I am running a first test of a convolutional neural network with tensor flow. I adapted the recommended method with queue runners from the programming guide (see session definition below). Output is the last result from the cnn (here is only this last step given). label_batch_vector is the training label batch.
output = tf.matmul(h_pool2_flat, W_fc1) + b_fc1
label_batch_vector = tf.one_hot(label_batch, 33)
correct_prediction = tf.equal(tf.argmax(output, 1), tf.argmax(label_batch_vector, 1))
accuracy = tf.reduce_mean(tf.cast(correct_prediction, tf.float32))
init_op = tf.group(tf.global_variables_initializer(), tf.local_variables_initializer())
print_accuracy = tf.Print(accuracy, [accuracy])
# Create a session for running operations in the Graph.
sess = tf.Session()
# Initialize the variables (like the epoch counter).
sess.run(init_op)
# Start input enqueue threads.
coord = tf.train.Coordinator()
threads = tf.train.start_queue_runners(sess=sess, coord=coord)
try:
while not coord.should_stop():
# Run training steps or whatever
sess.run(train_step)
sess.run(print_accuracy)
except tf.errors.OutOfRangeError:
print('Done training -- epoch limit reached')
finally:
# When done, ask the threads to stop.
coord.request_stop()
# Wait for threads to finish.
coord.join(threads)
sess.close()
My problem is that accuracy is calculated for each batch and I would like it calculated for each epoch. I would need to do the following: initialize a epoch_accuracy tensor, for each of the calculated batch accuracies in the epoch add it to the epoch_accuracy. At the end of the epoch show the calculated training set accuracy. However I am not finding any such example with the this queue threads that I implemented (which is actually the recommended method from TensorFlow). Can anyone help ?
To compute accuracy on the stream of data (your sequence of batches, here), you can use the tf.metrics.accuracy function in tensorflow. See its doc here
You define the op like this
_, accuracy = tf.metrics.accuracy(y_true, y_pred)
Then you can update the accuracy in this way:
sess.run(accuracy)
PS: all functions in tf.metrics (auc, recall, etc.) support streaming
Related
Below code snippet is the custom training loop from Tensorflow official tutorial.https://www.tensorflow.org/guide/keras/writing_a_training_loop_from_scratch . Another tutorial also does not average loss over batch_size, as shown here https://www.tensorflow.org/tutorials/customization/custom_training_walkthrough
Why is the loss_value not averaged over batch_size at this line loss_value = loss_fn(y_batch_train, logits)? Is this a bug? From another question here Loss function works with reduce_mean but not reduce_sum, reduce_mean is indeed needed to average loss over batch_size
The loss_fn is defined in the tutorial as below. It obviously does not average over batch_size.
loss_fn = keras.losses.SparseCategoricalCrossentropy(from_logits=True)
From documentation, keras.losses.SparseCategoricalCrossentropy sums loss over the batch without averaging. Thus, this is essentially reduce_sum instead of reduce_mean!
Type of tf.keras.losses.Reduction to apply to loss. Default value is AUTO. AUTO indicates that the reduction option will be determined by the usage context. For almost all cases this defaults to SUM_OVER_BATCH_SIZE.
The code is shown below.
epochs = 2
for epoch in range(epochs):
print("\nStart of epoch %d" % (epoch,))
# Iterate over the batches of the dataset.
for step, (x_batch_train, y_batch_train) in enumerate(train_dataset):
# Open a GradientTape to record the operations run
# during the forward pass, which enables auto-differentiation.
with tf.GradientTape() as tape:
# Run the forward pass of the layer.
# The operations that the layer applies
# to its inputs are going to be recorded
# on the GradientTape.
logits = model(x_batch_train, training=True) # Logits for this minibatch
# Compute the loss value for this minibatch.
loss_value = loss_fn(y_batch_train, logits)
# Use the gradient tape to automatically retrieve
# the gradients of the trainable variables with respect to the loss.
grads = tape.gradient(loss_value, model.trainable_weights)
# Run one step of gradient descent by updating
# the value of the variables to minimize the loss.
optimizer.apply_gradients(zip(grads, model.trainable_weights))
# Log every 200 batches.
if step % 200 == 0:
print(
"Training loss (for one batch) at step %d: %.4f"
% (step, float(loss_value))
)
print("Seen so far: %s samples" % ((step + 1) * 64))
I've figured it out, the loss_fn = keras.losses.SparseCategoricalCrossentropy(from_logits=True) indeed averages loss over batch_size by default.
