DOCSLIB.ORG

Neural Networks Continue

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Neural Networks Continue Machine Learning for Signal Processing Neural Networks Continue Instructor: Bhiksha Raj Slides by Najim Dehak 1 Dec 2016 1 So what are neural networks?? Voice N.Net Image N.Net Text caption signal Transcription Game N.Net State Next move • What are these boxes? 18797/11755 2 So what are neural networks?? • It began with this.. • Humans are very good at the tasks we just saw • Can we model the human brain/ human intelligence? – An old question – dating18797/11755 back to Plato and Aristotle.. 3 MLP - Recap • MLPs are Boolean machines – They represent Boolean functions over linear boundaries – They can represent arbitrary boundaries • Perceptrons are correlation filters – They detect patterns in the input • MLPs are Boolean formulae over patterns detected by perceptron – Higher-level perceptrons may also be viewed as feature detectors • MLPs are universal approximators – Can model any function to arbitrary precision • Extra: MLP in classification – The network will fire if the combination of the detected basic features matches an “acceptable” pattern for a desired class of signal • E.g. Appropriate combinations of (Nose, Eyes, Eyebrows, Cheek, Chin) Face 4 MLP - Recap • MLPs are Boolean machines – They represent arbitrary Boolean functions over arbitrary linear boundaries • Perceptrons are pattern detectors – MLPs are Boolean formulae over these patterns • MLPs are universal approximators – Can model any function to arbitrary precision • MLPs are very hard to train – Training data are generally many orders of magnitude too few – Even with optimal architectures, we could get rubbish – Depth helps greatly! – Can learn functions that regular classifiers cannot 5 What is a deep network? Deep Structures • In any directed network of computational elements with input source nodes and output sink nodes, “depth” is the length of the longest path from a source to a sink • Left: Depth = 2. Right: Depth = 3 Deep Structures • Layered deep structure • “Deep” Depth > 2 MLP as a continuous-valued regression T1 T1 x 1 1 f(x) x T1 T2 x 1 -1 T2 + T2 • MLPs can actually compose arbitrary functions to arbitrary precision – Not just classification/Boolean functions • 1D example – Left: A net with a pair of units can create a pulse of any width at any location – Right: A network of N such pairs approximates the function with N scaled pulses 9 MLP features DIGIT OR NOT? • The lowest layers of a network detect significant features in the signal • The signal could be reconstructed using these features – Will retain all the significant components of the signal 10 Making it explicit: an autoencoder 푿 푻 푾 풀 푾 푿 • A neural network can be trained to predict the input itself • This is an autoencoder • An encoder learns to detect all the most significant patterns in the signals • A decoder recomposes the signal from the patterns 11 Deep Autoencoder DECODER ENCODER What does the AE learn 푿 푻 푾 풀 푾 푿 푇 2 퐘 = 퐖퐗 퐗 = 퐖푇퐘 퐸 = 퐗 − 퐖 퐖퐗 Find W to minimize Avg[E] • In the absence of an intermediate non-linearity • This is just PCA 13 The AE DECODER ENCODER • With non-linearity – “Non linear” PCA – Deeper networks can capture more complicated manifolds 14 The Decoder: DECODER • The decoder represents a source-specific generative dictionary • Exciting it will produce typical signals from the source! 15 The AE DECODER Cut the AE ENCODER 16 The Decoder: Sax dictionary DECODER • The decoder represents a source-specific generative dictionary • Exciting it will produce typical signals from the source! 17 The Decoder: Clarinet dictionary DECODER • The decoder represents a source-specific generative dictionary • Exciting it will produce typical signals from the source! 18 NN for speech enhancement 19 Story so far • MLPs are universal classifiers – They can model any decision boundary • Neural networks are universal approximators – They can model any regression • The decoder of MLP autoencoders represent a non-linear constructive dictionary! 