How to show the class distribution in Dataset object in Tensorflow - tensorflow

I am working on a multi-class classification task using my own images.
filenames = [] # a list of filenames
labels = [] # a list of labels corresponding to the filenames
full_ds = tf.data.Dataset.from_tensor_slices((filenames, labels))
This full dataset will be shuffled and split into train, valid and test dataset
full_ds_size = len(filenames)
full_ds = full_ds.shuffle(buffer_size=full_ds_size*2, seed=128) # seed is used for reproducibility
train_ds_size = int(0.64 * full_ds_size)
valid_ds_size = int(0.16 * full_ds_size)
train_ds = full_ds.take(train_ds_size)
remaining = full_ds.skip(train_ds_size)
valid_ds = remaining.take(valid_ds_size)
test_ds = remaining.skip(valid_ds_size)
Now I am struggling to understand how each class is distributed in train_ds, valid_ds and test_ds. An ugly solution is to iterate all the element in the dataset and count the occurrence of each class. Is there any better way to solve it?
My ugly solution:
def get_class_distribution(dataset):
class_distribution = {}
for element in dataset.as_numpy_iterator():
label = element[1]
if label in class_distribution.keys():
class_distribution[label] += 1
else:
class_distribution[label] = 0
# sort dict by key
class_distribution = collections.OrderedDict(sorted(class_distribution.items()))
return class_distribution
train_ds_class_dist = get_class_distribution(train_ds)
valid_ds_class_dist = get_class_distribution(valid_ds)
test_ds_class_dist = get_class_distribution(test_ds)
print(train_ds_class_dist)
print(valid_ds_class_dist)
print(test_ds_class_dist)

The answer below assumes:
there are five classes.
labels are integers from 0 to 4.
It can be modified to suit your needs.
Define a counter function:
def count_class(counts, batch, num_classes=5):
labels = batch['label']
for i in range(num_classes):
cc = tf.cast(labels == i, tf.int32)
counts[i] += tf.reduce_sum(cc)
return counts
Use the reduce operation:
initial_state = dict((i, 0) for i in range(5))
counts = train_ds.reduce(initial_state=initial_state,
reduce_func=count_class)
print([(k, v.numpy()) for k, v in counts.items()])

A solution inspired by user650654 's answer, only using TensorFlow primitives (with tf.unique_with_counts instead of for loop):
In theory, this should have better performance and scale better to large datasets, batches or class count.
num_classes = 5
#tf.function
def count_class(counts, batch):
y, _, c = tf.unique_with_counts(batch[1])
return tf.tensor_scatter_nd_add(counts, tf.expand_dims(y, axis=1), c)
counts = train_ds.reduce(
initial_state=tf.zeros(num_classes, tf.int32),
reduce_func=count_class)
print(counts.numpy())
Similar and simpler version with numpy that actually had better performances for my simple use-case:
count = np.zeros(num_classes, dtype=np.int32)
for _, labels in train_ds:
y, _, c = tf.unique_with_counts(labels)
count[y.numpy()] += c.numpy()
print(count)

Related

How to calculate cosine similarity given sparse matrix data in TensorFlow?

I'm supposed to change part of a python script on the GitHub website. This code is an attention-based similarity measure, but I want to turn it to cosine similarity.
The respective code is in the layers.py file (inside the call method).
Attention-Based:
def __call__(self, inputs):
x = inputs
# dropout
if self.sparse_inputs:
x = sparse_dropout(x, 1-self.dropout, self.num_features_nonzero)
else:
x = tf.nn.dropout(x, 1-self.dropout)
# graph learning
h = dot(x, self.vars['weights'], sparse=self.sparse_inputs)
N = self.num_nodes
edge_v = tf.abs(tf.gather(h,self.edge[0]) - tf.gather(h,self.edge[1]))
edge_v = tf.squeeze(self.act(dot(edge_v, self.vars['a'])))
sgraph = tf.SparseTensor(indices=tf.transpose(self.edge), values=edge_v, dense_shape=[N, N])
sgraph = tf.sparse_softmax(sgraph)
return h, sgraph
I edited the above code to what I believe are my requirements (cosine similarity). However, when I run the following code, like so:
def __call__(self, inputs):
x = inputs
# dropout
if self.sparse_inputs:
x = sparse_dropout(x, 1-self.dropout, self.num_features_nonzero)
else:
x = tf.nn.dropout(x, 1-self.dropout)
# graph learning
h = dot(x, self.vars['weights'], sparse=self.sparse_inputs)
N = self.num_nodes
h_norm = tf.nn.l2_normalize(h)
edge_v = tf.matmul(h_norm, tf.transpose(h_norm))
h_norm_1 = tf.norm(h_norm)
edge_v /= h_norm_1 * h_norm_1
edge_v = dot(edge_v, self.vars['a']) # It causes an error when I add this line
zero = tf.constant(0, dtype=tf.float32)
where = tf.not_equal(edge_v, zero)
indices = tf.where(where)
values = tf.gather_nd(edge_v, indices)
sgraph = tf.SparseTensor(indices, values, dense_shape= [N,N])
return h, sgraph
The script shows some runtime errors:
Screenshot of error message
I suspect the error here is related to line 226:
edge_v = dot(edge_v, self.vars['a']) # It causes an error when I add this line
Any admonition on how to accomplish this successfully?
Link of the script on GitHub:
https://github.com/jiangboahu/GLCN-tf
Note: I don't want to use built-in functions, because I think they are not precise to do this job.
ETA: It appears that there are some answers around but they seem to tackle different problems, as far, as I understood them.
Thanks a bunch in advance
What's the dot? Have you imported the method?
It should either be:
edge_v = tf.keras.backend.dot(edge_v, self.vars['a'])
or
edge_v = tf.tensordot(edge_v, self.vars['a'])

