
features = torch.randn((1, 5))
# True weights for our data, random normal variables again
weights = torch.randn_like(features)
# and a true bias term
bias = torch.randn((1, 1))
product = features.t() * weights + bias
output = activation(product.sum())
tensor(0.9897)
However, if I transpose weights, I get a different output:
weights_prime = weights.view(5,1)
prod = torch.mm(features, weights_prime) + bias
y_hat = activation(prod.sum())
tensor(0.1595)
Why does this happen?
Update
I took a look at the solution:
https://github.com/udacity/deep-learning-v2-pytorch/blob/master/intro-to-pytorch/Part%201%20-%20Tensors%20in%20PyTorch%20(Solution).ipynb
And I saw this:
y = activation((features * weights).sum() + bias)
why can a matrix features(1,5) multiply another matrix weights(1,5) without transposing weights first?
Update 2
After read several posts, I realized that
matrixA * matrixB is different from torch.mm(matrixA,matrixB) and torch.matmul(matrixA,matrixB).
Could someone confirm my three understandings between?
So the * means element-wise multiplication, whereas torch.mm() and torch.matmul() are matrix-wise multiplication.
differences between torch.mm() and torch.matmul(): mm() is used specifically for 2 dimensions matrix, whereas matmul() can be used for more complicated cases.
In Neutral Network for this Udacity coding exercise mentioned in my above link, it needs element-wise multiplication.
Update 3
Just to bring in the Video screenshot for someone who has the same confusion:
And here is the video link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=98&v=6Z7WntXays8&feature=emb_logo
Looking at https://pytorch.org/docs/master/generated/torch.nn.Linear.html
The typical linear (fully connected) layer in torch uses input features of shape (N,∗,in_features) and weights of shape (out_features,in_features) to produce an output of shape (N,*,out_features). Here N is the batch size, and * is any number of other dimensions (may be none).
The implementation is:
output = input.matmul(weight.t())
So, the answer is that neither of your formulas is correct according to convention; the standard formula is the one above.
You may use a non-standard shape since you're implementing things from scratch; as long as it's consistent it may work, but I don't recommend it for learning. It's unclear what 1 and 5 is in your code, but presumably you want 5 input features and one output feature, with a batch size of 1 as well. In which case the standard shapes should be input = torch.randn((1, 5)) for batch size=1 and in_features=5, and weights = torch.randn((5, 1)) for in_features=5 and out_features=1.
There is no reason why weights should ever be the same shape as features; thus weights = torch.randn_like(features) doesn't make sense.
Lastly, for your actual questions:
"Should I transpose features or weights in Neural network?" - in torch convention, you should transpose weights, but use matmul with the features first. Other frameworks may have a different convention; as long as in_features dimension of the weights is multiplied by the num_features dimension of the input, it would work.
"Why does this happen?" - these are two completely different calculations; there is no reason to think they would produce the same result.
"So the * means element-wise multiplication, whereas torch.mm() and torch.matmul() are matrix-wise multiplication." - Yes; mm is matrix-matrix only, matmul is vector-matrix or matrix-matrix, including batched versions of same - check the docs for everything matmul can do (which is kinda a lot).
"differences between torch.mm() and torch.matmul(): mm() is used specifically for 2 dimensions matrix, whereas matmul() can be used for more complicated cases." - Yes; the big difference is that matmul can broadcast. Use it when you specifically intend that; use mm to prevent unintentional broadcasting.
"In Neutral Network for this Udacity coding exercise mentioned in my above link, it needs element-wise multiplication." - I doubt it; it's probably an error in the Udacity code. This bit of code weights = torch.randn_like(features) looks like an error in any case; the dimensions of weights have a meaning different from the dimensions of features.
This line is taking an outer product between the two vectors.
product = features.t() * weights + bias
The resulting shape is 5x5.
If you change this to a dot product, then output will match y_hat.
product = torch.mm(weights, features.t()) + bias
As the title states, I am doing multivariate time-series prediction. I have some experience with this situation and was able to successfully setup and train a working model in TF Keras.
