Develop Reference

How to implement batch normalization merging in python?

I have defined the model as in the code below, and I used batch normalization merging to make 3 layers into 1 linear layer.
The first layer of the model is a linear layer and there is no bias.
The second layer of the model is a batch normalization and there is no weight and bias ( affine is false )
The third layer of the model is a linear layer.
The variables named new_weight and new_bias are the weight and bias of the newly created linear layer, respectively.
My question is: Why is the output of the following two print functions different? And where is the wrong part in the code below the batch merge comment?
import torch
import torch.nn as nn
import torch.optim as optim
learning_rate = 0.01
in_nodes = 20
internal_nodes = 8
out_nodes = 9
batch_size = 100
# model define
class M(nn.Module):
def __init__(self):
super(M, self).__init__()
self.layer1 = nn.Linear(in_nodes, internal_nodes, bias=False)
self.layer2 = nn.BatchNorm1d(internal_nodes, affine=False)
self.layer3 = nn.Linear(internal_nodes, out_nodes)
def forward(self, x):
x = self.layer1(x)
x = self.layer2(x)
x = self.layer3(x)
return x
# optimizer and criterion
model = M()
optimizer = optim.SGD(model.parameters(), lr=learning_rate)
criterion = nn.MSELoss()
# training
for batch_num in range(1000):
model.train()
optimizer.zero_grad()
input = torch.randn(batch_size, in_nodes)
target = torch.ones(batch_size, out_nodes)
output = model(input)
loss = criterion(output, target)
loss.backward()
optimizer.step()
# batch merge
divider = torch.sqrt(model.layer2.eps + model.layer2.running_var)
w_bn = torch.diag(torch.ones(internal_nodes) / divider)
new_weight = torch.mm(w_bn, model.layer1.weight)
new_weight = torch.mm(model.layer3.weight, new_weight)
b_bn = - model.layer2.running_mean / divider
new_bias = model.layer3.bias + torch.squeeze(torch.mm(model.layer3.weight, b_bn.reshape(-1, 1)))
input = torch.randn(batch_size, in_nodes)
print(model(input))
print(torch.t(torch.mm(new_weight, torch.t(input))) + new_bias)

Short Answer: As far as I can tell you need a model.eval() before the line
input = torch.randn(batch_size, in_nodes)
such that the end looks like this
...
model.eval()
input = torch.randn(batch_size, in_nodes)
test_input = torch.ones(batch_size,internal_nodes)/100
print(model(input))
print(torch.t(torch.mm(new_weight, torch.t(input))) + new_bias)
with that (I tested it) the two print-statements should output the same. It fixed the weights.
Long Answer:
When using Batch-Normalization according to PyTorch documentation a default momentum of 0.1 is used to compute the running_mean and running_var. The momentum defines how much the estimated statistics and how much the new observed value influence the value.
Now when you don't set a model.eval() statement the batch_normalization computes an updated running_mean and running_var due to the momentum in line
print(model(input))
For further details and or confirmation: Related Question, PyTorch-Documentation

How to access all outputs from a single custom loss function in keras

I'm trying to reproduce the architecture of the network proposed in this publication in tensorFlow. Being a total beginner to this, I've been using this tutorial as a base to work on, using tensorflow==2.3.2.
To train this network, they use a loss which implies outputs from two branches of the network at the same time, which made me look towards custom losses function in keras. I've got that you can define your own, as long as the definition of the function looks like the following:
def custom_loss(y_true, y_pred):
I also understood that you could give other arguments like so:
def loss_function(margin=0.3):
def custom_loss(y_true, y_pred):
# And now you can use margin
You then just have to call these while compiling your model. When it comes to using multiple outputs, the most common approach seem to be the one proposed here, where you would give several losses functions, one being called for each of your output.
However, I could not find a solution to give several outputs to a loss function, which is what I need here.
To further explain it, here is a minimal working example showing what I've tried, which you can try for yourself in this collab.
import os
import tensorflow as tf
import keras.backend as K
from tensorflow.keras import datasets, layers, models, applications, losses
from tensorflow.keras.preprocessing import image_dataset_from_directory
_URL = 'https://storage.googleapis.com/mledu-datasets/cats_and_dogs_filtered.zip'
path_to_zip = tf.keras.utils.get_file('cats_and_dogs.zip', origin=_URL, extract=True)
PATH = os.path.join(os.path.dirname(path_to_zip), 'cats_and_dogs_filtered')
train_dir = os.path.join(PATH, 'train')
validation_dir = os.path.join(PATH, 'validation')
BATCH_SIZE = 32
IMG_SIZE = (160, 160)
IMG_SHAPE = IMG_SIZE + (3,)
train_dataset = image_dataset_from_directory(train_dir,
shuffle=True,
batch_size=BATCH_SIZE,
image_size=IMG_SIZE)
validation_dataset = image_dataset_from_directory(validation_dir,
shuffle=True,
batch_size=BATCH_SIZE,
image_size=IMG_SIZE)
data_augmentation = tf.keras.Sequential([
layers.experimental.preprocessing.RandomFlip('horizontal'),
layers.experimental.preprocessing.RandomRotation(0.2),
])
preprocess_input = applications.resnet50.preprocess_input
base_model = applications.ResNet50(input_shape=IMG_SHAPE,
include_top=False,
weights='imagenet')
base_model.trainable = True
conv = layers.Conv2D(filters=128, kernel_size=(1,1))
global_pooling = layers.GlobalAveragePooling2D()
horizontal_pooling = layers.AveragePooling2D(pool_size=(1, 5))
reshape = layers.Reshape((-1, 128))
def custom_loss(y_true, y_pred):
print(y_pred.shape)
# Do some stuffs involving both outputs
# Returning something trivial here for correct behavior
return K.mean(y_pred)
inputs = tf.keras.Input(shape=IMG_SHAPE)
x = data_augmentation(inputs)
x = preprocess_input(x)
x = base_model(x, training=True)
first_branch = global_pooling(x)
second_branch = conv(x)
second_branch = horizontal_pooling(second_branch)
second_branch = reshape(second_branch)
model = tf.keras.Model(inputs, [first_branch, second_branch])
base_learning_rate = 0.0001
model.compile(optimizer=tf.keras.optimizers.Adam(lr=base_learning_rate),
loss=custom_loss,
metrics=['accuracy'])
model.summary()
initial_epochs = 10
history = model.fit(train_dataset,
epochs=initial_epochs,
validation_data=validation_dataset)
while doing so, I thought that the y_pred given to loss function would be a list, containing both outputs. However, while running it, what I've got in stdout was this:
Epoch 1/10
(None, 2048)
(None, 5, 128)
What I understand from this is that the loss function is called with every output, one by one, instead of being called once with all the outputs, which means I can't define a loss that would use both the outputs at the same time. Is there any way to achieve this?
Please let me know if I'm unclear, or if you need further details.

