For example, I want to do a matrix multiplication, and in doing so, I use the tf.matmul operation inside the tensorflow. And, i want to optimize matrix mulptiplication in tf. However, I cannot reach where the matrix Multiplication is made exactly in tf_matmul. Is there any people who can help me to do this ?
We need to do some code tracing to figure out what is being called and what is happening
1) tensorflow.python.ops.math_ops called via tf.matmul
2) tf.matmul returns either a sparse_matmul (which calls gen_math_ops.sparse_matmul) or gen_math_ops.batch_mat_mul
3) The gen_math_ops script is automatically generated but the underlying code is math_ops.cc
All the best!
Related
I am trying to implement image classification in hardware using the quantized Mobilenetv2 model taken from here. To do that, I first need to reproduce the inference process from the beginning to the end to make sure I understand the calculations/operations that are performed on the data.
The first target is the Conv fuction. I can see how it is being calculated, but there are several arguments that are passed to this function which I would like to know how they are produced: output_offset, output_multiplier,output_shift, output_activation_min, output_activation_max. I cannot find the previous function that calls the Conv() function with these parameters. This would hopefully give me an insight of how these arguments are generated. Could someone point me to the right line of the source code?
Another gap in the sourcecode is at the interpreter.invoke() function. I wish to track and see what happens next, but can not find the soursecode that implements the invoke() function. The help would be greatly appreciated!
If you want to know how the conv reference code is used you can read the code for the conv operator.
The python interpreter uses swig to call the C++ intepreter.
Hope this helps.
I'm trying to set up a DNN for classification and at one point I want to take the tensor product of a vector with itself. I'm using the Keras functional API at the moment but it isn't immediately clear that there is a layer that does this already.
I've been attempting to use a Lambda layer and numpy in order to try this, but it's not working.
Doing a bit of googling reveals
tf.linalg.LinearOperatorKronecker, which does not seem to work either.
Here's what I've tried:
I have a layer called part_layer whose output is a single vector (rank one tensor).
keras.layers.Lambda(lambda x_array: np.outer(x_array, x_array),) ( part_layer) )
Ideally I would want this to to take a vector of the form [1,2] and give me [[1,2],[2,4]].
But the error I'm getting suggests that the np.outer function is not recognizing its arguments:
AttributeError: 'numpy.ndarray' object has no attribute '_keras_history
Any ideas on what to try next, or if there is a simple function to use?
You can use two operations:
If you want to consider the batch size you can use the Dot function
Otherwise, you can use the the dot function
In both case the code should look like this:
dot_lambda = lambda x_array: tf.keras.layers.dot(x_array, x_array)
# dot_lambda = lambda x_array: tf.keras.layers.Dot(x_array, x_array)
keras.layers.Lambda(dot_lamda)( part_layer)
Hope this help.
Use tf.tensordot(x_array, x_array, axes=0) to achieve what you want. For example, the expression print(tf.tensordot([1,2], [1,2], axes=0)) gives the desired result: [[1,2],[2,4]].
Keras/Tensorflow needs to keep an history of operations applied to tensors to perform the optimization. Numpy has no notion of history, so using it in the middle of a layer is not allowed. tf.tensordot performs the same operation, but keeps the history.
I have some observational data and I want to fit some model parameters by using lmfit.Minimizer() to minimize an error function which, for reasons I won't get into here, must return a float instead of an array of residuals. This means that I cannot use the Leastsq method to minimize the function. In practice, methods nelder, BFGS and powell converge fine, but these methods do not provide the covariance of the best-fit parameters (MinimizerResult.covar).
I would like to know if thee is a simple way to compute this covariance when using any of the non-Leastsq methods.
It is true that the leastsq method is the only method that can calculate error bars and that this requires a residual array (with more elements than variables!).
It turns out that some work has been done in lmfit toward the goal of being able to compute uncertainties for scalar minimizers, but it is not complete. See https://github.com/lmfit/lmfit-py/issues/169 and https://github.com/lmfit/lmfit-py/pull/481. If you're interested in helping, that would be great!
