So I made a CNN that classifies two types of birds, and it worked fine. After that, I tried adding one more type, but I got weird results. I already posted this on ai stack exchange, but they said its better to ask it in here, so I am providing a link to that post.
https://ai.stackexchange.com/q/11444/23452
Here is the model code:
import tensorflow as tf
from tensorflow.keras.models import Sequential
from tensorflow.keras.layers import Dense, Dropout, Activation, Flatten, Conv2D, MaxPooling2D
from tensorflow.keras.callbacks import TensorBoard
import pickle
import time as time
gpu_options = tf.GPUOptions(per_process_gpu_memory_fraction = 0.333)
sess = tf.Session(config=tf.ConfigProto(gpu_options=gpu_options))
pickle_in = open("C:/Users/Recep/Desktop/programlar/python/X.pickle","rb")
X = pickle.load(pickle_in)
pickle_in = open("C:/Users/Recep/Desktop/programlar/python/Y.pickle","rb")
Y = pickle.load(pickle_in)
X = X/255.0
node_size = 64
model_name = "agi_vs_golden-{}".format(time.time())
tensorboard = TensorBoard(log_dir='C:/Users/Recep/Desktop/programlar/python/logs/{}'.format(model_name))
file_writer = tf.summary.FileWriter('C:/Users/Recep/Desktop/programlar/python/logs/{}'.format(model_name, sess.graph))
model = Sequential()
model.add(Conv2D(node_size,(3,3),input_shape = X.shape[1:]))
#idk what that shape does except that and validation i have no problem
model.add(Activation("relu"))
model.add(MaxPooling2D(pool_size=(2,2)))
model.add(Conv2D(node_size,(3,3)))
model.add(Activation("relu"))
model.add(MaxPooling2D(pool_size=(2,2)))
model.add(Flatten())
model.add(Dense(node_size))
model.add(Activation("relu"))
model.add(Dense(1))
model.add(Activation("sigmoid"))
model.compile(loss="binary_crossentropy",optimizer="adam",metrics=["accuracy"])
model.fit(X,Y,batch_size=25,epochs=8,validation_split=0.1,callbacks=[tensorboard])
# idk what the validation is and how its used but dont think it caused the problem
model.save("agi_vs_gouldian.model")
By the way, as I said in the comments of my original post, I think maybe there is a lack of training the network, or I don't have the enough data. So I tried increasing the number of epochs. It kinda get the problem, but the part that I'm curious about is what happened when I had the lower epochs?
Can anyone help me?
I am giving the tensor board graphs below.
BTW, is my data array rgb?
And how can I get rid of this local max of %70?
And since I'm a beginner to this, I don't know what validation really works, but I saw that the validation graphs stays the same in the first training that I had issues with.
You try to classify three birds with sigmoid. Sigmoid is good for binary classification. Try a softmax activation layer and see how it goes. I suggest replacing
model.add(Dense(1))
model.add(Activation("sigmoid"))
with
model.add(Dense(3, activation='softmax'))
Where 3 is the number of birds' type you want to classify.
Have a look here, a very good tutorial of using softmax as the activation layer for a multi-class classification
https://machinelearningmastery.com/multi-class-classification-tutorial-keras-deep-learning-library/
Related
I'm trying to convert some old code from using sklearn to Keras implementation. Since it is crucial to maintain the same way of operation, I want to understand if I'm doing it correctly.
I've converted most of the code already, however I'm having trouble with sklearn.svm SVC classifier conversion. Here is how it looks right now:
from sklearn.svm import SVC
model = SVC(kernel='linear', probability=True)
model.fit(X, Y_labels)
Super easy, right. However, I couldn't find the analog of SVC classifier in Keras. So, what I've tried is this:
from keras.models import Sequential
from keras.layers import Dense
model = Sequential()
model.add(Dense(64, activation='relu'))
model.add(Dense(1, activation='softmax'))
model.compile(loss='squared_hinge',
optimizer='adadelta',
metrics=['accuracy'])
model.fit(X, Y_labels)
But, I think that it is not correct by any means. Could you, please, help me find an alternative of the SVC classifier from sklearn in Keras?
Thank you.
If you are making a classifier, you need squared_hinge and regularizer, to get the complete SVM loss function as can be seen here. So you will also need to break your last layer to add regularization parameter before performing activation, I have added the code here.