20 The need for shift invariance = • In many problems the location of a pattern is not important – Only the presence of the pattern • Conventional MLPs are sensitive to the location of the pattern – Moving it by one component results in an entirely different input that the MLP wont recognize • Requirement: Network must be shift invariant Convolutional Neural Networks History Hubel and Wiesel: 1959 (biological model), Fukushima: 1980 (computational model), Altas: 1988, Lecunn: 1989 (Backprop in convnets) Yann LeCun Kunihiko Fukushima Convolutional Neural Networks • A special kind of multi-layer neural networks. • Implicitly extract relevant features. • A feed-forward network that can extract topological properties from an image. • CNNs are also trained with a version of back-propagation algorithm. Connectivity & weight sharing All different weights All different weights Shared weights Convolution layer has much smaller number of parameters by local connection and weight sharing Fully Connected Layer Example: 200x200 image 40K hidden units ~2B parameters!!! - Spatial correlation is local - Waste of resources + we have not enough training samples anyway.. Ranzato 25 Locally Connected Layer Example: 200x200 image 40K hidden units Filter size: 10x10 4M parameters Note: This parameterization is good when input image is registered (e.g., face recognition). Ranzato 26 Locally Connected Layer STATIONARITY? Statistics is similar at different locations Example: 200x200 image 40K hidden units Filter size: 10x10 4M parameters Ranzato 27 Convolutional Layer Share the same parameters across different locations (assuming input is stationary): Convolutions with learned kernels Ranzato 28 Convolution Convolutional Layer Ranzato Convolutional Layer Ranzato Convolutional Layer Ranzato Convolutional Layer Ranzato Convolutional Layer Ranzato Convolutional Layer Ranzato Convolutional Layer Ranzato Convolutional Layer Ranzato Convolutional Layer Ranzato Convolutional Layer Ranzato Convolutional Layer Ranzato Convolutional Layer Ranzato Convolutional Layer Ranzato Convolutional Layer Ranzato Convolutional Layer Ranzato Convolutional Layer Ranzato Convolutional Layer Learn multiple filters. E.g.: 200x200 image 100 Filters Filter size: 10x10 10K parameters Ranzato 46 Convolutional Layers before: output layer input layer hidden layer now: Convolution Layer 32x32x3 image 32 height 32 width 3 depth Convolution Layer 32x32x3 image 5x5x3 filter 32 Convolve the filter with the image i.e. “slide over the image spatially, computing dot products” 32 3 Convolution Layer Filters always extend the full depth of the input volume 32x32x3 image 5x5x3 filter 32 Convolve the filter with the image i.e. “slide over the image spatially, computing dot products” 32 3 Convolution Layer 32x32x3 image 5x5x3 filter 32 1 number: the result of taking a dot product between the filter and a small 5x5x3 chunk of the image 32 (i.e. 5*5*3 = 75-dimensional dot product + bias) 3 Convolution Layer activation map 32x32x3 image 5x5x3 filter 32 28 convolve (slide) over all spatial locations 32 28 3 1 Convolution Layer consider a second, green filter 32x32x3 image activation maps 5x5x3 filter 32 28 convolve (slide) over all spatial locations 32 28 3 1 Convolution Layer For example, if we had 6 5x5 filters, we’ll get 6 separate activation maps: activation maps 32 28 Convolution Layer 32 28 3 6 We stack these up to get a “new image” of size 28x28x6! CNN Preview: ConvNet is a sequence of Convolution Layers, interspersed with activation functions 32 28 CONV, ReLU e.g. 6 5x5x3 32 filters 28 3 6 CNN Preview: ConvNet is a sequence of Convolutional Layers, interspersed with activation functions 32 28 24 …. CONV, CONV, CONV, ReLU ReLU ReLU e.g. 6 e.g. 10 5x5x3 5x5x6 32 filters 28 filters 24 3 6 10 Pooling Layer Let us assume filter is an “eye” detector. Q.: how can we make the detection robust to the exact location of the eye? Ranzato 57 Pooling Layer By “pooling” (e.g., taking max) filter responses at different locations we gain robustness to the exact spatial location of features. Ranzato 58 Pooling Layer - makes the representations smaller and more manageable - operates over each activation map independently: Max Pooling Single depth slice 1 1 2 4 x max pool with 2x2 filters 5 6 7 8 and stride 2 6 8 3 2 1 0 3 4 1 2 3 4 y ConvNets: Typical Stage One stage (zoom) Convol. Pooling courtesy of K. Kavukcuoglu Ranzato 61 Digit classification ImageNet • 1.2 million high-resolution images from ImageNet LSVRC-2010 contest • 1000 different classes (sofmax layer) • NN configuration • NN contains 60 million parameters and 650,000 neurons, • 5 convolutional layers, some of which are