If i enlarge my dataset using augmentations, I get a better result?
For example, I have 1 class, it is a dog class and 4 images for it. I applied augmentations to 4 images. Now some of these images are augmented, some are not. But I still have 4 images.
Will it be more efficient if I add to augmented images original images? -> It will be 8 images in dataset. I tried to do this thing, changing my "Custom Dataset", but if I have lot of images (100000) then Collab tell me bye bye, because of memory ran out.
Is it matter to make augmentations before creating dataset and after creating dataset in training loop like this:
for x, y in train_loader:
aug_x = aug(x)
...
output = model(aug_x)
loss = ...
loss.backward()
...
I suppose, I need to choose 1 way to apply augmentations to my images either before dataset or in the training loop. Am I wrong? Write below ypur suggestions with code. Thank you!
Usually approprietly chosen augmentations leads to better results.
You are right the preliminary augmentation of your dataset and saving augmented images consumes all the disk memory in the case of big datasets.
So it makes sense to apply augmentations dynamically, on-the-fly.
Simple pytorch example:
import cv2
import numpy as np
from torch.utils.data import DataLoader, Dataset
class MyDataset(Dataset):
def __init__(self, image_paths, size):
self._image_paths = image_paths
self._size = size
def __getitem__(self, idx):
path = self._image_paths[0]
image = cv2.imread(path)
# Insert here your augmentations
if np.random.rand() < 0.5:
image = cv2.flip(image, 0)
if np.random.rand() < 0.5:
image = cv2.flip(image, 1)
return image
def __len__(self):
return self._size
image_paths = ["1.png"]
loader = DataLoader(MyDataset(image_paths, 10), batch_size=4)
for batch in loader:
batch_images = np.hstack([image for image in batch])
cv2.imshow("image", batch_images)
cv2.waitKey()
One special case when this approach will work poorly is when the augmentation process takes a lot of time. For example when you need to render some 3D objects using complex pipeline with Blender. Such augmentations will became the bottleneck during the training so it makes sense to save the augmented data to disk first and the use it to enlarge dataset during training.
The choice of augmentations heavily depends on the domain of your data. Small augmentations could lead to small to no accuracy gains. Very heavy augmentations could distort the training distribution too big which results to decrease in quality.
If you are interested in image augmentations you can check out these projects:
https://github.com/aleju/imgaug
https://github.com/albumentations-team/albumentations
https://docs.nvidia.com/deeplearning/dali/user-guide/docs/index.html
I have a question regarding the role of the batch size. My MLP model has 2 Dense-layers with "softmax" activation function:
# Creat my MLP MODEL:
model = Sequential()
model.add(Dense(units=64, input_dim = 100))
model.add(BatchNormalization())
model.add(Activation("softmax"))
model.add(Dense(units=64))
model.add(BatchNormalization())
model.add(Activation("softmax"))
model.add(Dense(units=1))
Green's Batchsize = 2, Pink's Batchsize = 8, Red's Batchsize = 5
The dataset has 84000 samples. Each of the sample consists of 100 input values and 1 output value. Each of the sample describes a different subprocess, so the relationship between the samples do not exist. I have evaluated the training process with different batch_size. What is the reason that the training result looks better when the batch size is increased to 8? As far as I Is there a relationship in my datasample that I was not aware of?
First of all you are useing batchnorm, which, as the name suggests normalises samples based on statistics in the batch, thus it will work better if the sample size (batch size) is bigger. Apart from this higher batch size also means lower variance of your gradient estimator and is often good.
I'm interested in fine-tuning a Mask-RCNN model that I'm using for instance segmentation. Currently I have trained the model for 6 epochs and the various Mask-RCNN losses are as follows:
The reason I'm stopping is that the COCO evaluation metrics seem to have dipped in the last epoch:
I know this is a far reaching question, but I'm looking to gain some intuition of how to understand which parameters are going to be the most impactful in improving the evaluation metrics. I understand there are three places to consider:
Should I be looking at batch size, learning rate and momentum, this uses an SGD optimizer with a learning rate of 1e-4 and batch size 2?
Should I be looking at using more training data or adding augmentation (I don't currently use any) and my dataset is current pretty large 40K images?