These changes should give you the output
from keras.regularizers import l2
from keras.models import Sequential
from keras.layers import Dense
model = Sequential()
model.add(Dense(64, activation='relu'))
model.add(Dense(1), kernel_regularizer=l2(0.01))
model.add(activation('softmax'))
model.compile(loss='squared_hinge',
optimizer='adadelta',
metrics=['accuracy'])
model.fit(X, Y_labels)
Also hinge is implemented in keras for binary classification, so if you are working on a binary classification model, use the code below.
from keras.regularizers import l2
from keras.models import Sequential
from keras.layers import Dense
model = Sequential()
model.add(Dense(64, activation='relu'))
model.add(Dense(1), kernel_regularizer=l2(0.01))
model.add(activation('linear'))
model.compile(loss='hinge',
optimizer='adadelta',
metrics=['accuracy'])
model.fit(X, Y_labels)
If you cannot understand the article or have issues with the code, feel free to comment.
I had this same issue a while back, and this GitHub thread helped me understand, maybe go through it too, some of the ideas here are directly from here https://github.com/keras-team/keras/issues/2588
If you are using Keras 2.0 then you need to change the following lines of anand v sing's answer.
W_regularizer -> kernel_regularizer
Github link
model.add(Dense(nb_classes, kernel_regularizer=regularizers.l2(0.0001)))
model.add(Activation('linear'))
model.compile(loss='squared_hinge',
optimizer='adadelta', metrics=['accuracy'])
Or You can use follow
top_model = bottom_model.output
top_model = Flatten()(top_model)
top_model = Dropout(0.5)(top_model)
top_model = Dense(64, activation='relu')(top_model)
top_model = Dense(2, kernel_regularizer=l2(0.0001))(top_model)
top_model = Activation('linear')(top_model)
model = Model(bottom_model.input, top_model)
model.compile(loss='squared_hinge',
optimizer='adadelta', metrics=['accuracy'])
You can use SVM with Keras implementation suing scikeras. It is a Scikit-Learn API wrapper for Keras. It was first release in May 2020. Below I have attached the official documentation link for it. I hope you will find your answer over there.
https://pypi.org/project/scikeras/#description
I was testing some network architectures in Keras for classifying the MNIST dataset. I have implemented one that is similar to the LeNet.
I have seen that in the examples that I have found on the internet, there is a step of data normalization. For example:
X_train /= 255
I have performed a test without this normalization and I have seen that the performance (accuracy) of the network has decreased (keeping the same number of epochs). Why has this happened?
If I increase the number of epochs, the accuracy can reach the same level reached by the model trained with normalization?
So, the normalization affects the accuracy, or only the training speed?
The complete source code of my training script is below:
from keras.models import Sequential
from keras.layers.convolutional import Conv2D
from keras.layers.convolutional import MaxPooling2D
from keras.layers.core import Activation
from keras.layers.core import Flatten
from keras.layers.core import Dense
from keras.datasets import mnist
from keras.utils import np_utils
from keras.optimizers import SGD, RMSprop, Adam
import numpy as np
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt
from keras import backend as k
def build(input_shape, classes):
model = Sequential()
model.add(Conv2D(20, kernel_size=5, padding="same",activation='relu',input_shape=input_shape))
model.add(MaxPooling2D(pool_size=(2, 2), strides=(2, 2)))
model.add(Conv2D(50, kernel_size=5, padding="same", activation='relu'))
model.add(MaxPooling2D(pool_size=(2, 2), strides=(2, 2)))
model.add(Flatten())
model.add(Dense(500))
model.add(Activation("relu"))
model.add(Dense(classes))
model.add(Activation("softmax"))
return model
NB_EPOCH = 4 # number of epochs
BATCH_SIZE = 128 # size of the batch
VERBOSE = 1 # set the training phase as verbose
OPTIMIZER = Adam() # optimizer
VALIDATION_SPLIT=0.2 # percentage of the training data used for
evaluating the loss function
IMG_ROWS, IMG_COLS = 28, 28 # input image dimensions
NB_CLASSES = 10 # number of outputs = number of digits
INPUT_SHAPE = (1, IMG_ROWS, IMG_COLS) # shape of the input
(X_train, y_train), (X_test, y_test) = mnist.load_data()
k.set_image_dim_ordering("th")
X_train = X_train.astype('float32')
X_test = X_test.astype('float32')
X_train /= 255
X_test /= 255
X_train = X_train[:, np.newaxis, :, :]
X_test = X_test[:, np.newaxis, :, :]
print(X_train.shape[0], 'train samples')
print(X_test.shape[0], 'test samples')
y_train = np_utils.to_categorical(y_train, NB_CLASSES)
y_test = np_utils.to_categorical(y_test, NB_CLASSES)
model = build(input_shape=INPUT_SHAPE, classes=NB_CLASSES)
model.compile(loss="categorical_crossentropy",
optimizer=OPTIMIZER,metrics=["accuracy"])
history = model.fit(X_train, y_train, batch_size=BATCH_SIZE, epochs=NB_EPOCH, verbose=VERBOSE, validation_split=VALIDATION_SPLIT)
model.save("model2")
score = model.evaluate(X_test, y_test, verbose=VERBOSE)
print('Test accuracy:', score[1])
Normalization is a generic concept not limited only to deep learning or to Keras.
