I have been learning Neural networks for a while now, predominantly with respect to natural language processing. I have been using Kaggle notebooks since I am a beginner. So, recently I was working on a Tamil News Classification dataset I found on Kaggle. The model uses LSTM RNN neural network to classify the news into appropriate news groups. The code in the notebook has an accuracy of around 90+. (Notebook for Reference: https://www.kaggle.com/sagorsemantics/tamil-nlp-lstm) When I tried to create an LSTM Model, my accuracy was around 34%, despite using the same layers, activation function, optimizer, hyperparameters etc. Which I thought was strange. After asking around, I was advised to use hyperparameter tuning to achieve a higher accuracy. I did so. (My code here: https://github.com/Vijeeguna/Tamil-News-Article-Classification/blob/main/tamil_news_classification_LSTM_RNN_CNN.py) But my accuracy continues to be low at 34%. I have played around with layers, dropout, etc. But the accuracy wont budge.
I am at a loss. I don't understand how/why this is. Any nudge in the right direction would be most welcome.
Code on Collab with accuracy I got: https://colab.research.google.com/drive/1P7H6J98GGizrGpMXl8QtTAzWsdgIvGAw?usp=sharing
[Also, I am a true novice. I have been learning thro Kaggle notebooks almost exclusively. Please be patient and dumb things down for me.]
Related
We were given an assignment in which we were supposed to implement our own neural network, and two other already developed Neural Networks. I have done that and however, this isn't the requirement of the assignment but I still would want to know that what are the steps/procedure I can follow to improve the accuracy of my Models?
I am fairly new to Deep Learning and Machine Learning as a whole so do not have much idea.
The given dataset contains a total of 15 classes (airplane, chair etc.) and we are provided with about 15 images of each class in training dataset. The testing dataset has 10 images of each class.
Complete github repository of my code can be found here (Jupyter Notebook file): https://github.com/hassanashas/Deep-Learning-Models
I tried it out with own CNN first (made one using Youtube tutorials).
Code is as follows,
X_train = X_train/255.0
model = Sequential()
model.add(Conv2D(64, (3, 3), input_shape = X_train.shape[1:]))
model.add(Activation("relu"))
model.add(MaxPooling2D(pool_size=(2, 2)))
model.add(Conv2D(128, (3, 3)))
model.add(Activation("relu"))
model.add(MaxPooling2D(pool_size=(2, 2)))
model.add(Flatten())
model.add(Dense(64))
model.add(Dense(16)) # added 16 because it model.fit gave error on 15
model.add(Activation('softmax'))
For the compiling of Model,
from tensorflow.keras.optimizers import SGD
model.compile(loss='sparse_categorical_crossentropy',
optimizer=SGD(learning_rate=0.01),
metrics=['accuracy'])
I used sparse categorical crossentropy because my "y" label was intenger values, ranging from 1 to 15.
I ran this model with following way,
model_fit = model.fit(X_train, y_train, batch_size=32, epochs=30, validation_split=0.1)
It gave me an accuracy of 0.2030 on training dataset and only 0.0733 on the testing dataset (both the datasets are present in the github repository)
Then, I tried out the AlexNet CNN (followed a Youtube tutorial for its code)
I ran the AlexNet on the same dataset for 15 epochs. It improved the accuracy on training dataset to 0.3317, however accuracy on testing dataset was even worse than my own CNN, at only 0.06
Afterwards, I tried out the VGG16 CNN, again following a Youtube Tutorial.
I ran the code on Google Colab for 10 Epochs. It managed to improve to 100% accuracy on training dataset in the 8th epoch. But this model gave the worst accuracy of all three on testing dataset with only 0.0533
I am unable to understand this contrasting behavior of all these models. I have tried out different epoch values, loss functions etc. but the current ones gave the best result relatively. My own CNN was able to get to 100% accuracy when I ran it on 100 epochs (however, it gave very poor results on the testing dataset)
What can I do to improve the performance of these Models? And specifically, what are the few crucial things that one should always try to follow in order to improve efficiency of a Deep Learning Model? I have looked up multiple similar questions on Stackoverflow but almost all of them were working on datasets provided by the tensorflow like mnist dataset and etc. and I didn't find much help from those.