I've been trying to investigate into the reason (e.g. by checking weights, gradients and activations during training) why SGD with a 0.001 learning rate worked in training while Adam fails to do so. (Please see my previous post [here](Why is my loss (binary cross entropy) converging on ~0.6? (Task: Natural Language Inference)"Why is my loss (binary cross entropy) converging on ~0.6? (Task: Natural Language Inference)"))
Note: I'm using the same model from my previous post here as well.
using tf.keras, i trained the neural network using model.fit():
model.compile(optimizer=SGD(learning_rate=0.001),
loss='binary_crossentropy',
metrics=['accuracy'])
model.fit(x=ds,
epoch=80,
validation_data=ds_val)
This resulted in a epoch loss graphed below, within the 1st epoch, it's reached a train loss of 0.46 and then ultimately resulting in a train_loss of 0.1241 and val_loss of 0.2849.
I would've used tf.keras.callbacks.Tensorboard(histogram_freq=1) to train the network with both SGD(0.001) and Adam to investigate but it's throwing an InvalidArgumentError on Variable:0, something I can't decipher. So I tried to write a custom training loop using GradientTape and plotting the values.
using tf.GradientTape(), i tried to reproduce the results using the exact same model and dataset, however the epoch loss is training incredibly slowly, reaching train loss of 0.676 after 15 epochs (see graph below), is there something wrong with my implementation? (code below)
#tf.function
def compute_grads(train_batch: Dict[str,tf.Tensor], target_batch: tf.Tensor,
loss_fn: Loss, model: tf.keras.Model):
with tf.GradientTape(persistent=False) as tape:
# forward pass
outputs = model(train_batch)
# calculate loss
loss = loss_fn(y_true=target_batch, y_pred=outputs)
# calculate gradients for each param
grads = tape.gradient(loss, model.trainable_variables)
return grads, loss
BATCH_SIZE = 8
EPOCHS = 15
bce = BinaryCrossentropy()
optimizer = SGD(learning_rate=0.001)
for epoch in tqdm(range(EPOCHS), desc='epoch'):
# - accumulators
epoch_loss = 0.0
for (i, (train_batch, target_dict)) in tqdm(enumerate(ds_train.shuffle(1024).batch(BATCH_SIZE)), desc='step'):
(grads, loss) = compute_grads(train_batch, target_dict['target'], bce, model)
optimizer.apply_gradients(zip(grads, model.trainable_variables))
epoch_loss += loss
avg_epoch_loss = epoch_loss/(i+1)
tensorboard_scalar(writer, name='epoch_loss', data=avg_epoch_loss, step=epoch) # custom helper function
print("Epoch {}: epoch_loss = {}".format(epoch, avg_epoch_loss))
Thanks in advance!
Check if you have shuffle your dataset then the problem may came from the shuffling using the tf.Dataset method. It only shuffled through the dataset one bucket at the time. Using the Keras.Model.fit yielded better results because it probably adds another shuffling.
By adding a shuffling with numpy.random.shuffle it may improve the training performance. From this reference.
The example of applying it into generation of the dataset is:
numpy_data = np.hstack([index_rows.reshape(-1, 1), index_cols.reshape(-1, 1), index_data.reshape(-1, 1)])
np.random.shuffle(numpy_data)
indexes = np.array(numpy_data[:, :2], dtype=np.uint32)
labels = np.array(numpy_data[:, 2].reshape(-1, 1), dtype=np.float32)
train_ds = data.Dataset.from_tensor_slices(
(indexes, labels)
).shuffle(100000).batch(batch_size, drop_remainder=True)
If this not work you may need to use Dataset .repeat(epochs_number) and .shuffle(..., reshuffle_each_iteration=True):
train_ds = data.Dataset.from_tensor_slices(
(np.hstack([index_rows.reshape(-1, 1), index_cols.reshape(-1, 1)]), index_data)
).shuffle(100000, reshuffle_each_iteration=True
).batch(batch_size, drop_remainder=True
).repeat(epochs_number)
for ix, (examples, labels) in train_ds.enumerate():
train_step(examples, labels)
current_epoch = ix // (len(index_data) // batch_size)
This workaround is not beautiful nor natural, for the moment you can use this to shuffle each epoch. It's a known issue and will be fixed, in the future you can use for epoch in range(epochs_number) instead of .repeat()
The solution provided here may also help a lot. You might want to check it out.
If this is not the case, you may want to speed up the TF2.0 GradientTape. This can be the solution:
TensorFlow 2.0 introduces the concept of functions, which translate eager code into graph code.
The usage is pretty straight-forward. The only change needed is that all relevant functions (like compute_loss and apply_gradients) have to be annotated with #tf.function.
I spend some of my time coding novel (I wish) RNN cells in Tensorflow.
To prototype, I use eager mode (easier to debug).
In order to train, I migrate the code to a graph (runs faster).