Expected to see 3 array(s), but instead got the following list of 1 arrays:

I am trying to train a triple loss model using a fit_generator. it requires three input and no output. so i have a function that generates hard triplets. the output from the triplets generator has a shape of (3,5,279) which is 3 inputs(anchor,positive and negative) for 5 batches and a total of 279 features. When i run the fit_generator it throws this error that "the list of Numpy arrays that you are passing to your model is not the size the model expected. Expected to see 3 array(s), but instead got the following list of 1 arrays" meanwhile i have passed a list of three arrays. the code is below. it works when i use the fit, however, i want to always call the generator function to generate my triplets as my batches. thanks in advance..this has taken me three days
def load_data():
path = "arrhythmia_data.txt"
f = open( path, "r")
data = []
#remove line breaker, comma separate and store in array
for line in f:
line = line.replace('\n','').replace('?','0')
line = line.split(",")
data.append(line)
f.close()
data = np.array(data).astype(np.float64)
#print(data.shape)
#create the class labels for input data
Y_train = data[:,-1:]
train = data[:,:-1]
normaliser = preprocessing.MinMaxScaler()
train = normaliser.fit_transform(train)
val = train[320:,:]
train = train[:320,:]
#create one hot encoding of the class labels of the data and separate them into train and test data
lb = LabelBinarizer()
encode = lb.fit_transform(Y_train)
nb_classes = int(len(encode[0]))
#one_hot_labels = keras.utils.to_categorical(labels, num_classes=10) this could also be used for one hot encoding
Y_val_e = encode[320:,:]
Y_train_e = encode[:320,:]
print(Y_train_e[0])
print(np.argmax(Y_train_e[0]))
val_in = []
train_in = []
#grouping and sorting the input data based on label id or name
for n in range(nb_classes):
images_class_n = np.asarray([row for idx,row in enumerate(train) if np.argmax(Y_train_e[idx])==n])
train_in.append(images_class_n)
images_class_n = np.asarray([row for idx,row in enumerate(val) if np.argmax(Y_val_e[idx])==n])
val_in.append(images_class_n)
#print(train_in[0].shape)
return train_in,val_in,Y_train_e,Y_val_e,nb_classes
train_in,val,Y_train,Y_val,nb_classes = load_data()
input_shape = (train_in[0].shape[1],)
def build_network(input_shape , embeddingsize):
'''
Define the neural network to learn image similarity
Input :
input_shape : shape of input images
embeddingsize : vectorsize used to encode our picture
'''
#in_ = Input(train.shape)
net = Sequential()
net.add(Dense(128, activation='relu', input_shape=input_shape))
net.add(Dense(128, activation='relu'))
net.add(Dense(256, activation='relu'))
net.add(Dense(4096, activation='sigmoid'))
net.add(Dense(embeddingsize, activation= None))
#Force the encoding to live on the d-dimentional hypershpere
net.add(Lambda(lambda x: K.l2_normalize(x,axis=-1)))
return net
class TripletLossLayer(Layer):
def __init__(self, alpha, **kwargs):
self.alpha = alpha
super(TripletLossLayer, self).__init__(**kwargs)
def triplet_loss(self, inputs):
anchor, positive, negative = inputs
p_dist = K.sum(K.square(anchor-positive), axis=-1)
n_dist = K.sum(K.square(anchor-negative), axis=-1)
return K.sum(K.maximum(p_dist - n_dist + self.alpha, 0), axis=0)
def call(self, inputs):
loss = self.triplet_loss(inputs)
self.add_loss(loss)
return loss
def build_model(input_shape, network, margin=0.2):
'''
Define the Keras Model for training
Input :
input_shape : shape of input images
network : Neural network to train outputing embeddings
margin : minimal distance between Anchor-Positive and Anchor-Negative for the lossfunction (alpha)