Disclaimer: it's been a few years since I've played with CNNs myself, so I can only pass on some general advice and suggestions.
First of all, I would like to talk about the results you've gotten so far. The first two networks you've trained seem to at least learn something from the training data because they perform better than just randomly guessing.
However: the performance on the test data indicates that the network has not learned anything meaningful because those numbers suggest the network is as good as (or only marginally better than) a random guess.
As for the third network: high accuracy for training data combined with low accuracy for testing data means that your network has overfitted. This means that the network has memorized the training data but has not learned any meaningful patterns.
There's no point in continuing to train a network that has started overfitting. So once the training accuracy increases and testing accuracy decreases for a few epochs consecutively, you can stop training.
Increase the dataset size
Neural networks rely on loads of good training data to learn patterns from. Your dataset contains 15 classes with 15 images each, that is very little training data.
Of course, it would be great if you could get hold of additional high-quality training data to expand your dataset, but that is not always feasible. So a different approach is to artificially expand your dataset. You can easily do this by applying a bunch of transformations to the original training data. Think about: mirroring, rotating, zooming, and cropping.
Remember to not just apply these transformations willy-nilly, they must make sense! For example, if you want a network to recognize a chair, do you also want it to recognize chairs that are upside down? Or for detecting road signs: mirroring them makes no sense because the text, numbers, and graphics will never appear mirrored in real life.
From the brief description of the classes you have (planes and chairs and whatnot...), I think mirroring horizontally could be the best transformation to apply initially. That will already double your training dataset size.
Also, keep in mind that an artificially inflated dataset is never as good as one of the same size that contains all authentic, real images. A mirrored image contains much of the same information as its original, we merely hope it will delay the network from overfitting and hope that it will learn the important patterns instead.
Lower the learning rate
This is a bit of side note, but try lowering the learning rate. Your network seems to overfit in only a few epochs which is very fast. Obviously, lowering the learning rate will not combat overfitting but it will happen more slowly. This means that you can hopefully find an epoch with better overall performance before overfitting takes place.
Note that a lower learning rate will never magically make a bad-performing network good. It's just one way to locate a set of parameters that performs a tad bit better.
Randomize the training data order
During training, the training data is presented in batches to the network. This often happens in a fixed order over all iterations. This may lead to certain biases in the network.
First of all, make sure that the training data is shuffled at least once. You do not want to present the classes one by one, for example first all plane images, then all chairs, etc... This could lead to the network unlearning much of the first class by the end of each epoch.
Also, reshuffle the training data between epochs. This will again avoid potential minor biases because of training data order.
Improve the network design
You've designed a convolutional neural network with only two convolution layers and two fully connected layers. Maybe this model is too shallow to learn to differentiate between the different classes.
Know that the convolution layers tend to first pick up small visual features and then tend to combine these in higher level patterns. So maybe adding a third convolution layer may help the network identify more meaningful patterns.
Obviously, network design is something you'll have to experiment with and making networks overly deep or complex is also a pitfall to watch out for!
I followed all the steps mentioned in the article:
https://stackabuse.com/tensorflow-2-0-solving-classification-and-regression-problems/
Then I compared the results with Linear Regression and found that the error is less (68) than the tensorflow model (84).
from sklearn.linear_model import LinearRegression
logreg_clf = LinearRegression()
logreg_clf.fit(X_train, y_train)
pred = logreg_clf.predict(X_test)
print(np.sqrt(mean_squared_error(y_test, pred)))
Does this mean that if I have large dataset, I will get better results than linear regression?
What is the best situation - when I should be using tensorflow?