Should I be looking at the specific MaskRCNN parameters?
I thing I'll likely be asked to me more specific on what I want to improve so let me say that I would like to improve the recall of the individual masks. The model is performing well but doesn't quite capture the full extend of what I would like it to. I'm also leaving out details of the specific learning problem as I'd like to gain intuition of how to approach this in general.
A couple of notes:
6 epochs are too small for the network to converge even if you use a pre-trained network—especially such a big one as resnet50. I think you need at least 50 epochs. On a pre-trained resnet18 I started to get good results after 30 epochs, resnet34 needed +10-20 epochs and your resnet50 + 40k images of the train set - definitely need more epochs than 6;
definitely use a pre-trained network;
in my experience, I failed to get the results I like with SGD. I started using AdamW + ReduceLROnPlateau scheduler. The network converges quite fast, like 50-60% AP on epoch 7 or 8 but then it comes up to 80-85 after 50-60 epochs using very small improvements from epoch to epoch, only if the LR is small enough. You must be familiar with the gradient descent notion. I used to think of it as if you have more augmentation, your "hill" is covered with "boulders" that you have to be able to bypass and this is only possible if you control the LR. Additionally, AdamW helps with the overfitting.
This is how I do it. For networks with higher input resolution (your input images are scaled on input by the net itself), I use higher LR.
init_lr = 0.00005
weight_decay = init_lr * 100
optimizer = torch.optim.AdamW(params, lr=init_lr, weight_decay=weight_decay)
scheduler = torch.optim.lr_scheduler.ReduceLROnPlateau(optimizer, verbose=True, patience=3, factor=0.75)
for epoch in range(epochs):
# train for one epoch, printing every 10 iterations
metric_logger = train_one_epoch(model, optimizer, train_loader, scaler, device,
epoch, print_freq=10)
scheduler.step(metric_logger.loss.global_avg)
optimizer.param_groups[0]["weight_decay"] = optimizer.param_groups[0]["lr"] * 100
# scheduler.step()
# evaluate on the test dataset
evaluate(model, test_loader, device=device)
print("[INFO] serializing model to '{}' ...".format(args["model"]))
save_and_print_size_of_model(model, args["model"], script=False)
Find such an LR and weight decay that the training exhausts LR to a very small value, like 1/10 of your initial LR, at the end of the training. If you will have a plateau too often, the scheduler quickly brings it to very small values and the network will learn nothing all the rest of the epochs.
Your plots indicate that your LR is too high at some point in the training, the network stops training and then AP is going down. You need constant improvements, even small ones. The more network trains the more subtle details it learns about your domain and the smaller the learning rate. Imho, constant LR will not allow doing that correctly.
anchor generator settings. Here is how I initialize the network.
def get_maskrcnn_resnet_model(name, num_classes, pretrained, res='normal'):
print('Using maskrcnn with {} backbone...'.format(name))
backbone = resnet_fpn_backbone(name, pretrained=pretrained, trainable_layers=5)
sizes = ((4,), (8,), (16,), (32,), (64,))
aspect_ratios = ((0.25, 0.5, 1.0, 2.0, 4.0),) * len(sizes)
anchor_generator = AnchorGenerator(
sizes=sizes, aspect_ratios=aspect_ratios
)
roi_pooler = torchvision.ops.MultiScaleRoIAlign(featmap_names=['0', '1', '2', '3'],
output_size=7, sampling_ratio=2)
default_min_size = 800
default_max_size = 1333
if res == 'low':
min_size = int(default_min_size / 1.25)
max_size = int(default_max_size / 1.25)
elif res == 'normal':
min_size = default_min_size
max_size = default_max_size
elif res == 'high':
min_size = int(default_min_size * 1.25)
max_size = int(default_max_size * 1.25)
else:
raise ValueError('Invalid res={} param'.format(res))
model = MaskRCNN(backbone, min_size=min_size, max_size=max_size, num_classes=num_classes,
rpn_anchor_generator=anchor_generator, box_roi_pool=roi_pooler)
model.roi_heads.detections_per_img = 512
return model
I need to find small objects here why I use such anchor params.
classes in-balancing issue. If you have only your object and bg - no problem. If you have more classes then make sure that your training split (as 80% for train and 20% for the test) is more or less precisely applied to all the classes used in your particular training.