I had the same problem trying to implement Triplet_Loss function.
I refered to Keras's implementation for Siamese Network with Triplet Loss Function but something didnt work out and I had to implement the network by myself.
def get_siamese_model(input_shape, conv2d_filters):
# Define the tensors for the input images
anchor_input = Input(input_shape, name="Anchor_Input")
positive_input = Input(input_shape, name="Positive_Input")
negative_input = Input(input_shape, name="Negative_Input")
body = build_body(input_shape, conv2d_filters)
# Generate the feature vectors for the images
encoded_a = body(anchor_input)
encoded_p = body(positive_input)
encoded_n = body(negative_input)
distance = DistanceLayer()(encoded_a, encoded_p, encoded_n)
# Connect the inputs with the outputs
siamese_net = Model(inputs=[anchor_input, positive_input, negative_input],
outputs=distance)
return siamese_net
and the "bug" was in DistanceLayer Implementation Keras posted (also in the same link above).
class DistanceLayer(tf.keras.layers.Layer):
"""
This layer is responsible for computing the distance between the anchor
embedding and the positive embedding, and the anchor embedding and the
negative embedding.
"""
def __init__(self, **kwargs):
super().__init__(**kwargs)
def call(self, anchor, positive, negative):
ap_distance = tf.math.reduce_sum(tf.math.square(anchor - positive), axis=1, keepdims=True, name='ap_distance')
an_distance = tf.math.reduce_sum(tf.math.square(anchor - negative), axis=1, keepdims=True, name='an_distance')
return (ap_distance, an_distance)
When I was training the model, the loss function took only one of the vectors ap_distance or an_distance.
FINALLY, THE FIX WAS to concatenate the vectors together (along axis=1 this case) and on the loss function, take them apart:
def call(self, anchor, positive, negative):
ap_distance = tf.math.reduce_sum(tf.math.square(anchor - positive), axis=1, keepdims=True, name='ap_distance')
an_distance = tf.math.reduce_sum(tf.math.square(anchor - negative), axis=1, keepdims=True, name='an_distance')
return tf.concat([ap_distance, an_distance], axis=1)
on my custom loss:
def get_loss(margin=1.0):
def triplet_loss(y_true, y_pred):
# The output of the network is NOT A tuple, but a matrix shape (batch_size, 2),
# containing the distances between the anchor and the positive example,
# and the anchor and the negative example.
ap_distance = y_pred[:, 0]
an_distance = y_pred[:, 1]
# Computing the Triplet Loss by subtracting both distances and
# making sure we don't get a negative value.
loss = tf.math.maximum(ap_distance - an_distance + margin, 0.0)
# tf.print("\n", ap_distance, an_distance)
# tf.print(f"\n{loss}\n")
return loss
return triplet_loss

Ok, here is an easy way to achieve this. We can achieve this by using the loss_weights parameter. We can weigh multiple outputs exactly the same so that we can get the combined loss results. So, for two output we can do
loss_weights = 1*output1 + 1*output2
In your case, your network has two outputs, by the name they are reshape, and global_average_pooling2d. You can do now as follows
# calculation of loss for one output, i.e. reshape
def reshape_loss(y_true, y_pred):
# do some math with these two
return K.mean(y_pred)
# calculation of loss for another output, i.e. global_average_pooling2d
def gap_loss(y_true, y_pred):
# do some math with these two
return K.mean(y_pred)
And while compiling now you need to do as this
model.compile(
optimizer=tf.keras.optimizers.Adam(lr=base_learning_rate),
loss = {
'reshape':reshape_loss,
'global_average_pooling2d':gap_loss
},
loss_weights = {
'reshape':1.,
'global_average_pooling2d':1.
}
)
Now, the loss is the result of 1.*reshape + 1.*global_average_pooling2d.