I am looking for a wrapper code/example that can run forward pass and training in a way that will be agnostic to the mode I run it - eager or graph, as much as possible. I have in mind a set of functions/classes, to which the particular neural network/optimizer/data can be inserted, and that these set of functions/classes could run in both modes with minimal changes between the two. In addition, it is of course good that it would be compatible with many types of NN/optimizers/data instances.
I am quite sure that many had this idea.
I wonder if something like this is feasible given the current eager/graph integration in TF.
Yes. I have been wondering the same. In the Tensorflow documentation you can see:
The same code written for eager execution will also build a graph during graph execution. Do this by simply running the same code in a new Python session where eager execution is not enabled.
But this is hard to achieve, mostly because working with graphs means dealing with placeholders, which can not be used in Eager mode. I tried to get rid off placeholders using object-oriented layers and the Dataset API. This is the closest I could get to totally compatible code:
m = 128 # num_examples
n = 5 # num features
epochs = 2
batch_size = 32
steps_per_epoch = m // 32
dataset = tf.data.Dataset.from_tensor_slices(
(tf.random_uniform([m, n], dtype=tf.float32),
tf.random_uniform([m, 1], dtype=tf.float32)))
dataset = dataset.repeat(epochs)
dataset = dataset.batch(batch_size)
model = tf.keras.Sequential([
tf.keras.layers.Dense(64, activation='relu', input_dim=n),
tf.keras.layers.Dense(32, activation='relu'),
tf.keras.layers.Dense(1)
])
def train_eagerly(model, dataset):
optimizer = tf.train.AdamOptimizer()
iterator = dataset.make_one_shot_iterator()
print('Training graph...')
for epoch in range(epochs):
print('Epoch', epoch)
progbar = tf.keras.utils.Progbar(target=steps_per_epoch, stateful_metrics='loss')
for step in range(steps_per_epoch):
with tf.GradientTape() as tape:
features, labels = iterator.get_next()
predictions = model(features, training=True)
loss_value = tf.losses.mean_squared_error(labels, predictions)
grads = tape.gradient(loss_value, model.variables)
optimizer.apply_gradients(zip(grads, model.variables))
progbar.add(1, values=[('loss', loss_value.numpy())])
def train_graph(model, dataset):
optimizer = tf.train.AdamOptimizer()
iterator = dataset.make_initializable_iterator()
print('Training graph...')
with tf.Session() as sess:
sess.run(iterator.initializer)
sess.run(tf.global_variables_initializer())
for epoch in range(epochs):
print('Epoch', epoch)
progbar = tf.keras.utils.Progbar(target=steps_per_epoch, stateful_metrics='loss')
for step in range(steps_per_epoch):
with tf.GradientTape() as tape:
features, labels = sess.run(iterator.get_next())
predictions = model(features, training=True)
loss_value = tf.losses.mean_squared_error(labels, predictions)
grads = tape.gradient(loss_value, model.variables)
optimizer.apply_gradients(zip(grads, model.variables))
progbar.add(1, values=[('loss', loss_value.eval())])
As you can see, the main difference is that I use a one_shot_iterator during Eager training (of course, during graph training, I have to run operations within a session).
I tried to do the same using optimizer.minimize instead of applying the gradients myself, but I could not come up with a code that worked both for eager and graph modes.
Also, I'm sure this becomes much harder to do with not so simple models, like the one you are working with.
We have the following input pipeline:
with tf.name_scope('input'):
filename_queue = tf.train.string_input_producer(
[filename], num_epochs=num_epochs)
# Even when reading in multiple threads, share the filename
# queue.
image, label = read_and_decode(filename_queue)
# Shuffle the examples and collect them into batch_size batches.
# (Internally uses a RandomShuffleQueue.)
# We run this in two threads to avoid being a bottleneck.
images, sparse_labels = tf.train.shuffle_batch(
[image, label], batch_size=batch_size, num_threads=2,
capacity=1000 + 3 * batch_size,
# Ensures a minimum amount of shuffling of examples.
min_after_dequeue=1000)
return images, sparse_labels
and we have the following training:
# Start input enqueue threads.
coord = tf.train.Coordinator()
threads = tf.train.start_queue_runners(sess=sess, coord=coord)
try:
step = 0
while not coord.should_stop():
start_time = time.time()
# Run one step of the model. The return values are
# the activations from the `train_op` (which is
# discarded) and the `loss` op. To inspect the values
# of your ops or variables, you may include them in
# the list passed to sess.run() and the value tensors
# will be returned in the tuple from the call.
_, loss_value = sess.run([train_op, loss])
duration = time.time() - start_time
# Print an overview fairly often.
if step % 100 == 0:
print('Step %d: loss = %.2f (%.3f sec)' % (step, loss_value,
duration))
step += 1
except tf.errors.OutOfRangeError:
print('Done training for %d epochs, %d steps.' % (FLAGS.num_epochs, step))
finally:
# When done, ask the threads to stop.
coord.request_stop()
# Wait for threads to finish.
coord.join(threads)
sess.close()
I have two doubts:
1) Is the variable num_epochs deciding the number of training iterations?