Good luck!
I am confused about the definition of data augmentation. Should we train the original data points and the transformed ones or just the transformed? If we train both, then we will increase the size of the dataset while the second approach won't.
I got this question when using the function RandomResizedCrop.
'train': transforms.Compose([
transforms.RandomResizedCrop(224),
transforms.RandomHorizontalFlip(),
transforms.ToTensor(),
transforms.Normalize([0.485, 0.456, 0.406], [0.229, 0.224, 0.225])
]),
If we resize and crop some of the dataset randomly, we don't actually increase the size of the dataset for data augmentation. Is that correct? Or data augmentation just requires the change/modification of original dataset rather than increase the size of it?
Thanks.
By definition, or at least the influential paper AlexNet from 2012 that popularized data augmentation in computer vision, increases the size of the training set. Hence the word augmentation. Go ahead and have a look at Section 4.1 from the AlexNet paper. But, here is the gist of it, which I'm quoting from the paper:
The easiest and most common method to reduce overfitting on image data is to artificially enlarge the dataset using label-preserving transformations. The first form of data augmentation consists of generating image translations and horizontal reflections. We do this by extracting random 224 × 224 patches (and their horizontal reflections) from the 256×256 images and training our network on these extracted patches. This increases the size of our training set by a factor of 2048, though the resulting training examples are, of course, highly interdependent.
As for the specific implementation, it depends on your use case and most importantly the size of your training data. If you're short in quantity in the latter case, you should consider training on original and transformed images, by sufficiently taking care to preserve the labels.
transform.compose is just as preprocessing an image ,convert one form to particular suiatable form
On apply transformation on single image means changing it pixel value and it does not increases dataset size
for more dataset you have to perform operation such below:
final_train_data = []
final_target_train = []
for i in tqdm(range(train_x.shape[0])):
final_train_data.append(train_x[i])
final_train_data.append(rotate(train_x[i], angle=45, mode = 'wrap'))
final_train_data.append(np.fliplr(train_x[i]))
final_train_data.append(np.flipud(train_x[i]))
final_train_data.append(random_noise(train_x[i],var=0.2**2))
for j in range(5):
final_target_train.append(train_y[i])
for more detail pytorch
When using a Keras LSTM to predict on time series data I've been getting errors when I'm trying to train the model using a batch size of 50, while then trying to predict on the same model using a batch size of 1 (ie just predicting the next value).
Why am I not able to train and fit the model with multiple batches at once, and then use that model to predict for anything other than the same batch size. It doesn't seem to make sense, but then I could easily be missing something about this.
Edit: this is the model. batch_size is 50, sl is sequence length, which is set at 20 currently.
model = Sequential()
model.add(LSTM(1, batch_input_shape=(batch_size, 1, sl), stateful=True))
model.add(Dense(1))
model.compile(loss='mean_squared_error', optimizer='adam')
model.fit(trainX, trainY, epochs=epochs, batch_size=batch_size, verbose=2)
here is the line for predicting on the training set for RMSE
# make predictions
trainPredict = model.predict(trainX, batch_size=batch_size)
here is the actual prediction of unseen time steps
for i in range(test_len):
print('Prediction %s: ' % str(pred_count))
next_pred_res = np.reshape(next_pred, (next_pred.shape[1], 1, next_pred.shape[0]))
# make predictions
forecastPredict = model.predict(next_pred_res, batch_size=1)
forecastPredictInv = scaler.inverse_transform(forecastPredict)
forecasts.append(forecastPredictInv)
next_pred = next_pred[1:]
next_pred = np.concatenate([next_pred, forecastPredict])
pred_count += 1
This issue is with the line:
forecastPredict = model.predict(next_pred_res, batch_size=batch_size)
The error when batch_size here is set to 1 is:
ValueError: Cannot feed value of shape (1, 1, 2) for Tensor 'lstm_1_input:0', which has shape '(10, 1, 2)' which is the same error that throws when batch_size here is set to 50 like the other batch sizes as well.