How to implement contractive autoencoder in Pytorch?

I'm trying to create a contractive autoencoder in Pytorch. I found this thread and tried according to that. This is the snippet I wrote based on the mentioned thread:
import datetime
import numpy as np
import torch
import torchvision
from torchvision import datasets, transforms
from torchvision.utils import save_image, make_grid
import torch.nn as nn
import torch.nn.functional as F
import torch.optim as optim
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt
%matplotlib inline
dataset_train = datasets.MNIST(root='MNIST',
train=True,
transform = transforms.ToTensor(),
download=True)
dataset_test = datasets.MNIST(root='MNIST',
train=False,
transform = transforms.ToTensor(),
download=True)
batch_size = 128
num_workers = 2
dataloader_train = torch.utils.data.DataLoader(dataset_train,
batch_size = batch_size,
shuffle=True,
num_workers = num_workers,
pin_memory=True)
dataloader_test = torch.utils.data.DataLoader(dataset_test,
batch_size = batch_size,
num_workers = num_workers,
pin_memory=True)
def view_images(imgs, labels, rows = 4, cols =11):
imgs = imgs.detach().cpu().numpy().transpose(0,2,3,1)
fig = plt.figure(figsize=(8,4))
for i in range(imgs.shape[0]):
ax = fig.add_subplot(rows, cols, i+1, xticks=[], yticks=[])
ax.imshow(imgs[i].squeeze(), cmap='Greys_r')
ax.set_title(labels[i].item())
# now let's view some
imgs, labels = next(iter(dataloader_train))
view_images(imgs, labels,13,10)
class Contractive_AutoEncoder(nn.Module):
def __init__(self):
super().__init__()
self.encoder = nn.Linear(784, 512)
self.decoder = nn.Linear(512, 784)
def forward(self, input):
# flatten the input
shape = input.shape
input = input.view(input.size(0), -1)
output_e = F.relu(self.encoder(input))
output = F.sigmoid(self.decoder(output_e))
output = output.view(*shape)
return output_e, output
def loss_function(output_e, outputs, imgs, device):
output_e.backward(torch.ones(output_e.size()).to(device), retain_graph=True)
criterion = nn.MSELoss()
assert outputs.shape == imgs.shape ,f'outputs.shape : {outputs.shape} != imgs.shape : {imgs.shape}'
imgs.grad.requires_grad = True
loss1 = criterion(outputs, imgs)
print(imgs.grad)
loss2 = torch.mean(pow(imgs.grad,2))
loss = loss1 + loss2
return loss
epochs = 50
interval = 2000
device = torch.device('cuda' if torch.cuda.is_available() else 'cpu')
model = Contractive_AutoEncoder().to(device)
optimizer = optim.Adam(model.parameters(), lr =0.001)
for e in range(epochs):
for i, (imgs, labels) in enumerate(dataloader_train):
imgs = imgs.to(device)
labels = labels.to(device)
outputs_e, outputs = model(imgs)
loss = loss_function(outputs_e, outputs, imgs,device)
optimizer.zero_grad()
loss.backward()
optimizer.step()
if i%interval:
print('')
print(f'epoch/epoechs: {e}/{epochs} loss : {loss.item():.4f} ')
For the sake of brevity I just used one layer for the encoder and the decoder. It should work regardless of number of layers in either of them obviously!
But the catch here is, aside from the fact that I don't know if this is the correct way of doing this, (calculating gradients with respect to the input), I get an error which makes the former solution wrong/not applicable.
That is:
imgs.grad.requires_grad = True
produces the error :
AttributeError : 'NoneType' object has no attribute 'requires_grad'
I also tried the second method suggested in that thread which is as follows:
class Contractive_Encoder(nn.Module):
def __init__(self):
super().__init__()
self.encoder = nn.Linear(784, 512)
def forward(self, input):
# flatten the input
input = input.view(input.size(0), -1)
output_e = F.relu(self.encoder(input))
return output_e
class Contractive_Decoder(nn.Module):
def __init__(self):
super().__init__()
self.decoder = nn.Linear(512, 784)
def forward(self, input):
# flatten the input
output = F.sigmoid(self.decoder(input))
output = output.view(-1,1,28,28)
return output
epochs = 50
interval = 2000
device = torch.device('cuda' if torch.cuda.is_available() else 'cpu')
model_enc = Contractive_Encoder().to(device)
model_dec = Contractive_Decoder().to(device)
optimizer = optim.Adam([{"params":model_enc.parameters()},
{"params":model_dec.parameters()}], lr =0.001)
optimizer_cond = optim.Adam(model_enc.parameters(), lr = 0.001)
criterion = nn.MSELoss()
for e in range(epochs):
for i, (imgs, labels) in enumerate(dataloader_train):
imgs = imgs.to(device)
labels = labels.to(device)
outputs_e = model_enc(imgs)
outputs = model_dec(outputs_e)
loss_rec = criterion(outputs, imgs)
optimizer.zero_grad()
loss_rec.backward()
optimizer.step()
imgs.requires_grad_(True)
y = model_enc(imgs)
optimizer_cond.zero_grad()
y.backward(torch.ones(imgs.view(-1,28*28).size()))
imgs.grad.requires_grad = True
loss = torch.mean([pow(imgs.grad,2)])
optimizer_cond.zero_grad()
loss.backward()
optimizer_cond.step()
if i%interval:
print('')
print(f'epoch/epoechs: {e}/{epochs} loss : {loss.item():.4f} ')
but I face the error :
RuntimeError: invalid gradient at index 0 - got [128, 784] but expected shape compatible with [128, 512]
How should I go about this in Pytorch?