'''
# Define the tensors for the three 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")
# Generate the encodings (feature vectors) for the three images
encoded_a = network(anchor_input)
encoded_p = network(positive_input)
encoded_n = network(negative_input)
#TripletLoss Layer
loss_layer = TripletLossLayer(alpha=margin,name='triplet_loss_layer')([encoded_a,encoded_p,encoded_n])
# Connect the inputs with the outputs
network_train = Model(inputs=[anchor_input,positive_input,negative_input],outputs=loss_layer)
# return the model
return network_train
def get_batch_random(batch_size,s="train"):
# initialize result
triplets=[np.zeros((batch_size,m)) for i in range(3)]
for i in range(batch_size):
#Pick one random class for anchor
anchor_class = np.random.randint(0, nb_classes)
nb_sample_available_for_class_AP = X[anchor_class].shape[0]
#Pick two different random pics for this class => A and P. You can use same anchor as P if there is one one element for anchor
if nb_sample_available_for_class_AP<=1:
continue
[idx_A,idx_P] = np.random.choice(nb_sample_available_for_class_AP,size=2 ,replace=False)
#Pick another class for N, different from anchor_class
negative_class = (anchor_class + np.random.randint(1,nb_classes)) % nb_classes
nb_sample_available_for_class_N = X[negative_class].shape[0]
#Pick a random pic for this negative class => N
idx_N = np.random.randint(0, nb_sample_available_for_class_N)
triplets[0][i,:] = X[anchor_class][idx_A,:]
triplets[1][i,:] = X[anchor_class][idx_P,:]
triplets[2][i,:] = X[negative_class][idx_N,:]
return np.array(triplets)
def get_batch_hard(draw_batch_size,hard_batchs_size,norm_batchs_size,network,s="train"):
if s == 'train':
X = train_in
else:
X = val
#m, features = X[0].shape
#while True:
#Step 1 : pick a random batch to study
studybatch = get_batch_random(draw_batch_size,X)
#Step 2 : compute the loss with current network : d(A,P)-d(A,N). The alpha parameter here is omited here since we want only to order them
studybatchloss = np.zeros((draw_batch_size))
#Compute embeddings for anchors, positive and negatives
A = network.predict(studybatch[0])
P = network.predict(studybatch[1])
N = network.predict(studybatch[2])
#Compute d(A,P)-d(A,N)
studybatchloss = np.sum(np.square(A-P),axis=1) - np.sum(np.square(A-N),axis=1)
#Sort by distance (high distance first) and take the
selection = np.argsort(studybatchloss)[::-1][:hard_batchs_size]
#Draw other random samples from the batch
selection2 = np.random.choice(np.delete(np.arange(draw_batch_size),selection),norm_batchs_size,replace=False)
selection = np.append(selection,selection2)
triplets = [studybatch[0][selection,:], studybatch[1][selection,:],studybatch[2][selection,:]]
triplets = triplets.reshape(triplets.shape[0],triplets.shape[1],triplets.shape[2])
yield triplets
network = build_network(input_shape,embeddingsize=10)
hard = get_batch_hard(5,4,1,network,s="train")
network_train = build_model(input_shape,network)
optimizer = Adam(lr = 0.00006)
network_train.compile(loss=None,optimizer=optimizer)
#this works
#history = network_train.fit(hard,epochs=100,steps_per_epoch=1, verbose=2)
history = network_train.fit_generator(hard,epochs=10,steps_per_epoch=16, verbose=2)
# error:: the list of Numpy arrays that you are passing to your model is not the size the model
expected. Expected to see 3 array(s), but instead got the following list of 1 arrays:
I think that's beacause in your generator you are yielding the 3 inputs array in one list, you need to yield the 3 arrays independently:
triplet_1 = studybatch[0][selection,:]
triplet_2 = studybatch[1][selection,:]
triplet_3 = studybatch[2][selection,:]
yield [triplet_1, triplet_2, triplet_3]