The total error is:
forecastPredict = model.predict(next_pred_res, batch_size=1)
File "/home/entelechy/tf_keras/lib/python3.5/site-packages/keras/models.py", line 899, in predict
return self.model.predict(x, batch_size=batch_size, verbose=verbose)
File "/home/entelechy/tf_keras/lib/python3.5/site-packages/keras/engine/training.py", line 1573, in predict
batch_size=batch_size, verbose=verbose)
File "/home/entelechy/tf_keras/lib/python3.5/site-packages/keras/engine/training.py", line 1203, in _predict_loop
batch_outs = f(ins_batch)
File "/home/entelechy/tf_keras/lib/python3.5/site-packages/keras/backend/tensorflow_backend.py", line 2103, in __call__
feed_dict=feed_dict)
File "/home/entelechy/tf_keras/lib/python3.5/site-packages/tensorflow/python/client/session.py", line 767, in run
run_metadata_ptr)
File "/home/entelechy/tf_keras/lib/python3.5/site-packages/tensorflow/python/client/session.py", line 944, in _run
% (np_val.shape, subfeed_t.name, str(subfeed_t.get_shape())))
ValueError: Cannot feed value of shape (1, 1, 2) for Tensor 'lstm_1_input:0', which has shape '(10, 1, 2)'
Edit: Once I set the model to stateful=False then I am able to use different batch sizes for fitting/training and prediction. What is the reason for this?
Unfortunately what you want to do is impossible with Keras ... I've also struggle a lot of time on this problems and the only way is to dive into the rabbit hole and work with Tensorflow directly to do LSTM rolling prediction.
First, to be clear on terminology, batch_size usually means number of sequences that are trained together, and num_steps means how many time steps are trained together. When you mean batch_size=1 and "just predicting the next value", I think you meant to predict with num_steps=1.
Otherwise, it should be possible to train and predict with batch_size=50 meaning you are training on 50 sequences and make 50 predictions every time step, one for each sequence (meaning training/prediction num_steps=1).
However, I think what you mean is that you want to use stateful LSTM to train with num_steps=50 and do prediction with num_steps=1. Theoretically this make senses and should be possible, and it is possible with Tensorflow, just not Keras.
The problem: Keras requires an explicit batch size for stateful RNN. You must specify batch_input_shape (batch_size, num_steps, features).
The reason: Keras must allocate a fixed-size hidden state vector in the computation graph with shape (batch_size, num_units) in order to persist the values between training batches. On the other hand, when stateful=False, the hidden state vector can be initialized dynamically with zeroes at the beginning of each batch so it does not need to be a fixed size. More details here: http://philipperemy.github.io/keras-stateful-lstm/
Possible work around: Train and predict with num_steps=1. Example: https://github.com/keras-team/keras/blob/master/examples/lstm_stateful.py. This might or might not work at all for your problem as the gradient for back propagation will be computed on only one time step. See: https://github.com/fchollet/keras/issues/3669
My solution: use Tensorflow: In Tensorflow you can train with batch_size=50, num_steps=100, then do predictions with batch_size=1, num_steps=1. This is possible by creating a different model graph for training and prediction sharing the same RNN weight matrices. See this example for next-character prediction: https://github.com/sherjilozair/char-rnn-tensorflow/blob/master/model.py#L11 and blog post http://karpathy.github.io/2015/05/21/rnn-effectiveness/. Note that one graph can still only work with one specified batch_size, but you can setup multiple model graphs sharing weights in Tensorflow.
Sadly what you wish for is impossible because you specify the batch_size when you define the model...
However, I found a simple way around this problem: create 2 models! The first is used for training and the second for predictions, and have them share weights:
train_model = Sequential([Input(batch_input_shape=(batch_size,...),
<continue specifying your model>])
predict_model = Sequential([Input(batch_input_shape=(1,...),
<continue specifying exact same model>])
train_model.compile(loss='sparse_categorical_crossentropy', optimizer=Adam())
predict_model.compile(loss='sparse_categorical_crossentropy', optimizer=Adam())
Now you can use any batch size you want. after you fit your train_model just save it's weights and load them with the predict_model:
train_model.save_weights('lstm_model.h5')
predict_model.load_weights('lstm_model.h5')
notice that you only want to save and load the weights, and not the whole model (which includes the architecture, optimizer etc...). This way you get the weights but you can input one batch at a time...
more on keras save/load models:
https://keras.io/getting-started/faq/#how-can-i-save-a-keras-model
notice that you need to install h5py to use "save weights".