Summary
The final implementation for contractive loss that I wrote is as follows:
def loss_function(output_e, outputs, imgs, lamda = 1e-4, device=torch.device('cuda')):
criterion = nn.MSELoss()
assert outputs.shape == imgs.shape ,f'outputs.shape : {outputs.shape} != imgs.shape : {imgs.shape}'
loss1 = criterion(outputs, imgs)
output_e.backward(torch.ones(outputs_e.size()).to(device), retain_graph=True)
# Frobenious norm, the square root of sum of all elements (square value)
# in a jacobian matrix
loss2 = torch.sqrt(torch.sum(torch.pow(imgs.grad,2)))
imgs.grad.data.zero_()
loss = loss1 + (lamda*loss2)
return loss
and inside training loop you need to do:
for e in range(epochs):
for i, (imgs, labels) in enumerate(dataloader_train):
imgs = imgs.to(device)
labels = labels.to(device)
imgs.retain_grad()
imgs.requires_grad_(True)
outputs_e, outputs = model(imgs)
loss = loss_function(outputs_e, outputs, imgs, lam,device)
imgs.requires_grad_(False)
optimizer.zero_grad()
loss.backward()
optimizer.step()
print(f'epoch/epochs: {e}/{epochs} loss: {loss.item():.4f}')
Full explanation
As it turns out and rightfully #akshayk07 pointed out in the comments, the implementation found in Pytorch forum was wrong in multiple places. The notable thing, being it wasn't implementing the actual contractive loss that was introduced in Contractive Auto-Encoders:Explicit Invariance During Feature Extraction paper! and also aside from that, the implementation wouldn't work at all for obvious reasons that will be explained in a moment.
The changes are obvious so I try to explain what's going on here. First of all note that imgs is not a leaf node, so the gradients would not be retained in the image .grad attribute.
In order to retain gradients for non leaf nodes, you should use retain_graph(). grad is only populated for leaf Tensors. Also imgs.retain_grad() should be called before doing forward() as it will instruct the autograd to store grads into non-leaf nodes.
Update
Thanks to #Michael for pointing out that the correct calculation of Frobenius Norm is actually (from ScienceDirect):
the square root of the sum of the squares of all the matrix entries
and not
the the square root of the sum of the absolute values of all the
matrix entries as explained here

In PyTorch 1.5.0, a high level torch.autograd.functional.jacobian API is added. This should make the contractive objective easier to implement for an arbitrary encoder. For torch>=v1.5.0, the contractive loss would look like this:
contractive_loss = torch.norm(torch.autograd.functional.jacobian(self.encoder, imgs, create_graph=True))
The create_graph argument makes the jacobian differentiable.

The main challenge in implementing the contractive autoencoder is in calculating the Frobenius norm of the Jacobian, which is the gradient of the code or bottleneck layer (vector) with respect to the input layer (vector). This is the regularization term in the loss function. Fortunately, you have done the hard work in solving this for me. Thank you! You are using MSE loss for the first term. Cross entropy loss is sometimes used instead. It's worth considering. I think you are almost there with the Frobenius norm, except that you need to take the square root of the sum of the squares of the Jacobian, where you are calculating the square root of the sum of the absolute values. Here's how I'd define the loss function (sorry I changed notation a little to keep myself straight):
def cae_loss_fcn(code, img_out, img_in, lamda=1e-4, device=torch.device('cuda')):
# First term in the loss function, for ensuring representational fidelity
criterion=nn.MSELoss()
assert img_out.shape == img_in.shape, f'img_out.shape : {img_out.shape} != img_in.shape : {img_in.shape}'
loss1 = criterion(img_out, img_in)
# Second term in the loss function, for enforcing contraction of representation
code.backward(torch.ones(code.size()).to(device), retain_graph=True)
# Frobenius norm of Jacobian of code with respect to input image
loss2 = torch.sqrt(torch.sum(torch.pow(img_in.grad, 2))) # THE CORRECTION
img_in.grad.data.zero_()
# Total loss, the sum of the two loss terms, with weight applied to second term
loss = loss1 + (lamda*loss2)
return loss

Keras: how to implement target replication for LSTM?