However, I did not know the 'proper' way to handle having multiple unrelated time-series samples. I have about 8000 unique sample 'blocks' with anywhere from 800 time steps to 30,000 time steps per sample. Of course I couldn't concatenate them all into one single time series because the first points of sample 2 are not related in time with the last points of sample 1.
Thus my solution was to fit each sample individually in a loop (at great inefficiency).
My new idea is can/should I pad the start of each sample with empty time-steps = to the amount of look back for the RNN and then concatenate the padded samples into one time-series? This will mean that the first time-step will have a look-back data of mostly 0's which sounds like another 'hack' for my problem and not the right way to do it.
The main challenge is in 800 vs. 30,000 timesteps, but nothing you can't do.
Model design: group sequences into chunks - for example, 30 sequences of 800-to-900 timesteps, padded, then 60 sequences of 900-to-1000, etc. - don't have to be contiguous (i.e. next can be 1200-to-1500)
Input shape: (samples, timesteps, channels) - or equivalently, (sequences, timesteps, features)
Layers: Conv1D and/or RNNs - e.g. GRU, LSTM. Each can handle variable timesteps
Concatenation: don't do it. If each of your sequences is independent, then each must be fed along dimension 0 in Keras - the batch or samples dimension. If they are dependent, e.g. multivariate timeseries, like many channels in a signal - then feed them along the channels dimension (dim 2). But never concatenate along timeseries dimension, as it implies causal continuity whrere none exists.
Stateful RNNs: can help in processing long sequences - info on how they work here
RNN capability: is limited w.r.t. long sequences, and 800 is already in danger zone even for LSTMs; I'd suggest dimensionality reduction via either autoencoders or CNNs w/ strides > 1 at input, then feeding their outputs to RNNs.
RNN training: is difficult. Long train times, hyperparameter sensitivity, vanishing gradients - but, with proper regularization, they can be powerful. More info here
Zero-padding: before/after/both - debatable, can read about it, but probably stay clear from "both" as learning to ignore paddings is easier with one locality; I personally use "before"
RNN variant: use CuDNNLSTM or CuDNNGRU whenever possible, as they are 10x faster
Note: "samples" above, and in machine learning, refers to independent examples / observations, rather than measured signal datapoints (which would be referred to as timesteps).
Below is a minimal code for what a timeseries-suited model would look like:
from tensorflow.keras.layers import Input, Conv1D, LSTM, Dense
from tensorflow.keras.models import Model
from tensorflow.keras.optimizers import Adam
import numpy as np
def make_data(batch_shape): # dummy data
return (np.random.randn(*batch_shape),
np.random.randint(0, 2, (batch_shape[0], 1)))
def make_model(batch_shape): # example model
ipt = Input(batch_shape=batch_shape)
x = Conv1D(filters=16, kernel_size=10, strides=2, padding='valid')(ipt)
x = LSTM(units=16)(x)
out = Dense(1, activation='sigmoid')(x) # assuming binary classification
model = Model(ipt, out)
model.compile(Adam(lr=1e-3), 'binary_crossentropy')
return model
batch_shape = (32, 100, 16) # 32 samples, 100 timesteps, 16 channels
x, y = make_data(batch_shape)
model = make_model(batch_shape)
model.train_on_batch(x, y)
I am trying to reconcile my understand of LSTMs and pointed out here in this post by Christopher Olah implemented in Keras. I am following the blog written by Jason Brownlee for the Keras tutorial. What I am mainly confused about is,
The reshaping of the data series into [samples, time steps, features] and,
The stateful LSTMs
Lets concentrate on the above two questions with reference to the code pasted below:
# reshape into X=t and Y=t+1
look_back = 3
trainX, trainY = create_dataset(train, look_back)
testX, testY = create_dataset(test, look_back)
# reshape input to be [samples, time steps, features]
trainX = numpy.reshape(trainX, (trainX.shape[0], look_back, 1))
testX = numpy.reshape(testX, (testX.shape[0], look_back, 1))
########################
# The IMPORTANT BIT
##########################
# create and fit the LSTM network
batch_size = 1
model = Sequential()
model.add(LSTM(4, batch_input_shape=(batch_size, look_back, 1), stateful=True))
model.add(Dense(1))
model.compile(loss='mean_squared_error', optimizer='adam')
for i in range(100):
model.fit(trainX, trainY, nb_epoch=1, batch_size=batch_size, verbose=2, shuffle=False)
model.reset_states()
Note: create_dataset takes a sequence of length N and returns a N-look_back array of which each element is a look_back length sequence.