Answering your first question, Neural Networks are notoriously known for overfitting on smaller datasets, and here you are comparing the performance of a simple linear regression model with a neural network with two hidden layers on the testing data set, so it's not very surprising to see that the MLP model falling behind (assuming that you are working with relatively a smaller dataset) the linear regression model. Larger datasets will definitely help neural networks in learning more accurate parameters and generalize the phenomena well.
Now coming to your second question, Tensorflow is basically a library for building deep learning models, so whenever you are working on a deep learning problem like image recognition, Natural Language Processing, etc. you need massive computational power and will be processing a ton of data to train your models, and this is where TensorFlow becomes handy, it offers you GPU support which will significantly boost your training process which otherwise becomes practically impossible. Moreover, if you are building a product that has to be deployed in a production environment for it to be consumed, you can make use of TensorFlow Serving which helps you to take your models much closer to the customers.
I need a tensorflow model which recognizes a dog's breed. I downloaded the Stanford Dogs Dataset - 20,580 images in 120 categories (=breeds). I followed the procedure described in TensorFlow For Poets to retrain mobilenet_1.0_224. I used --how_many_training_steps=4000 and defaults for everything else. I got this tensorboard graph:
Training and validation accuracy
The validation accuracy is only about 80%.
What can I do to improve it?
In the research paper MobileNets: Efficient Convolutional Neural Networks for Mobile Vision Applications, the test accuracy using the 'MobileNet_1.0_224' architecture on the Stanford Dogs dataset is 83.3%, which seems in line with your results.
When you visually examine the Stanford Dogs Dataset you will find a lot of the breeds look similar, which makes it hard to reach a higher accuracy, even with the state of the art image classifiers in accuracy. You might improve your results by either splitting similar looking breeds into larger subcategories.
Alternatively, you might tweak the training settings of the retrain.py script in the Tensorflow for Poets tutorial, but the gains will be likely be marginal.
I have a trained a neural network on a classification task, and it is learning, although it's accuracy is not high. I am trying to figure out which test examples it is not confident about, so that I can gain some more insight into what is happening.
In order to do this, I decided to use the standard softmax probabilities in Tensorflow. To do this, I called tf.nn.softmax(logits), and used the probabilities provided here. I noticed that many times the probabilities were 99%, but the prediction was still wrong. As such, even when I only consider examples who have prediction probabilities higher than 99%, I get a poor accuracy, only 2-3 percent higher than my original accuracy.
Does anyone have any ideas as to why the network is so confident about wrong predictions? I am still new to deep learning, so am looking for some ideas to help me out.
Also, is using the softmax probabilities the right way to do determine confidence of predictions from a neural network? If not, is there a better way?
Thanks!
Edit: From the answer below, it seems like my network is just performing poorly. Is there another way to identify which predictions the network makes are likely to be wrong besides looking at the confidence (since the confidence doesn't seem to work well)?
Imagine your samples are split by a vertical line but you NN classifier learnt a horizontal line, in this case any prediction given by your classifier can only obtain 50% accuracy always. However NN will assign higher confidence to the samples which are further away from the horizontal line.
In short, when your model is doing poor classification higher confidence has little to none contribution to accuracy.
Suggestion: Check if the information you needed to do the correct classification are in the data then improve the overall accuracy first.
I've implemented the Neural Network using Tensorflow. During the implementation and training, I've found several not-so-trivial bugs.
Example: during the training I had same Mini-Batch loss for different steps/epochs, but different accuracy.
Now the neural network seems to be ready and working properly. I haven't managed to train it well yet, but I am working on it.
Anyway, I would like to check somehow that I haven't done any computational errors there. I am thinking about generating some artificial data for "fake" classification problem with lets say 4 features. The classification should have a very clear human-understandable dependency between the classification output and 4 features. The idea is to try to train the NN on it and see how it performs.
What do you think?
Stanford's c231n has a couple of general tips for this, like gradient checking.
If you're just learning neural networks, why don't you try to run your implementation on some known data? Many courses provide error and loss curves form models with specified hyperparameters, so you can check whether your implementation's behavior differs significantly from correct implementation.