Using examples from Lipton et al (2016), target replication is basically calculating the loss at each time step (except final) of the LSTM (or GRU) and averaging this loss and adding it to the main loss while training. Mathematically, it is given by -
Graphically, it can be represented as -
So how do I go about exactly implementing this in Keras? Say, I have binary classification task. Let's say my model is a simple one given below -
model.add(LSTM(50))
model.add(Dense(1))
model.compile(loss='binary_crossentropy', class_weights={0:0.5, 1:4}, optimizer=Adam(), metrics=['accuracy'])
model.fit(x_train, y_train)
I think y_train needs to be reshaped/tiled from (batch_size, 1) to (batch_size, time_step) right?
The dense layer needs TimeDistributed to be applied correctly to the LSTM after setting return_sequences=True?
How do I exactly implement the exact loss function given above? Will class_weights need to be modified?
Target replication is only during training. How to implement validation set evaluation using only the main loss?
How should I deal with zero paddings in target replication? My sequences are padded to a max_len of 15 with average length being 7. Since the target replication loss averages over all the steps, how do I make sure it doesn't use the padded words in calculating the loss? Basically, dynamically assign T the actual sequence length.

Question 1:
So, for the targets, you need it shaped as (batch_size, time_steps, 1). Just use:
y_train = np.stack([y_train]*time_steps, axis=1)
Question 2:
You're correct, but TimeDistributed is optional in Keras 2.
Question 3:
I don't know how class weights will behave, but a regular loss function should go like:
from keras.losses import binary_crossentropy
def target_replication_loss(alpha):
def inner_loss(true,pred):
losses = binary_crossentropy(true,pred)
return (alpha*K.mean(losses[:,:-1], axis=-1)) + ((1-alpha)*losses[:,-1])
return inner_loss
model.compile(......, loss = target_replication_loss(alpha), ...)
Question 3a:
Since the above doens't work well with class weights, I created an alternative where the weights go into the loss:
def target_replication_loss(alpha, class_weights):
def get_weights(x):
b = class_weights[0]
a = class_weights[1] - b
return (a*x) + b
def inner_loss(true,pred):
#this will only work for classification with only one class 0 or 1
#and only if the target is the same for all classes
true_classes = true[:,-1,0]
weights = get_weights(true_classes)
losses = binary_crossentropy(true,pred)
return weights*((alpha*K.mean(losses[:,:-1], axis=-1)) + ((1-alpha)*losses[:,-1]))
return inner_loss
Question 4:
To avoid complexity, I'd say you should use an additional metric in validation:
def last_step_BC(true,pred):
return binary_crossentropy(true[:,-1], pred[:,-1])
model.compile(....,
loss = target_replication_loss(alpha),
metrics=[last_step_BC])
Question 5:
This is a hard one and I'd need to research a little....
As an initial workaround, you can set the model with an input shape of (None, features), and train each sequence individually.
Working example without class_weight
def target_replication_loss(alpha):
def inner_loss(true,pred):
losses = binary_crossentropy(true,pred)
#print(K.int_shape(losses))
#print(K.int_shape(losses[:,:-1]))
#print(K.int_shape(K.mean(losses[:,:-1], axis=-1)))
#print(K.int_shape(losses[:,-1]))
return (alpha*K.mean(losses[:,:-1], axis=-1)) + ((1-alpha)*losses[:,-1])
return inner_loss
alpha = 0.6
i1 = Input((5,2))
i2 = Input((5,2))
out = LSTM(1, activation='sigmoid', return_sequences=True)(i1)
model = Model(i1, out)
model.compile(optimizer='adam', loss = target_replication_loss(alpha))
model.fit(np.arange(30).reshape((3,5,2)), np.arange(15).reshape((3,5,1)), epochs = 200)
Working example with class weights:
def target_replication_loss(alpha, class_weights):
def get_weights(x):
b = class_weights[0]
a = class_weights[1] - b
return (a*x) + b
def inner_loss(true,pred):
#this will only work for classification with only one class 0 or 1
#and only if the target is the same for all classes
true_classes = true[:,-1,0]
weights = get_weights(true_classes)
losses = binary_crossentropy(true,pred)
print(K.int_shape(losses))
print(K.int_shape(losses[:,:-1]))
print(K.int_shape(K.mean(losses[:,:-1], axis=-1)))
print(K.int_shape(losses[:,-1]))
print(K.int_shape(weights))
return weights*((alpha*K.mean(losses[:,:-1], axis=-1)) + ((1-alpha)*losses[:,-1]))
return inner_loss
alpha = 0.6
class_weights={0: 0.5, 1:4.}
i1 = Input(batch_shape=(3,5,2))
i2 = Input((5,2))
out = LSTM(1, activation='sigmoid', return_sequences=True)(i1)
model = Model(i1, out)
model.compile(optimizer='adam', loss = target_replication_loss(alpha, class_weights))
model.fit(np.arange(30).reshape((3,5,2)), np.arange(15).reshape((3,5,1)), epochs = 200)