followed by max-pooling layers • 3 fully-connected layers Krizhevsky, A., Sutskever, I. and Hinton, G. E. “ImageNet Classification with Deep Convolutional Neural Networks” NIPS 2012: Neural Information Processing Systems, Lake Tahoe, Nevada ImageNet Figure 3: 96 convolutional kernels of size 11×11×3 learned by the first convolutional layer on the 224×224×3 input images. The top 48 kernels were learned on GPU 1 while the bottom 48 kernels were learned on GPU 2. See Section 6.1 for details. Krizhevsky, A., Sutskever, I. and Hinton, G. E. “ImageNet Classification with Deep Convolutional Neural Networks” NIPS 2012: Neural Information Processing Systems, Lake Tahoe, Nevada ImageNet Eight ILSVRC-2010 test images and the five Five ILSVRC-2010 test images in the first labels considered most probable by our model. column. The remaining columns show the six The correct label is written under each image, training images that produce feature vectors
Load more

Recommended publications
  • CSE 152: Computer Vision Manmohan Chandraker
    CSE 152: Computer Vision Manmohan Chandraker Lecture 15: Optimization in CNNs Recap Engineered against learned features Label Convolutional filters are trained in a Dense supervised manner by back-propagating classification error Dense Dense Convolution + pool Label Convolution + pool Classifier Convolution + pool Pooling Convolution + pool Feature extraction Convolution + pool Image Image Jia-Bin Huang and Derek Hoiem, UIUC Two-layer perceptron network Slide credit: Pieter Abeel and Dan Klein Neural networks Non-linearity Activation functions Multi-layer neural network From fully connected to convolutional networks next layer image Convolutional layer Slide: Lazebnik Spatial filtering is convolution Convolutional Neural Networks [Slides credit: Efstratios Gavves] 2D spatial filters Filters over the whole image Weight sharing Insight: Images have similar features at various spatial locations! Key operations in a CNN Feature maps Spatial pooling Non-linearity Convolution (Learned) . Input Image Input Feature Map Source: R. Fergus, Y. LeCun Slide: Lazebnik Convolution as a feature extractor Key operations in a CNN Feature maps Rectified Linear Unit (ReLU) Spatial pooling Non-linearity Convolution (Learned) Input Image Source: R. Fergus, Y. LeCun Slide: Lazebnik Key operations in a CNN Feature maps Spatial pooling Max Non-linearity Convolution (Learned) Input Image Source: R. Fergus, Y. LeCun Slide: Lazebnik Pooling operations • Aggregate multiple values into a single value • Invariance to small transformations • Keep only most important information for next layer • Reduces the size of the next layer • Fewer parameters, faster computations • Observe larger receptive field in next layer • Hierarchically extract more abstract features Key operations in a CNN Feature maps Spatial pooling Non-linearity Convolution (Learned) . Input Image Input Feature Map Source: R.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Convolution
    CS1114 Section 6: Convolution February 27th, 2013 1 Convolution Convolution is an important operation in signal and image processing. Convolution op- erates on two signals (in 1D) or two images (in 2D): you can think of one as the \input" signal (or image), and the other (called the kernel) as a “filter” on the input image, pro- ducing an output image (so convolution takes two images as input and produces a third as output). Convolution is an incredibly important concept in many areas of math and engineering (including computer vision, as we'll see later). Definition. Let's start with 1D convolution (a 1D \image," is also known as a signal, and can be represented by a regular 1D vector in Matlab). Let's call our input vector f and our kernel g, and say that f has length n, and g has length m. The convolution f ∗ g of f and g is defined as: m X (f ∗ g)(i) = g(j) · f(i − j + m=2) j=1 One way to think of this operation is that we're sliding the kernel over the input image. For each position of the kernel, we multiply the overlapping values of the kernel and image together, and add up the results. This sum of products will be the value of the output image at the point in the input image where the kernel is centered. Let's look at a simple example. Suppose our input 1D image is: f = 10 50 60 10 20 40 30 and our kernel is: g = 1=3 1=3 1=3 Let's call the output image h.