Another easy workaround is:
def create_model(batch_size):
model = Sequential()
model.add(LSTM(1, batch_input_shape=(batch_size, 1, sl), stateful=True))
model.add(Dense(1))
return model
model_train = create_model(batch_size=50)
model_train.compile(loss='mean_squared_error', optimizer='adam')
model_train.fit(trainX, trainY, epochs=epochs, batch_size=batch_size)
model_predict = create_model(batch_size=1)
weights = model_train.get_weights()
model_predict.set_weights(weights)
The best solution to this problem is "Copy Weights". It can be really helpful if you want to train & predict with your LSTM model with different batch sizes.
For example, once you have trained your model with 'n' batch size as shown below:
# configure network
n_batch = len(X)
n_epoch = 1000
n_neurons = 10
# design network
model = Sequential()
model.add(LSTM(n_neurons, batch_input_shape=(n_batch, X.shape[1], X.shape[2]), stateful=True))
model.add(Dense(1))
model.compile(loss='mean_squared_error', optimizer='adam')
And now you want to want predict values fewer than your batch size where n=1.
What you can do is that, copy the weights of your fit model and reinitialize the new model LSTM model with same architecture and set batch size equal to 1.
# re-define the batch size
n_batch = 1
# re-define model
new_model = Sequential()
new_model.add(LSTM(n_neurons, batch_input_shape=(n_batch, X.shape[1], X.shape[2]), stateful=True))
new_model.add(Dense(1))
# copy weights
old_weights = model.get_weights()
new_model.set_weights(old_weights)
Now you can easily predict and train LSTMs with different batch sizes.
For more information please read: https://machinelearningmastery.com/use-different-batch-sizes-training-predicting-python-keras/
I found below helpful (and fully inline with above). The section "Solution 3: Copy Weights" worked for me:
How to use Different Batch Sizes when Training and Predicting with LSTMs, by Jason Brownlee
n_neurons = 10
# design network
model = Sequential()
model.add(LSTM(n_neurons, batch_input_shape=(n_batch, X.shape[1], X.shape[2]), stateful=True))
model.add(Dense(1))
model.compile(loss='mean_squared_error', optimizer='adam')
# fit network
for i in range(n_epoch):
model.fit(X, y, epochs=1, batch_size=n_batch, verbose=1, shuffle=False)
model.reset_states()
# re-define the batch size
n_batch = 1
# re-define model
new_model = Sequential()
new_model.add(LSTM(n_neurons, batch_input_shape=(n_batch, X.shape[1], X.shape[2]), stateful=True))
new_model.add(Dense(1))
# copy weights
old_weights = model.get_weights()
new_model.set_weights(old_weights)
# compile model
new_model.compile(loss='mean_squared_error', optimizer='adam')
I also have same problem and resolved it.
In another way, you can save your weights, when you test your result, you can reload your model with same architecture and set batch_size=1 as below:
n_neurons = 10
# design network
model = Sequential()
model.add(LSTM(n_neurons, batch_size=1, batch_input_shape=(n_batch,X.shape[1], X.shape[2]), statefull=True))
model.add(Dense(1))
model.compile(loss='mean_squared_error', optimizer='adam')
model.load_weights("w.h5")
It will work well. I hope it will helpfull for you.
If you don't have access to the code that created the model or if you just don't want your prediction/validation code to depend on your model creation and training code there is another way:
You could create a new model from a modified version of the loaded model's config like this:
loaded_model = tf.keras.models.load_model('model_file.h5')
config = loaded_model.get_config()
old_batch_input_shape = config['layers'][0]['config']['batch_input_shape']
config['layers'][0]['config']['batch_input_shape'] = (new_batch_size, old_batch_input_shape[1])
new_model = loaded_model.__class__.from_config(config)
new_model.set_weights(loaded_model.get_weights())
This works well for me in a situation where I have several different models with state-full RNN layers working together in a graph network but being trained separately with different networks leading to different batch sizes. It allows me to experiment with the model structures and training batches without needing to change anything in my validation script.