Editing TensorFlow Source to fix unbalanced data

I have highly unbalanced data in a two class problem that I am trying to use TensorFlow to solve with a NN. I was able to find a posting that exactly described the difficulty that I'm having and gave a solution which appears to address my problem. However I'm working with an assistant, and neither of us really knows python and so TensorFlow is being used like a black box for us. I have extensive (decades) of experience working in a variety of programming languages in various paradigms. That experience allows me to have a pretty good intuitive grasp of what I see happening in the code my assistant cobbled together to get a working model, but neither of us can follow what is going on enough to be able to tell exactly where in TensorFlow we need to make edits to get what we want.
I'm hoping someone with a good knowledge of Python and TensorFlow can look at this and just tell us something like, "Hey, just edit the file called xxx and at the lines at yyy," so we can get on with it.
Below, I have a link to the solution we want to implement, and I've also included the code my assistant wrote that initially got us up and running. Our code produces good results when our data is balanced, but when highly imbalanced, it tends to classify everything skewed to the larger class to get better results.
Here is a link to the solution we found that looks promising:
Loss function for class imbalanced binary classifier in Tensor flow
I've included the relevant code from this link below. Since I know that where we make these edits will depend on how we are using TensorFlow, I've also included our implementation immediately under it in the same code block with appropriate comments to make it clear what we want to add and what we are currently doing:
# Here is the stuff we need to add some place in the TensorFlow source code:
ratio = 31.0 / (500.0 + 31.0)
class_weight = tf.constant([[ratio, 1.0 - ratio]])
logits = ... # shape [batch_size, 2]
weight_per_label = tf.transpose( tf.matmul(labels
, tf.transpose(class_weight)) ) #shape [1, batch_size]
# this is the weight for each datapoint, depending on its label
xent = tf.mul(weight_per_label
, tf.nn.softmax_cross_entropy_with_logits(logits, labels, name="xent_raw") #shape [1, batch_size]
loss = tf.reduce_mean(xent) #shape 1
# NOW HERE IS OUR OWN CODE TO SHOW HOW WE ARE USING TensorFlow:
# (Obviously this is not in the same file in real life ...)
import os
os.environ['TF_CPP_MIN_LOG_LEVEL']='2'
import tensorflow as tf
import numpy as np
from math import exp
from PreProcessData import load_and_process_training_Data,
load_and_process_test_data
from PrintUtilities import printf, printResultCompare
tf.set_random_seed(0)
#==============================================================
# predefine file path
''' Unbalanced Training Data, hence there are 1:11 target and nontarget '''
targetFilePath = '/Volumes/Extend/BCI_TestData/60FeaturesVersion/Train1-35/tar.txt'
nontargetFilePath = '/Volumes/Extend/BCI_TestData/60FeaturesVersion/Train1-35/nontar.txt'
testFilePath = '/Volumes/Extend/BCI_TestData/60FeaturesVersion/Test41/feats41.txt'
labelFilePath = '/Volumes/Extend/BCI_TestData/60FeaturesVersion/Test41/labs41.txt'
# train_x,train_y =
load_and_process_training_Data(targetFilePath,nontargetFilePath)
train_x, train_y =
load_and_process_training_Data(targetFilePath,nontargetFilePath)
# test_x,test_y = load_and_process_test_data(testFilePath,labelFilePath)
test_x, test_y = load_and_process_test_data(testFilePath,labelFilePath)
# trained neural network path
save_path = "nn_saved_model/model.ckpt"
# number of classes
n_classes = 2 # in this case, target or non_target
# number of hidden layers
num_hidden_layers = 1
# number of nodes in each hidden layer
nodes_in_layer1 = 40
nodes_in_layer2 = 100
nodes_in_layer3 = 30 # We think: 3 layers is dangerous!! try to avoid it!!!!
# number of data features in each blocks
block_size = 3000 # computer may not have enough memory, so we divide the train into blocks
# number of times we iterate through training data
total_iterations = 1000
# terminate training if computed loss < supposed loss
expected_loss = 0.1
# max learning rate and min learnign rate
max_learning_rate = 0.002
min_learning_rate = 0.0002
# These are placeholders for some values in graph
# tf.placeholder(dtype, shape=None(optional), name=None(optional))
# It's a tensor to hold our datafeatures
x = tf.placeholder(tf.float32, [None,len(train_x[0])])
# Every row has either [1,0] for targ or [0,1] for non_target. placeholder to hold one hot value
Y_C = tf.placeholder(tf.int8, [None, n_classes])
# variable learning rate
lr = tf.placeholder(tf.float32)
# neural network model
def neural_network_model(data):
if (num_hidden_layers == 1):
# layers contain weights and bias for case like all neurons fired a 0 into the layer, we will need result out
# When using RELUs, make sure biases are initialised with small *positive* values for example 0.1 = tf.ones([K])/10
hidden_1_layer = {'weights': tf.Variable(tf.random_normal([len(train_x[0]), nodes_in_layer1])),
'bias': tf.Variable(tf.ones([nodes_in_layer1]) / 10)}
# no more bias when come to the output layer
output_layer = {'weights': tf.Variable(tf.random_normal([nodes_in_layer1, n_classes])),
'bias': tf.Variable(tf.zeros([n_classes]))}
# multiplication of the raw input data multipled by their unique weights (starting as random, but will be optimized)
l1 = tf.add(tf.matmul(data, hidden_1_layer['weights']), hidden_1_layer['bias'])
l1 = tf.nn.relu(l1)
# We repeat this process for each of the hidden layers, all the way down to our output, where we have the final values still being the multiplication of the input and the weights, plus the output layer's bias values.
Ylogits = tf.matmul(l1, output_layer['weights']) + output_layer['bias']
if (num_hidden_layers == 2):
# layers contain weights and bias for case like all neurons fired a 0 into the layer, we will need result out
# When using RELUs, make sure biases are initialised with small *positive* values for example 0.1 = tf.ones([K])/10
hidden_1_layer = {'weights': tf.Variable(tf.random_normal([len(train_x[0]), nodes_in_layer1])),
'bias': tf.Variable(tf.ones([nodes_in_layer1]) / 10)}
hidden_2_layer = {'weights': tf.Variable(tf.random_normal([nodes_in_layer1, nodes_in_layer2])),