Why to normalize?
Let me take a simple logistic regression example which will be easy to understand and to explain normalization.
Assume we are trying to predict if a customer should be given loan or not. Among many available independent variables lets just consider Age and Income.
Let the equation be of the form:
Y = weight_1 * (Age) + weight_2 * (Income) + some_constant
Just for sake of explanation let Age be usually in range of [0,120] and let us assume Income in range of [10000, 100000]. The scale of Age and Income are very different. If you consider them as is then weights weight_1 and weight_2 may be assigned biased weights. weight_2 might bring more importance to Income as a feature than to what weight_1 brings importance to Age. To scale them to a common level, we can normalize them. For example, we can bring all the ages in range of [0,1] and all incomes in range of [0,1]. Now we can say that Age and Income are given equal importance as a feature.
Does Normalization always increase the accuracy?
Apparently, No. It is not necessary that normalization always increases accuracy. It may or might not, you never really know until you implement. Again it depends on at which stage in you training you apply normalization, on whether you apply normalization after every activation, etc.
As the range of the values of the features gets narrowed down to a particular range because of normalization, its easy to perform computations over a smaller range of values. So, usually the model gets trained a bit faster.
Regarding the number of epochs, accuracy usually increases with number of epochs provided that your model doesn't start over-fitting.
A very good explanation for Normalization/Standardization and related terms is here.
In a nutshell, normalization reduces the complexity of the problem your network is trying to solve. This can potentially increase the accuracy of your model and speed up the training. You bring the data on the same scale and reduce variance. None of the weights in the network are wasted on doing a normalization for you, meaning that they can be used more efficiently to solve the actual task at hand.
As #Shridhar R Kulkarni says, normalization is a general concept and doesn’t only apply to keras.
It’s often applied as part of data preparation for ML learning models to change numeric values in the dataset to fit a standard scale without distorting the differences in their ranges. As such, normalization enhances the cohesion of entity types within a model by reducing the probability of inconsistent data.
However, not every other dataset and use case requires normalization, it’s primarily necessary when features have different ranges. You may use when;
You want to improve your model’s convergence efficiency and make
optimization feasible
When you want to make training less sensitive to scale features, you can better
solve coefficients.
Want to improve analysis from multiple models.
Normalization is not recommended when;
-Using decision tree models or ensembles based on them
-Your data is not normally distributed- you may have to use other data pre-
processing techniques
-If your dataset comprises already scaled variables
In some cases, normalization can improve performance. However, it is not always necessary.
The critical thing is to understand your dataset and scenario first, then you’ll know whether you need it or not. Sometimes, you can experiment to see if it gives you good performance or not.
Check out deepchecks and see how to deal with important data-related checks you come across in ML.
For example, to check duplicated data in your set, you can use the following code detailed code
from deepchecks.checks.integrity.data_duplicates import DataDuplicates
from deepchecks.base import Dataset, Suite
from datetime import datetime
import pandas as pd
I think there are some issue with the convergence of the optimizer function too. Here i show a simple linear regression. Three examples:
First with an array with small values and it works as expected.