    [Show full text]
  • Deep Clustering with Convolutional Autoencoders
    Deep Clustering with Convolutional Autoencoders Xifeng Guo1, Xinwang Liu1, En Zhu1, and Jianping Yin2 1 College of Computer, National University of Defense Technology, Changsha, 410073, China [email protected] 2 State Key Laboratory of High Performance Computing, National University of Defense Technology, Changsha, 410073, China Abstract. Deep clustering utilizes deep neural networks to learn fea- ture representation that is suitable for clustering tasks. Though demon- strating promising performance in various applications, we observe that existing deep clustering algorithms either do not well take advantage of convolutional neural networks or do not considerably preserve the local structure of data generating distribution in the learned feature space. To address this issue, we propose a deep convolutional embedded clus- tering algorithm in this paper. Specifically, we develop a convolutional autoencoders structure to learn embedded features in an end-to-end way. Then, a clustering oriented loss is directly built on embedded features to jointly perform feature refinement and cluster assignment. To avoid feature space being distorted by the clustering loss, we keep the decoder remained which can preserve local structure of data in feature space. In sum, we simultaneously minimize the reconstruction loss of convolutional autoencoders and the clustering loss. The resultant optimization prob- lem can be effectively solved by mini-batch stochastic gradient descent and back-propagation. Experiments on benchmark datasets empirically validate
    [Show full text]
  • Tensorizing Neural Networks
    Tensorizing Neural Networks Alexander Novikov1;4 Dmitry Podoprikhin1 Anton Osokin2 Dmitry Vetrov1;3 1Skolkovo Institute of Science and Technology, Moscow, Russia 2INRIA, SIERRA project-team, Paris, France 3National Research University Higher School of Economics, Moscow, Russia 4Institute of Numerical Mathematics of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, Russia [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] Abstract Deep neural networks currently demonstrate state-of-the-art performance in sev- eral domains. At the same time, models of this class are very demanding in terms of computational resources. In particular, a large amount of memory is required by commonly used fully-connected layers, making it hard to use the models on low-end devices and stopping the further increase of the model size. In this paper we convert the dense weight matrices of the fully-connected layers to the Tensor Train [17] format such that the number of parameters is reduced by a huge factor and at the same time the expressive power of the layer is preserved. In particular, for the Very Deep VGG networks [21] we report the compression factor of the dense weight matrix of a fully-connected layer up to 200000 times leading to the compression factor of the whole network up to 7 times. 1 Introduction Deep neural networks currently demonstrate state-of-the-art performance in many domains of large- scale machine learning, such as computer vision, speech recognition, text processing, etc. These advances have become possible because of algorithmic advances, large amounts of available data, and modern hardware.
    [Show full text]
  • Fully Convolutional Mesh Autoencoder Using Efficient Spatially Varying Kernels
    Fully Convolutional Mesh Autoencoder using Efficient Spatially Varying Kernels Yi Zhou∗ Chenglei Wu Adobe Research Facebook Reality Labs Zimo Li Chen Cao Yuting Ye University of Southern California Facebook Reality Labs Facebook Reality Labs Jason Saragih Hao Li Yaser Sheikh Facebook Reality Labs Pinscreen Facebook Reality Labs Abstract Learning latent representations of registered meshes is useful for many 3D tasks. Techniques have recently shifted to neural mesh autoencoders. Although they demonstrate higher precision than traditional methods, they remain unable to capture fine-grained deformations. Furthermore, these methods can only be applied to a template-specific surface mesh, and is not applicable to more general meshes, like tetrahedrons and non-manifold meshes. While more general graph convolution methods can be employed, they lack performance in reconstruction precision and require higher memory usage. In this paper, we propose a non-template-specific fully convolutional mesh autoencoder for arbitrary registered mesh data. It is enabled by our novel convolution and (un)pooling operators learned with globally shared weights and locally varying coefficients which can efficiently capture the spatially varying contents presented by irregular mesh connections. Our model outperforms state-of-the-art methods on reconstruction accuracy. In addition, the latent codes of our network are fully localized thanks to the fully convolutional structure, and thus have much higher interpolation capability than many traditional 3D mesh generation models. 1 Introduction arXiv:2006.04325v2 [cs.CV] 21 Oct 2020 Learning latent representations for registered meshes 2, either from performance capture or physical simulation, is a core component for many 3D tasks, ranging from compressing and reconstruction to animation and simulation.