What is Time Steps and Features?
As can be seen TrainX is a 3-D array with Time_steps and Feature being the last two dimensions respectively (3 and 1 in this particular code). With respect to the image below, does this mean that we are considering the many to one case, where the number of pink boxes are 3? Or does it literally mean the chain length is 3 (i.e. only 3 green boxes considered).
Does the features argument become relevant when we consider multivariate series? e.g. modelling two financial stocks simultaneously?
Stateful LSTMs
Does stateful LSTMs mean that we save the cell memory values between runs of batches? If this is the case, batch_size is one, and the memory is reset between the training runs so what was the point of saying that it was stateful. I'm guessing this is related to the fact that training data is not shuffled, but I'm not sure how.
Any thoughts?
Image reference: http://karpathy.github.io/2015/05/21/rnn-effectiveness/
Edit 1:
A bit confused about #van's comment about the red and green boxes being equal. So just to confirm, does the following API calls correspond to the unrolled diagrams? Especially noting the second diagram (batch_size was arbitrarily chosen.):
Edit 2:
For people who have done Udacity's deep learning course and still confused about the time_step argument, look at the following discussion: https://discussions.udacity.com/t/rnn-lstm-use-implementation/163169
Update:
It turns out model.add(TimeDistributed(Dense(vocab_len))) was what I was looking for. Here is an example: https://github.com/sachinruk/ShakespeareBot
Update2:
I have summarised most of my understanding of LSTMs here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ywinX5wgdEU
As a complement to the accepted answer, this answer shows keras behaviors and how to achieve each picture.
General Keras behavior
The standard keras internal processing is always a many to many as in the following picture (where I used features=2, pressure and temperature, just as an example):
In this image, I increased the number of steps to 5, to avoid confusion with the other dimensions.
For this example:
We have N oil tanks
We spent 5 hours taking measures hourly (time steps)
We measured two features:
Pressure P
Temperature T
Our input array should then be something shaped as (N,5,2):
[ Step1 Step2 Step3 Step4 Step5
Tank A: [[Pa1,Ta1], [Pa2,Ta2], [Pa3,Ta3], [Pa4,Ta4], [Pa5,Ta5]],
Tank B: [[Pb1,Tb1], [Pb2,Tb2], [Pb3,Tb3], [Pb4,Tb4], [Pb5,Tb5]],
....
Tank N: [[Pn1,Tn1], [Pn2,Tn2], [Pn3,Tn3], [Pn4,Tn4], [Pn5,Tn5]],
]
Inputs for sliding windows
Often, LSTM layers are supposed to process the entire sequences. Dividing windows may not be the best idea. The layer has internal states about how a sequence is evolving as it steps forward. Windows eliminate the possibility of learning long sequences, limiting all sequences to the window size.
In windows, each window is part of a long original sequence, but by Keras they will be seen each as an independent sequence:
[ Step1 Step2 Step3 Step4 Step5
Window A: [[P1,T1], [P2,T2], [P3,T3], [P4,T4], [P5,T5]],
Window B: [[P2,T2], [P3,T3], [P4,T4], [P5,T5], [P6,T6]],
Window C: [[P3,T3], [P4,T4], [P5,T5], [P6,T6], [P7,T7]],
....
]
Notice that in this case, you have initially only one sequence, but you're dividing it in many sequences to create windows.