Apply same Keras Tensorflow preprocessing transform to several images

I'm currently building my own custom generator with data augmentation. I have to apply the same transformation to two images, the train one and the target one, but functions only works one by one. Any ideas how to apply the exact transformation in both images?
This is one function I'm trying:
tf.keras.preprocessing.image.random_zoom
The code for the generator:
def generator(data, batch_size = 32, data_augmentation = False):
batch_number = 0
while True:
original_train = []
original_target = []
train = []
target = []
if batch_number * batch_size >= data.shape[0]:
batch_number = 0
for x in train_pd.values[batch_number * batch_size: (batch_number + 1) * batch_size ]:
train_image = load_image_as_array(train_path+'images/'+x[0]+'.png').reshape(101,101,1)
target_image = load_image_as_array(train_path+'masks/'+x[0]+'.png').reshape(101,101,1)
original_train.append(train_image)
original_target.append(target_image)
if data_augmentation:
train_image = random_zoom(train_image, (.25,.25))
target_image = random_zoom(target_image, (.25,.25))
train.append(train_image)
target.append(target_image)
batch_number += 1
yield np.array(train), np.array(target), np.array(original_train), np.array(original_target)
Ok. It seems that it applies the exact transformation besides you call the function two times.

Split a dataset created by Tensorflow dataset API in to Train and Test?

Does anyone know how to split a dataset created by the dataset API (tf.data.Dataset) in Tensorflow into Test and Train?
Assuming you have all_dataset variable of tf.data.Dataset type:
test_dataset = all_dataset.take(1000)
train_dataset = all_dataset.skip(1000)
Test dataset now has first 1000 elements and the rest goes for training.
You may use Dataset.take() and Dataset.skip():
train_size = int(0.7 * DATASET_SIZE)
val_size = int(0.15 * DATASET_SIZE)
test_size = int(0.15 * DATASET_SIZE)
full_dataset = tf.data.TFRecordDataset(FLAGS.input_file)
full_dataset = full_dataset.shuffle()
train_dataset = full_dataset.take(train_size)
test_dataset = full_dataset.skip(train_size)
val_dataset = test_dataset.skip(val_size)
test_dataset = test_dataset.take(test_size)
For more generality, I gave an example using a 70/15/15 train/val/test split but if you don't need a test or a val set, just ignore the last 2 lines.
Take:
Creates a Dataset with at most count elements from this dataset.
Skip:
Creates a Dataset that skips count elements from this dataset.
You may also want to look into Dataset.shard():
Creates a Dataset that includes only 1/num_shards of this dataset.
Disclaimer I stumbled upon this question after answering this one so I thought I'd spread the love
Most of the answers here use take() and skip(), which requires knowing the size of your dataset before hand. This isn't always possible, or is difficult/intensive to ascertain.
Instead what you can do is to essentially slice the dataset up so that 1 every N records becomes a validation record.
To accomplish this, lets start with a simple dataset of 0-9:
dataset = tf.data.Dataset.range(10)
# [0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9]
Now for our example, we're going to slice it so that we have a 3/1 train/validation split. Meaning 3 records will go to training, then 1 record to validation, then repeat.
split = 3
dataset_train = dataset.window(split, split + 1).flat_map(lambda ds: ds)
# [0, 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9]
dataset_validation = dataset.skip(split).window(1, split + 1).flat_map(lambda ds: ds)
# [3, 7]
So the first dataset.window(split, split + 1) says to grab split number (3) of elements, then advance split + 1 elements, and repeat. That + 1 effectively skips the 1 element we're going to use in our validation dataset.
The flat_map(lambda ds: ds) is because window() returns the results in batches, which we don't want. So we flatten it back out.
Then for the validation data we first skip(split), which skips over the first split number (3) of elements that were grabbed in the first training window, so we start our iteration on the 4th element. The window(1, split + 1) then grabs 1 element, advances split + 1 (4), and repeats.
 