But, yes, you could compute the covariance by hand. For each variable, you would need to make a small perturbation to its value (ideally around 1-sigma, but since that is what you're trying to calculate, you probably don't know it) and then fix that value and optimize all the other values. In this way you can compute the Jacobian matrix (derivative of the residual array with respect to the variables).
From the Jacobian matrix, the covariance matrix is (assuming there are no singularities):
covar = numpy.inv(numpy.dot(numpy.transpose(jacobian), jacobian))
I appreciate if you can answer my questions or provide me with useful resources.
Currently, I am working on a problem that I need to do alternating optimization. So, consider we have two decision variables x and y. In the first step I take the derivative of loss function wrt. x (for fixed y) and update x. On the second step, I need to take the derivative wrt. y. The issue is x is dependent on y implicitly and finding the closed form of cost function in a way to show the dependency of x on y is not feasible, so the gradients of cost function wrt. y are unknown.
1) My first question is whether "autodiff" method in reverse mode used in TensorFlow works for these problems where we do not have an explicit form of cost function wrt to one variable and we need the derivatives? Actually, the value of cost function is known but the dependency on decision variable is unknown via math.
2) From a general view, if I define a node as a "tf.Variable" and have an arbitrary intractable function(intractable via computation by hand) of that variable that evolves through code execution, is it possible to calculate the gradients via "tf.gradients"? If yes, how can I make sure that it is implemented correctly? Can I check it using TensorBoard?
My model is too complicated but a simplified form can be considered in this way: suppose the loss function for my model is L(x). I can code L(x) as a function of "x" during the construction phase in tensorflow. However, I have also another variable "k" that is initialized to zero. The dependency of L(x) on "k" shapes as the code runs so my loss function is L(x,k), actually. And more importantly, "x" is a function of "k" implicitly. (all the optimization is done using GradientDescent). The problem is I do not have L(x,k) as a closed form function but I have the value of L(x,k) at each step. I can use "numerical" methods like FDSA/SPSA but they are not exact. I just need to make sure as you said there is a path between "k" and L(x,k)but I do not know how!
TensorFlow gradients only work when the graph connecting the x and the y when you're computing dy/dx has at least one path which contains only differentiable operations. In general if tf gives you a gradient it is correct (otherwise file a bug, but gradient bugs are rare, since the gradient for all differentiable ops is well tested and the chain rule is fairly easy to apply).
Can you be a little more specific about what your model looks like? You might also want to use eager execution if your forward complication is too weird to express as a fixed dataflow graph.
I am using this function of tensorflow to get my function jacobian. Came across two problems:
The tensorflow documentation is contradicted to itself in the following two paragraph if I am not mistaken:
gradients() adds ops to the graph to output the partial derivatives of ys with respect to xs. It returns a list of Tensor of length len(xs) where each tensor is the sum(dy/dx) for y in ys.
Blockquote
Blockquote
Returns:
A list of sum(dy/dx) for each x in xs.
Blockquote
According to my test, it is, in fact, return a vector of len(ys) which is the sum(dy/dx) for each x in xs.
I do not understand why they designed it in a way that the return is the sum of the columns(or row, depending on how you define your Jacobian).
How can I really get the Jacobian?
4.In the loss, I need the partial derivative of my function with respect to input (x), but when I am optimizing with respect to the network weights, I define x as a placeholder whose value is fed later, and weights are variable, in this case, can I still define the symbolic derivative of function with respect to input (x)? and put it in the loss? ( which later when we optimize with respect to weights will bring second order derivative of the function.)
I think you are right and there is a typo there, it was probably meant to be "of length len(ys)".
For efficiency. I can't explain exactly the reasoning, but this seems to be a pretty fundamental characteristic of how TensorFlow handles automatic differentiation. See issue #675.
There is no straightforward way to get the Jacobian matrix in TensorFlow. Take a look at this answer and again issue #675. Basically, you need one call to tf.gradients per column/row.
Yes, of course. You can compute whatever gradients you want, there is no real difference between a placeholder and any other operation really. There are a few operations that do not have a gradient because it is not well defined or not implemented (in which case it will generally return 0), but that's all.