The concept of "what is a sequence" is abstract. The important parts are:
you can have batches with many individual sequences
what makes the sequences be sequences is that they evolve in steps (usually time steps)
Achieving each case with "single layers"
Achieving standard many to many:
You can achieve many to many with a simple LSTM layer, using return_sequences=True:
outputs = LSTM(units, return_sequences=True)(inputs)
#output_shape -> (batch_size, steps, units)
Achieving many to one:
Using the exact same layer, keras will do the exact same internal preprocessing, but when you use return_sequences=False (or simply ignore this argument), keras will automatically discard the steps previous to the last:
outputs = LSTM(units)(inputs)
#output_shape -> (batch_size, units) --> steps were discarded, only the last was returned
Achieving one to many
Now, this is not supported by keras LSTM layers alone. You will have to create your own strategy to multiplicate the steps. There are two good approaches:
Create a constant multi-step input by repeating a tensor
Use a stateful=True to recurrently take the output of one step and serve it as the input of the next step (needs output_features == input_features)
One to many with repeat vector
In order to fit to keras standard behavior, we need inputs in steps, so, we simply repeat the inputs for the length we want:
outputs = RepeatVector(steps)(inputs) #where inputs is (batch,features)
outputs = LSTM(units,return_sequences=True)(outputs)
#output_shape -> (batch_size, steps, units)
Understanding stateful = True
Now comes one of the possible usages of stateful=True (besides avoiding loading data that can't fit your computer's memory at once)
Stateful allows us to input "parts" of the sequences in stages. The difference is:
In stateful=False, the second batch contains whole new sequences, independent from the first batch
In stateful=True, the second batch continues the first batch, extending the same sequences.
It's like dividing the sequences in windows too, with these two main differences:
these windows do not superpose!!
stateful=True will see these windows connected as a single long sequence
In stateful=True, every new batch will be interpreted as continuing the previous batch (until you call model.reset_states()).
Sequence 1 in batch 2 will continue sequence 1 in batch 1.
Sequence 2 in batch 2 will continue sequence 2 in batch 1.
Sequence n in batch 2 will continue sequence n in batch 1.
Example of inputs, batch 1 contains steps 1 and 2, batch 2 contains steps 3 to 5:
BATCH 1 BATCH 2
[ Step1 Step2 | [ Step3 Step4 Step5
Tank A: [[Pa1,Ta1], [Pa2,Ta2], | [Pa3,Ta3], [Pa4,Ta4], [Pa5,Ta5]],
Tank B: [[Pb1,Tb1], [Pb2,Tb2], | [Pb3,Tb3], [Pb4,Tb4], [Pb5,Tb5]],
.... |
Tank N: [[Pn1,Tn1], [Pn2,Tn2], | [Pn3,Tn3], [Pn4,Tn4], [Pn5,Tn5]],
] ]
Notice the alignment of tanks in batch 1 and batch 2! That's why we need shuffle=False (unless we are using only one sequence, of course).
You can have any number of batches, indefinitely. (For having variable lengths in each batch, use input_shape=(None,features).
One to many with stateful=True
For our case here, we are going to use only 1 step per batch, because we want to get one output step and make it be an input.
Please notice that the behavior in the picture is not "caused by" stateful=True. We will force that behavior in a manual loop below. In this example, stateful=True is what "allows" us to stop the sequence, manipulate what we want, and continue from where we stopped.
Honestly, the repeat approach is probably a better choice for this case. But since we're looking into stateful=True, this is a good example. The best way to use this is the next "many to many" case.
Layer:
outputs = LSTM(units=features,
stateful=True,
return_sequences=True, #just to keep a nice output shape even with length 1
input_shape=(None,features))(inputs)
#units = features because we want to use the outputs as inputs
#None because we want variable length
#output_shape -> (batch_size, steps, units)
Now, we're going to need a manual loop for predictions:
input_data = someDataWithShape((batch, 1, features))
#important, we're starting new sequences, not continuing old ones:
model.reset_states()
output_sequence = []
last_step = input_data
for i in steps_to_predict:
new_step = model.predict(last_step)
output_sequence.append(new_step)
last_step = new_step
#end of the sequences
model.reset_states()
Many to many with stateful=True
Now, here, we get a very nice application: given an input sequence, try to predict its future unknown steps.