'bias': tf.Variable(tf.ones([nodes_in_layer2]) / 10)}
# no more bias when come to the output layer
output_layer = {'weights': tf.Variable(tf.random_normal([nodes_in_layer2, n_classes])),
'bias': tf.Variable(tf.zeros([n_classes]))}
# multiplication of the raw input data multipled by their unique weights (starting as random, but will be optimized)
l1 = tf.add(tf.matmul(data, hidden_1_layer['weights']), hidden_1_layer['bias'])
l1 = tf.nn.relu(l1)
l2 = tf.add(tf.matmul(l1, hidden_2_layer['weights']), hidden_2_layer['bias'])
l2 = tf.nn.relu(l2)
# We repeat this process for each of the hidden layers, all the way down to our output, where we have the final values still being the multiplication of the input and the weights, plus the output layer's bias values.
Ylogits = tf.matmul(l2, output_layer['weights']) + output_layer['bias']
if (num_hidden_layers == 3):
# layers contain weights and bias for case like all neurons fired a 0 into the layer, we will need result out
# When using RELUs, make sure biases are initialised with small *positive* values for example 0.1 = tf.ones([K])/10
hidden_1_layer = {'weights':tf.Variable(tf.random_normal([len(train_x[0]), nodes_in_layer1])), 'bias':tf.Variable(tf.ones([nodes_in_layer1]) / 10)}
hidden_2_layer = {'weights':tf.Variable(tf.random_normal([nodes_in_layer1, nodes_in_layer2])), 'bias':tf.Variable(tf.ones([nodes_in_layer2]) / 10)}
hidden_3_layer = {'weights':tf.Variable(tf.random_normal([nodes_in_layer2, nodes_in_layer3])), 'bias':tf.Variable(tf.ones([nodes_in_layer3]) / 10)}
# no more bias when come to the output layer
output_layer = {'weights':tf.Variable(tf.random_normal([nodes_in_layer3, n_classes])), 'bias':tf.Variable(tf.zeros([n_classes]))}
# multiplication of the raw input data multipled by their unique weights (starting as random, but will be optimized)
l1 = tf.add(tf.matmul(data,hidden_1_layer['weights']), hidden_1_layer['bias'])
l1 = tf.nn.relu(l1)
l2 = tf.add(tf.matmul(l1,hidden_2_layer['weights']), hidden_2_layer['bias'])
l2 = tf.nn.relu(l2)
l3 = tf.add(tf.matmul(l2,hidden_3_layer['weights']), hidden_3_layer['bias'])
l3 = tf.nn.relu(l3)
# We repeat this process for each of the hidden layers, all the way down to our output, where we have the final values still being the multiplication of the input and the weights, plus the output layer's bias values.
Ylogits = tf.matmul(l3,output_layer['weights']) + output_layer['bias']
return Ylogits # return the neural network model
# set up the training process
def train_neural_network(x):
# produce the prediction base on output of nn model
Ylogits = neural_network_model(x)
# measure the error use build in cross entropy function, the value that we want to minimize
cross_entropy = tf.reduce_mean(tf.nn.softmax_cross_entropy_with_logits(logits=Ylogits, labels=Y_C))
# To optimize our cost (cross_entropy), reduce error, default learning_rate is 0.001, but you can change it, this case we use default
# optimizer = tf.train.GradientDescentOptimizer(0.003)
optimizer = tf.train.AdamOptimizer(lr)
train_step = optimizer.minimize(cross_entropy)
# start the session
with tf.Session() as sess:
# We initialize all of our variables first before start
sess.run(tf.global_variables_initializer())
# iterate epoch count time (cycles of feed forward and back prop), each epoch means neural see through all train_data once
for epoch in range(total_iterations):
# count the total cost per epoch, declining mean better result
epoch_loss=0
i=0
decay_speed = 150
# current learning rate
learning_rate = min_learning_rate + (max_learning_rate - min_learning_rate) * exp(-epoch/decay_speed)
# divide the dataset in to data_set/batch_size in case run out of memory
while i < len(train_x):
# load train data
start = i
end = i + block_size
batch_x = np.array(train_x[start:end])
batch_y = np.array(train_y[start:end])
train_data = {x: batch_x, Y_C: batch_y, lr: learning_rate}
# train
# sess.run(train_step,feed_dict=train_data)
# run optimizer and cost against batch of data.
_, c = sess.run([train_step, cross_entropy], feed_dict=train_data)
epoch_loss += c
i+=block_size
# print iteration status
printf("epoch: %5d/%d , loss: %f", epoch, total_iterations, epoch_loss)
# terminate training when loss < expected_loss
if epoch_loss < expected_loss:
break
# how many predictions we made that were perfect matches to their labels
# test model
# test data
test_data = {x:test_x, Y_C:test_y}
# calculate accuracy
correct_prediction = tf.equal(tf.argmax(Ylogits, 1), tf.argmax(Y_C, 1))
accuracy = tf.reduce_mean(tf.cast(correct_prediction, 'float'))
print('Accuracy:',accuracy.eval(test_data))
# result matrix, return the position of 1 in array
result = (sess.run(tf.argmax(Ylogits.eval(feed_dict=test_data),1)))
answer = []
for i in range(len(test_y)):
if test_y[i] == [0,1]:
answer.append(1)
elif test_y[i]==[1,0]:
answer.append(0)
answer = np.array(answer)
printResultCompare(result,answer)
# save the prediction of correctness
np.savetxt('nn_prediction.txt', Ylogits.eval(feed_dict={x: test_x}), delimiter=',',newline="\r\n")
# save the nn model for later use again
# 'Saver' op to save and restore all the variables
saver = tf.train.Saver()
saver.save(sess, save_path)
#print("Model saved in file: %s" % save_path)
# load the trained neural network model
def test_loaded_neural_network(trained_NN_path):
Ylogits = neural_network_model(x)
saver = tf.train.Saver()
with tf.Session() as sess:
# load saved model
saver.restore(sess, trained_NN_path)
print("Loading variables from '%s'." % trained_NN_path)
np.savetxt('nn_prediction.txt', Ylogits.eval(feed_dict={x: test_x}), delimiter=',',newline="\r\n")
# test model
# result matrix
result = (sess.run(tf.argmax(Ylogits.eval(feed_dict={x:test_x}),1)))
# answer matrix
answer = []
for i in range(len(test_y)):
if test_y[i] == [0,1]:
answer.append(1)
elif test_y[i]==[1,0]:
answer.append(0)
answer = np.array(answer)
printResultCompare(result,answer)
# calculate accuracy
correct_prediction = tf.equal(tf.argmax(Ylogits, 1), tf.argmax(Y_C, 1))
print(Ylogits.eval(feed_dict={x: test_x}).shape)
train_neural_network(x)
#test_loaded_neural_network(save_path)
So, can anyone help point us to the right place to make the edits that we need to make to resolve our problem? (i.e. what is the name of the file we need to edit, and where is it located.) Thanks in advance!
-gt-