Second an array with bigger values and the loss function explodes toward infinity, suggesting the need to normalize. And at the end in model 3 the same array as case two but it has been normalized and we get convergence.
github colab enabled ipython notebook
I've use the MSE optimizer function i don't know if other optimizers suffer the same issues.
I have a dataset C of 50,000 (binary) samples each of 128 features. The class label is also binary either 1 or -1. For instance, a sample would look like this [1,0,0,0,1,0, .... , 0,1] [-1]. My goal is to classify the samples based on the binary classes( i.e., 1 or -1). I thought to try using Recurrent LSTM to generate a good model for classification. To do so, I have written the following code using Keras library:
tr_C, ts_C, tr_r, ts_r = train_test_split(C, r, train_size=.8)
batch_size = 200
print('>>> Build STATEFUL model...')
model = Sequential()
model.add(LSTM(128, batch_input_shape=(batch_size, C.shape[1], C.shape[2]), return_sequences=False, stateful=True))
model.add(Dense(1, activation='softmax'))
print('>>> Training...')
model.compile(loss='binary_crossentropy', optimizer='adam', metrics=['accuracy'])
model.fit(tr_C, tr_r,
batch_size=batch_size, epochs=1, shuffle=True,
validation_data=(ts_C, ts_r))
However, I am getting bad accuracy, not more than 55%. I tried to change the activation function along with the loss function hoping to improve the accuracy but nothing works. Surprisingly, when I use Multilayer Perceptron, I get very good accuracy around 97%. Thus, I start questioning if LSTM can be used for classification or maybe my code here has something missing or it is wrong. Kindly, I want to know if the code has something missing or wrong to improve the accuracy. Any help or suggestion is appreciated.
You cannot use softmax as an output when you have only a single output unit as it will always output you a constant value of 1. You need to either change output activation to sigmoid or set output units number to 2 and loss to categorical_crossentropy. I would advise the first option.
I know this is a very classical question which might be answered many times in this forum, however I could not find any clear answer which explains this clearly from scratch.
Firstly, imgine that my dataset called my_data has 4 variables such as
my_data = variable1, variable2, variable3, target_variable
So, let's come to my problem. I'll explain all my steps and ask your help for where I've been stuck:
# STEP1 : split my_data into [predictors] and [targets]
predictors = my_data[[
'variable1',
'variable2',
'variable3'
]]
targets = my_data.target_variable
# STEP2 : import the required libraries
from sklearn import cross_validation
from sklearn.ensemble import RandomForestRegressor
#STEP3 : define a simple Random Forest model attirbutes
model = RandomForestClassifier(n_estimators=100)
#STEP4 : Simple K-Fold cross validation. 3 folds.
cv = cross_validation.KFold(len(my_data), n_folds=3, random_state=30)
# STEP 5
At this step, I want to fit my model based on the training dataset, and then
use that model on test dataset and predict test targets. I also want to calculate the required statistics such as MSE, r2 etc. for understanding the performance of my model.
I'd appreciate if someone helps me woth some basic codelines for Step5.
First off, you are using the deprecated package cross-validation of scikit library. New package is named model_selection. So I am using that in this answer.
Second, you are importing RandomForestRegressor, but defining RandomForestClassifier in the code. I am taking RandomForestRegressor here, because the metrics you want (MSE, R2 etc) are only defined for regression problems, not classification.