Note on nested datasets:
The above example works well for simple datasets, but flat_map() will generate an error if the dataset is nested. To address this, you can swap out the flat_map() with a more complicated version that can handle both simple and nested datasets:
.flat_map(lambda *ds: ds[0] if len(ds) == 1 else tf.data.Dataset.zip(ds))
#ted's answer will cause some overlap. Try this.
train_ds_size = int(0.64 * full_ds_size)
valid_ds_size = int(0.16 * full_ds_size)
train_ds = full_ds.take(train_ds_size)
remaining = full_ds.skip(train_ds_size)
valid_ds = remaining.take(valid_ds_size)
test_ds = remaining.skip(valid_ds_size)
use code below to test.
tf.enable_eager_execution()
dataset = tf.data.Dataset.range(100)
train_size = 20
valid_size = 30
test_size = 50
train = dataset.take(train_size)
remaining = dataset.skip(train_size)
valid = remaining.take(valid_size)
test = remaining.skip(valid_size)
for i in train:
print(i)
for i in valid:
print(i)
for i in test:
print(i)
Now Tensorflow doesn't contain any tools for that.
You could use sklearn.model_selection.train_test_split to generate train/eval/test dataset, then create tf.data.Dataset respectively.
You can use shard:
dataset = dataset.shuffle() # optional
trainset = dataset.shard(2, 0)
testset = dataset.shard(2, 1)
See:
https://www.tensorflow.org/api_docs/python/tf/data/Dataset#shard
The upcoming TensorFlow 2.10.0 will have a tf.keras.utils.split_dataset function, see the rc3 release notes:
Added tf.keras.utils.split_dataset utility to split a Dataset object or a list/tuple of arrays into two Dataset objects (e.g. train/test).
In case size of the dataset is known:
from typing import Tuple
import tensorflow as tf
def split_dataset(dataset: tf.data.Dataset,
dataset_size: int,
train_ratio: float,
validation_ratio: float) -> Tuple[tf.data.Dataset, tf.data.Dataset, tf.data.Dataset]:
assert (train_ratio + validation_ratio) < 1
train_count = int(dataset_size * train_ratio)
validation_count = int(dataset_size * validation_ratio)
test_count = dataset_size - (train_count + validation_count)
dataset = dataset.shuffle(dataset_size)
train_dataset = dataset.take(train_count)
validation_dataset = dataset.skip(train_count).take(validation_count)
test_dataset = dataset.skip(validation_count + train_count).take(test_count)
return train_dataset, validation_dataset, test_dataset
Example:
size_of_ds = 1001
train_ratio = 0.6
val_ratio = 0.2
ds = tf.data.Dataset.from_tensor_slices(list(range(size_of_ds)))
train_ds, val_ds, test_ds = split_dataset(ds, size_of_ds, train_ratio, val_ratio)
A robust way to split dataset into two parts is to first deterministically map every item in the dataset into a bucket with, for example, tf.strings.to_hash_bucket_fast. Then you can split the dataset into two by filtering by the bucket. If you split your data into five buckets, you get 80-20 split assuming that the split is even.
As an example, assume that your dataset contains dictionaries with key filename. We split the data into five buckets based on this key. With this add_fold function, we add the key "fold" in the dictionaries:
def add_fold(buckets: int):
def add_(sample, label):
fold = tf.strings.to_hash_bucket(sample["filename"], num_buckets=buckets)
return {**sample, "fold": fold}, label
return add_
dataset = dataset.map(add_fold(buckets=5))
Now we can split the dataset into two disjoint datasets with Dataset.filter:
def pick_fold(fold: int):
def filter_fn(sample, _):
return tf.math.equal(sample["fold"], fold)
return filter_fn
def skip_fold(fold: int):
def filter_fn(sample, _):
return tf.math.not_equal(sample["fold"], fold)
return filter_fn
train_dataset = dataset.filter(skip_fold(0))
val_dataset = dataset.filter(pick_fold(0))
The key that you use for hashing should be one that captures the correlations in the dataset. For example, if your samples collected by the same person are correlated and you want all samples with the same collector end up in the same bucket (and the same split), you should use the collector name or ID as the hashing column.
Of course, you can skip the part with dataset.map and do the hashing and filtering in one filter function. Here's a full example:
dataset = tf.data.Dataset.from_tensor_slices([f"value-{i}" for i in range(10000)])
def to_bucket(sample):
return tf.strings.to_hash_bucket_fast(sample, 5)
def filter_train_fn(sample):
return tf.math.not_equal(to_bucket(sample), 0)
def filter_val_fn(sample):
return tf.math.logical_not(filter_train_fn(sample))
train_ds = dataset.filter(filter_train_fn)
val_ds = dataset.filter(filter_val_fn)
print(f"Length of training set: {len(list(train_ds.as_numpy_iterator()))}")
print(f"Length of validation set: {len(list(val_ds.as_numpy_iterator()))}")
This prints:
Length of training set: 7995
Length of validation set: 2005
Can't comment, but above answer has overlap and is incorrect. Set BUFFER_SIZE to DATASET_SIZE for perfect shuffle. Try different sized val/test size to verify. Answer should be:
DATASET_SIZE = tf.data.experimental.cardinality(full_dataset).numpy()
train_size = int(0.7 * DATASET_SIZE)
val_size = int(0.15 * DATASET_SIZE)
test_size = int(0.15 * DATASET_SIZE)
full_dataset = full_dataset.shuffle(BUFFER_SIZE)
train_dataset = full_dataset.take(train_size)
test_dataset = full_dataset.skip(train_size)
val_dataset = test_dataset.take(val_size)
test_dataset = test_dataset.skip(val_size)