    [Show full text]
  • Geometrical Aspects of Statistical Learning Theory
    Geometrical Aspects of Statistical Learning Theory Vom Fachbereich Informatik der Technischen Universit¨at Darmstadt genehmigte Dissertation zur Erlangung des akademischen Grades Doctor rerum naturalium (Dr. rer. nat.) vorgelegt von Dipl.-Phys. Matthias Hein aus Esslingen am Neckar Prufungskommission:¨ Vorsitzender: Prof. Dr. B. Schiele Erstreferent: Prof. Dr. T. Hofmann Korreferent : Prof. Dr. B. Sch¨olkopf Tag der Einreichung: 30.9.2005 Tag der Disputation: 9.11.2005 Darmstadt, 2005 Hochschulkennziffer: D17 Abstract Geometry plays an important role in modern statistical learning theory, and many different aspects of geometry can be found in this fast developing field. This thesis addresses some of these aspects. A large part of this work will be concerned with so called manifold methods, which have recently attracted a lot of interest. The key point is that for a lot of real-world data sets it is natural to assume that the data lies on a low-dimensional submanifold of a potentially high-dimensional Euclidean space. We develop a rigorous and quite general framework for the estimation and ap- proximation of some geometric structures and other quantities of this submanifold, using certain corresponding structures on neighborhood graphs built from random samples of that submanifold. Another part of this thesis deals with the generalizati- on of the maximal margin principle to arbitrary metric spaces. This generalization follows quite naturally by changing the viewpoint on the well-known support vector machines (SVM). It can be shown that the SVM can be seen as an algorithm which applies the maximum margin principle to a subclass of metric spaces. The motivati- on to consider the generalization to arbitrary metric spaces arose by the observation that in practice the condition for the applicability of the SVM is rather difficult to check for a given metric.
    [Show full text]
  • Pre-Training Cnns Using Convolutional Autoencoders
    Pre-Training CNNs Using Convolutional Autoencoders Maximilian Kohlbrenner Russell Hofmann TU Berlin TU Berlin [email protected] [email protected] Sabbir Ahmmed Youssef Kashef TU Berlin TU Berlin [email protected] [email protected] Abstract Despite convolutional neural networks being the state of the art in almost all computer vision tasks, their training remains a difficult task. Unsupervised rep- resentation learning using a convolutional autoencoder can be used to initialize network weights and has been shown to improve test accuracy after training. We reproduce previous results using this approach and successfully apply it to the difficult Extended Cohn-Kanade dataset for which labels are extremely sparse but additional unlabeled data is available for unsupervised use. 1 Introduction A lot of progress has been made in the field of artificial neural networks in recent years and as a result most computer vision tasks today are best solved using this approach. However, the training of deep neural networks still remains a difficult problem and results are highly dependent on the model initialization (local minima). During a classification task, a Convolutional Neural Network (CNN) first learns a new data representation using its convolution layers as feature extractors and then uses several fully-connected layers for decision-making. While the representation after the convolutional layers is usually optizimed for classification, some learned features might be more general and also useful outside of this specific task. Instead of directly optimizing for a good class prediction, one can therefore start by focussing on the intermediate goal of learning a good data representation before beginning to work on the classification problem.
    [Show full text]
  • Universal Invariant and Equivariant Graph Neural Networks
    Universal Invariant and Equivariant Graph Neural Networks Nicolas Keriven Gabriel Peyré École Normale Supérieure CNRS and École Normale Supérieure Paris, France Paris, France [email protected] [email protected] Abstract Graph Neural Networks (GNN) come in many flavors, but should always be either invariant (permutation of the nodes of the input graph does not affect the output) or equivariant (permutation of the input permutes the output). In this paper, we consider a specific class of invariant and equivariant networks, for which we prove new universality theorems. More precisely, we consider networks with a single hidden layer, obtained by summing channels formed by applying an equivariant linear operator, a pointwise non-linearity, and either an invariant or equivariant linear output layer. Recently, Maron et al. (2019b) showed that by allowing higher- order tensorization inside the network, universal invariant GNNs can be obtained. As a first contribution, we propose an alternative proof of this result, which relies on the Stone-Weierstrass theorem for algebra of real-valued functions. Our main contribution is then an extension of this result to the equivariant case, which appears in many practical applications but has been less studied from a theoretical point of view. The proof relies on a new generalized Stone-Weierstrass theorem for algebra of equivariant functions, which is of independent interest. Additionally, unlike many previous works that consider a fixed number of nodes, our results show that a GNN defined by a single set of parameters can approximate uniformly well a function defined on graphs of varying size. 1 Introduction Designing Neural Networks (NN) to exhibit some invariance or equivariance to group operations is a central problem in machine learning (Shawe-Taylor, 1993).