The answer you want:
You should add these codes in your train_neural_network(x) function.
ratio = (num of classes 1) / ((num of classes 0) + (num of classes 1))
class_weight = tf.constant([[ratio, 1.0 - ratio]])
Ylogits = neural_network_model(x)
weight_per_label = tf.transpose( tf.matmul(Y_C , tf.transpose(class_weight)) )
cross_entropy = tf.reduce_mean( tf.mul(weight_per_label, tf.nn.softmax_cross_entropy_with_logits(logits=Ylogits, labels=Y_C) ) )
optimizer = tf.train.AdamOptimizer(lr)
train_step = optimizer.minimize(cross_entropy)
instead of these lines:
Ylogits = neural_network_model(x)
# measure the error use build in cross entropy function, the value that we want to minimize
cross_entropy = tf.reduce_mean(tf.nn.softmax_cross_entropy_with_logits(logits=Ylogits, labels=Y_C))
# To optimize our cost (cross_entropy), reduce error, default learning_rate is 0.001, but you can change it, this case we use default
# optimizer = tf.train.GradientDescentOptimizer(0.003)
optimizer = tf.train.AdamOptimizer(lr)
train_step = optimizer.minimize(cross_entropy)
More Details:
Since in neural network, we calculate the error of prediction with respect to the targets( the true labels ), in your case, you use the cross entropy error which finds the sum of targets multiple Log of predicted probabilities.
The optimizer of network backpropagates to minimize the error to achieve more accuracy.
Without weighted loss, the weight for each class are equals, so optimizer reduce the error for the classes which have more amount and overlook the other class.
So in order to prevent this phenomenon, we should force the optimizer to backpropogate larger error for class with small amount, to do this we should multiply the errors with a scalar.
I hope it was useful :)