We're using the same method as in the "one to many" above, with the difference that:
we will use the sequence itself to be the target data, one step ahead
we know part of the sequence (so we discard this part of the results).
Layer (same as above):
outputs = LSTM(units=features,
stateful=True,
return_sequences=True,
input_shape=(None,features))(inputs)
#units = features because we want to use the outputs as inputs
#None because we want variable length
#output_shape -> (batch_size, steps, units)
Training:
We are going to train our model to predict the next step of the sequences:
totalSequences = someSequencesShaped((batch, steps, features))
#batch size is usually 1 in these cases (often you have only one Tank in the example)
X = totalSequences[:,:-1] #the entire known sequence, except the last step
Y = totalSequences[:,1:] #one step ahead of X
#loop for resetting states at the start/end of the sequences:
for epoch in range(epochs):
model.reset_states()
model.train_on_batch(X,Y)
Predicting:
The first stage of our predicting involves "ajusting the states". That's why we're going to predict the entire sequence again, even if we already know this part of it:
model.reset_states() #starting a new sequence
predicted = model.predict(totalSequences)
firstNewStep = predicted[:,-1:] #the last step of the predictions is the first future step
Now we go to the loop as in the one to many case. But don't reset states here!. We want the model to know in which step of the sequence it is (and it knows it's at the first new step because of the prediction we just made above)
output_sequence = [firstNewStep]
last_step = firstNewStep
for i in steps_to_predict:
new_step = model.predict(last_step)
output_sequence.append(new_step)
last_step = new_step
#end of the sequences
model.reset_states()
This approach was used in these answers and file:
Predicting a multiple forward time step of a time series using LSTM
how to use the Keras model to forecast for future dates or events?
https://github.com/danmoller/TestRepo/blob/master/TestBookLSTM.ipynb
Achieving complex configurations
In all examples above, I showed the behavior of "one layer".
You can, of course, stack many layers on top of each other, not necessarly all following the same pattern, and create your own models.
One interesting example that has been appearing is the "autoencoder" that has a "many to one encoder" followed by a "one to many" decoder:
Encoder:
inputs = Input((steps,features))
#a few many to many layers:
outputs = LSTM(hidden1,return_sequences=True)(inputs)
outputs = LSTM(hidden2,return_sequences=True)(outputs)
#many to one layer:
outputs = LSTM(hidden3)(outputs)
encoder = Model(inputs,outputs)
Decoder:
Using the "repeat" method;
inputs = Input((hidden3,))
#repeat to make one to many:
outputs = RepeatVector(steps)(inputs)
#a few many to many layers:
outputs = LSTM(hidden4,return_sequences=True)(outputs)
#last layer
outputs = LSTM(features,return_sequences=True)(outputs)
decoder = Model(inputs,outputs)
Autoencoder:
inputs = Input((steps,features))
outputs = encoder(inputs)
outputs = decoder(outputs)
autoencoder = Model(inputs,outputs)
Train with fit(X,X)
Additional explanations
If you want details about how steps are calculated in LSTMs, or details about the stateful=True cases above, you can read more in this answer: Doubts regarding `Understanding Keras LSTMs`
First of all, you choose great tutorials(1,2) to start.
What Time-step means: Time-steps==3 in X.shape (Describing data shape) means there are three pink boxes. Since in Keras each step requires an input, therefore the number of the green boxes should usually equal to the number of red boxes. Unless you hack the structure.
many to many vs. many to one: In keras, there is a return_sequences parameter when your initializing LSTM or GRU or SimpleRNN. When return_sequences is False (by default), then it is many to one as shown in the picture. Its return shape is (batch_size, hidden_unit_length), which represent the last state. When return_sequences is True, then it is many to many. Its return shape is (batch_size, time_step, hidden_unit_length)
Does the features argument become relevant: Feature argument means "How big is your red box" or what is the input dimension each step. If you want to predict from, say, 8 kinds of market information, then you can generate your data with feature==8.