2) My model is pretty large and i want to checkpoint and restore and train.
How do I know for a restored model how many iterations are done and how many are left?
1) as stated in the tensorflow api tf.train.string_input_producer will throw a tf.errors.OutOfRangeError once each string has been produced for num_epoch times. So yes, num_epochs will be deciding the number of training iterations in your code.
2) I think it might be possible to declare a tf.Variable and increase its value for each epoch that you run, so when you restore your model you could read that value again and train for the remaining epochs. Unfortunately i dont know if there is a smarter way, since most people only save their models for predictions after the training, or do finetuning for a fix number of epochs.
Hope i could help
The following snippet has been taken from the TensorFlow 0.12 API documentation
def input_pipeline(filenames, batch_size, num_epochs=None):
filename_queue = tf.train.string_input_producer(
filenames, num_epochs=num_epochs, shuffle=True)
example, label = read_my_file_format(filename_queue)
# min_after_dequeue defines how big a buffer we will randomly sample
# from -- bigger means better shuffling but slower start up and more
# memory used.
# capacity must be larger than min_after_dequeue and the amount larger
# determines the maximum we will prefetch. Recommendation:
# min_after_dequeue + (num_threads + a small safety margin) * batch_size
min_after_dequeue = 10000
capacity = min_after_dequeue + 3 * batch_size
example_batch, label_batch = tf.train.shuffle_batch(
[example, label], batch_size=batch_size, capacity=capacity,
min_after_dequeue=min_after_dequeue)
return example_batch, label_batch
The question I have might be very basic for a regular TensorFlow user, but I am an absolute beginner. The question is the following :
tf.train.string_input_producer creates a queue for holding the filenames. As the input_pipeline() is called over and over again during training, how will it be ensured that everytime the same queue is used ? I guess, it is important since, if different calls to input_pipeline() result in a creation of a new queue, there does not seem to be a way to ensure that different images are picked everytime and epoch counter and shuffling can be properly maintained.
The input_pipeline function only creates the part of a (usually larger) graph that is responsible for producing batches of data. If you were to call input_pipeline twice - for whatever reason - you would be creating two different queues indeed.
In general, the function tf.train.string_input_producer actually creates a queue node (or operation) in the currently active graph (which is the default graph unless you specify something different). read_my_file_format then reads from that queue and sequentially produces single "example" tensors, while tf.train.shuffle_batch then batches these into bundles of length batch_size each.
However, the output of tf.train.shuffle_batch, two Tensors here that are returned from the input_pipeline function, only really takes on a (new) value when it is evaluated under a session. If you evaluate these tensors multiple times, they will contain different values - taken, through read_my_file_format, from files listed in the input queue.
Think of it like so:
X_batch, Y_batch = input_pipeline(..., batch_size=100)
with tf.Session() as sess:
sess.run(tf.global_variable_initializer())
tf.train.start_queue_runners()
# get the first 100 examples and labels
X1, Y1 = sess.run((X_batch, Y_batch))
# get the next 100 examples and labels
X2, Y2 = sess.run((X_batch, Y_batch))
# etc.
The boilerplate code to get it running is a bit more complex, e.g. because queues need to actually be started and stopped in the graph, because they will throw a tf.errors.OutOfRangeError when they run dry, etc.
A more complete example could look like this:
with tf.Graph().as_default() as graph:
X_batch, Y_batch = input_pipeline(..., batch_size=100)
prediction = inference(X_batch)
optimizer, loss = optimize(prediction, Y_batch)
coord = tf.train.Coordinator()
with tf.Session(graph=graph) as sess:
init = tf.group(tf.local_variable_initializer(),
tf.global_variable_initializer())
sess.run(init)
# start the queue runners
threads = tf.train.start_queue_runners(coord=coord)
try:
while not coord.should_stop():
# now you're really indirectly querying the
# queue; each iteration will see a new batch of
# at most 100 values.
_, loss = sess.run((optimizer, loss))
# you might also want to do something with
# the network's output - again, this would
# use a fresh batch of inputs
some_predicted_values = sess.run(prediction)
except tf.errors.OutOfRangeError:
print('Training stopped, input queue is empty.')
finally:
coord.request_stop()
# stop the queue(s)
coord.request_stop()
coord.join(threads)
For a deeper understanding, you might want to look at the Reading data documentation.