There are multiple ways to do what you want. I assume that since you are trying to use the KFold cross-validation here, you want to use the left-out data of each fold as test fold. To accomplish this, we can do:
predictors = my_data[[
'variable1',
'variable2',
'variable3'
]]
targets = my_data.target_variable
from sklearn import model_selection
from sklearn.ensemble import RandomForestRegressor
from sklearn import metrics
model = RandomForestRegressor(n_estimators=100)
cv = model_selection.KFold(n_splits=3)
for train_index, test_index in kf.split(predictors):
print("TRAIN:", train_index, "TEST:", test_index)
X_train, X_test = predictors[train_index], predictors[test_index]
y_train, y_test = targets[train_index], targets[test_index]
# For training, fit() is used
model.fit(X_train, y_train)
# Default metric is R2 for regression, which can be accessed by score()
model.score(X_test, y_test)
# For other metrics, we need the predictions of the model
y_pred = model.predict(X_test)
metrics.mean_squared_error(y_test, y_pred)
metrics.r2_score(y_test, y_pred)
For all this, documentation is your best friend. And scikit-learn documentation are one of the best I have ever seen. Following links may help you know more about them:
http://scikit-learn.org/stable/modules/cross_validation.html#cross-validation-evaluating-estimator-performance
http://scikit-learn.org/stable/modules/model_evaluation.html#regression-metrics
http://scikit-learn.org/stable/user_guide.html
Also in the for loop it should be:
model = RandomForestRegressor(n_estimators=100)
for train_index, test_index in cv.split(X):
I would like to calculate NN model certainty/confidence (see What my deep model doesn't know) - when NN tells me an image represents "8", I would like to know how certain it is. Is my model 99% certain it is "8" or is it 51% it is "8", but it could also be "6"? Some digits are quite ambiguous and I would like to know for which images the model is just "flipping a coin".
I have found some theoretical writings about this but I have trouble putting this in code. If I understand correctly, I should evaluate a testing image multiple times while "killing off" different neurons (using dropout) and then...?
Working on MNIST dataset, I am running the following model:
from keras.models import Sequential
from keras.layers import Dense, Activation, Conv2D, Flatten, Dropout
model = Sequential()
model.add(Conv2D(128, kernel_size=(7, 7),
activation='relu',
input_shape=(28, 28, 1,)))
model.add(Dropout(0.20))
model.add(Conv2D(64, (3, 3), activation='relu'))
model.add(Dropout(0.20))
model.add(Flatten())
model.add(Dense(units=64, activation='relu'))
model.add(Dropout(0.25))
model.add(Dense(units=10, activation='softmax'))
model.summary()
model.compile(loss='categorical_crossentropy',
optimizer='sgd',
metrics=['accuracy'])
model.fit(train_data, train_labels, batch_size=100, epochs=30, validation_data=(test_data, test_labels,))
How should I predict with this model so that I get its certainty about predictions too? I would appreciate some practical examples (preferably in Keras, but any will do).
To clarify, I am looking for an example of how to get certainty using the method outlined by Yurin Gal (or an explanation of why some other method yields better results).
If you want to implement dropout approach to measure uncertainty you should do the following:
Implement function which applies dropout also during the test time:
import keras.backend as K
f = K.function([model.layers[0].input, K.learning_phase()],
[model.layers[-1].output])
Use this function as uncertainty predictor e.g. in a following manner:
def predict_with_uncertainty(f, x, n_iter=10):
result = numpy.zeros((n_iter,) + x.shape)
for iter in range(n_iter):
result[iter] = f(x, 1)
prediction = result.mean(axis=0)
uncertainty = result.var(axis=0)
return prediction, uncertainty
Of course you may use any different function to compute uncertainty.
Made a few changes to the top voted answer. Now it works for me.
It's a way to estimate model uncertainty. For other source of uncertainty, I found https://eng.uber.com/neural-networks-uncertainty-estimation/ helpful.
f = K.function([model.layers[0].input, K.learning_phase()],
[model.layers[-1].output])
def predict_with_uncertainty(f, x, n_iter=10):
result = []
for i in range(n_iter):
result.append(f([x, 1]))
result = np.array(result)
prediction = result.mean(axis=0)
uncertainty = result.var(axis=0)
return prediction, uncertainty
Your model uses a softmax activation, so the simplest way to obtain some kind of uncertainty measure is to look at the output softmax probabilities:
probs = model.predict(some input data)[0]
The probs array will then be a 10-element vector of numbers in the [0, 1] range that sum to 1.0, so they can be interpreted as probabilities. For example the probability for digit 7 is just probs[7].
Then with this information you can do some post-processing, typically the predicted class is the one with highest probability, but you can also look at the class with second highest probability, etc.
A simpler way is to set training=True on any dropout layers you want to run during inference as well (essentially tells the layer to operate as if it's always in training mode - so it is always present for both training and inference).
import keras
inputs = keras.Input(shape=(10,))
x = keras.layers.Dense(3)(inputs)
outputs = keras.layers.Dropout(0.5)(x, training=True)
model = keras.Model(inputs, outputs)
Code above is from this issue.