Stateful: You can look up the source code. When initializing the state, if stateful==True, then the state from last training will be used as the initial state, otherwise it will generate a new state. I haven't turn on stateful yet. However, I disagree with that the batch_size can only be 1 when stateful==True.
Currently, you generate your data with collected data. Image your stock information is coming as stream, rather than waiting for a day to collect all sequential, you would like to generate input data online while training/predicting with network. If you have 400 stocks sharing a same network, then you can set batch_size==400.
When you have return_sequences in your last layer of RNN you cannot use a simple Dense layer instead use TimeDistributed.
Here is an example piece of code this might help others.
words = keras.layers.Input(batch_shape=(None, self.maxSequenceLength), name = "input")
# Build a matrix of size vocabularySize x EmbeddingDimension
# where each row corresponds to a "word embedding" vector.
# This layer will convert replace each word-id with a word-vector of size Embedding Dimension.
embeddings = keras.layers.embeddings.Embedding(self.vocabularySize, self.EmbeddingDimension,
name = "embeddings")(words)
# Pass the word-vectors to the LSTM layer.
# We are setting the hidden-state size to 512.
# The output will be batchSize x maxSequenceLength x hiddenStateSize
hiddenStates = keras.layers.GRU(512, return_sequences = True,
input_shape=(self.maxSequenceLength,
self.EmbeddingDimension),
name = "rnn")(embeddings)
hiddenStates2 = keras.layers.GRU(128, return_sequences = True,
input_shape=(self.maxSequenceLength, self.EmbeddingDimension),
name = "rnn2")(hiddenStates)
denseOutput = TimeDistributed(keras.layers.Dense(self.vocabularySize),
name = "linear")(hiddenStates2)
predictions = TimeDistributed(keras.layers.Activation("softmax"),
name = "softmax")(denseOutput)
# Build the computational graph by specifying the input, and output of the network.
model = keras.models.Model(input = words, output = predictions)
# model.compile(loss='kullback_leibler_divergence', \
model.compile(loss='sparse_categorical_crossentropy', \
optimizer = keras.optimizers.Adam(lr=0.009, \
beta_1=0.9,\
beta_2=0.999, \
epsilon=None, \
decay=0.01, \
amsgrad=False))
Refer this blog for more details Animated RNN, LSTM and GRU.
The figure below gives you a better view of LSTM. It's a LSTM cell.
As you can see, X has 3 features (green circles) so input of this cell is a vector of dimension 3 and hidden state has 2 units (red circles) so the output of this cell (and also cell state) is a vector of dimension 2.
An example of one LSTM layer with 3 timesteps (3 LSTM cells) is shown in the figure below:
** A model can have multiple LSTM layers.
Now I use Daniel Möller's example again for better understanding:
We have 10 oil tanks. For each of them we measure 2 features: temperature, pressure every one hour for 5 times.
now parameters are:
batch_size = number of samples used in one forward/backward pass (default=32) --> for example if you have 1000 samples and you set up the batch_size to 100 then the model will take 10 iterations to pass all of the samples once through network (1 epoch). The higher the batch size, the more memory space you'll need. Because the number of samples in this example are low, we consider batch_size equal to all of samples = 10
timesteps = 5
features = 2
units = It's a positive integer and determines the dimension of hidden state and cell state or in other words the number of parameters passed to next LSTM cell. It can be chosen arbitrarily or empirically based on the features and timesteps. Using more units will result in more accuracy and also more computational time. But it may cause over fitting.
input_shape = (batch_size, timesteps, features) = (10,5,2)
output_shape:
(batch_size, timesteps, units) if return_sequences=True
(batch_size, units) if return_sequences=False