stacked sigmoids: why training the second layer alters the first layer?

I am training a NN with sigmoid layers stacked one on top of the other. I have labels associated with each layer and I would like to alternate between training towards minimizing the loss for the first layer and minimizing the loss on the second layer. I expect that the result I get on the first layer would not change regardless whether I train for the second layer or not. However, I do get significant difference. What am I missing?
Here is the code:
dim = Xtrain.shape[1]
output_dim = Ytrain.shape[1]
categories_dim = Ctrain.shape[1]
features = C.input_variable(dim, np.float32)
label = C.input_variable(output_dim, np.float32)
categories = C.input_variable(categories_dim, np.float32)
b = C.parameter(shape=(output_dim))
w = C.parameter(shape=(dim, output_dim))
adv_w = C.parameter(shape=(output_dim, categories_dim))
adv_b = C.parameter(shape=(categories_dim))
pred_parameters = (w, b)
adv_parameters = (adv_w, adv_b)
z = C.tanh(C.times(features, w) + b)
adverse = C.tanh(C.times(z, adv_w) + adv_b)
pred_loss = C.cross_entropy_with_softmax(z, label)
pred_error = C.classification_error(z, label)
adv_loss = C.cross_entropy_with_softmax(adverse, categories)
adv_error = C.classification_error(adverse, categories)
pred_learning_rate = 0.5
pred_lr_schedule = C.learning_rate_schedule(pred_learning_rate, C.UnitType.minibatch)
pred_learner = C.adam(pred_parameters, pred_lr_schedule, C.momentum_as_time_constant_schedule(0.9))
pred_trainer = C.Trainer(adverse, (pred_loss, pred_error), [pred_learner])
adv_learning_rate = 0.5
adv_lr_schedule = C.learning_rate_schedule(adv_learning_rate, C.UnitType.minibatch)
adv_learner = C.adam(adverse.parameters, adv_lr_schedule, C.momentum_as_time_constant_schedule(0.9))
adv_trainer = C.Trainer(adverse, (adv_loss, adv_error), [adv_learner])
minibatch_size = 50
num_of_epocs = 40
# Run the trainer and perform model training
training_progress_output_freq = 50
def permute (x, y, c):
rr = np.arange(x.shape[0])
np.random.shuffle(rr)
x = x[rr, :]
y = y[rr, :]
c = c[rr, :]
return (x, y, c)
for e in range(0,num_of_epocs):
(x, y, c) = permute(Xtrain, Ytrain, Ctrain)
for i in range (0, x.shape[0], minibatch_size):
m_features = x[i:min(i+minibatch_size, x.shape[0]),]
m_labels = y[i:min(i+minibatch_size, x.shape[0]),]
m_cat = c[i:min(i+minibatch_size, x.shape[0]),]
if (e % 2 == 0):
pred_trainer.train_minibatch({features : m_features, label : m_labels, categories : m_cat, diagonal : m_diagonal})
else:
adv_trainer.train_minibatch({features : m_features, label : m_labels, categories : m_cat, diagonal : m_diagonal})
I am surprised that if I comment out the last two lines (else: adv_training.train...) the train and test error of z in predicting the label alters. Since adv_trainer is supposed to modify only adv_w and adv_b which are not used in computing z or its loss, I can't see why should that happen. I appreciate the assistance.
You shouldn’t do
adv_learner = C.adam(adverse.parameters, adv_lr_schedule, C.momentum_as_time_constant_schedule(0.9))
but:
adv_learner = C.adam(adv_parameters, adv_lr_schedule, C.momentum_schedule(0.9))
adverse.parameters contains all the parameters and you don’t want that. On a different note, you will want to replace momentum_as_time_constant_schedule with momentum_schedule. The former takes as parameter the number of samples after which the contribution of the gradient will have decayed by exp(-1).