    [Show full text]
  • Understanding 1D Convolutional Neural Networks Using Multiclass Time-Varying Signals Ravisutha Sakrepatna Srinivasamurthy Clemson University, [email protected]
    Clemson University TigerPrints All Theses Theses 8-2018 Understanding 1D Convolutional Neural Networks Using Multiclass Time-Varying Signals Ravisutha Sakrepatna Srinivasamurthy Clemson University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://tigerprints.clemson.edu/all_theses Recommended Citation Srinivasamurthy, Ravisutha Sakrepatna, "Understanding 1D Convolutional Neural Networks Using Multiclass Time-Varying Signals" (2018). All Theses. 2911. https://tigerprints.clemson.edu/all_theses/2911 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Theses at TigerPrints. It has been accepted for inclusion in All Theses by an authorized administrator of TigerPrints. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Understanding 1D Convolutional Neural Networks Using Multiclass Time-Varying Signals A Thesis Presented to the Graduate School of Clemson University In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Science Computer Engineering by Ravisutha Sakrepatna Srinivasamurthy August 2018 Accepted by: Dr. Robert J. Schalkoff, Committee Chair Dr. Harlan B. Russell Dr. Ilya Safro Abstract In recent times, we have seen a surge in usage of Convolutional Neural Networks to solve all kinds of problems - from handwriting recognition to object recognition and from natural language processing to detecting exoplanets. Though the technology has been around for quite some time, there is still a lot of scope to do research on what's really happening 'under the hood' in a CNN model. CNNs are considered to be black boxes which learn something from complex data and provides desired results. In this thesis, an effort has been made to explain what exactly CNNs are learning by training the network with carefully selected input data.
    [Show full text]
  • Convolution Network with Custom Loss Function for the Denoising of Low SNR Raman Spectra †
    sensors Article Convolution Network with Custom Loss Function for the Denoising of Low SNR Raman Spectra † Sinead Barton 1 , Salaheddin Alakkari 2, Kevin O’Dwyer 1 , Tomas Ward 2 and Bryan Hennelly 1,* 1 Department of Electronic Engineering, Maynooth University, W23 F2H6 Maynooth, County Kildare, Ireland; [email protected] (S.B.); [email protected] (K.O.) 2 Insight Centre for Data Analytics, School of Computing, Dublin City University, Dublin D 09, Ireland; [email protected] (S.A.); [email protected] (T.W.) * Correspondence: [email protected] † The algorithm presented in this paper may be accessed through github at the following link: https://github.com/bryanhennelly/CNN-Denoiser-SENSORS (accessed on 5 July 2021). Abstract: Raman spectroscopy is a powerful diagnostic tool in biomedical science, whereby different disease groups can be classified based on subtle differences in the cell or tissue spectra. A key component in the classification of Raman spectra is the application of multi-variate statistical models. However, Raman scattering is a weak process, resulting in a trade-off between acquisition times and signal-to-noise ratios, which has limited its more widespread adoption as a clinical tool. Typically denoising is applied to the Raman spectrum from a biological sample to improve the signal-to- noise ratio before application of statistical modeling. A popular method for performing this is Citation: Barton, S.; Alakkari, S.; Savitsky–Golay filtering. Such an algorithm is difficult to tailor so that it can strike a balance between O’Dwyer, K.; Ward, T.; Hennelly, B. denoising and excessive smoothing of spectral peaks, the characteristics of which are critically Convolution Network with Custom important for classification purposes.
    [Show full text]
  • Fighting Deepfake by Exposing the Convolutional Traces on Images
    Received August 6, 2020, accepted September 1, 2020, date of publication September 9, 2020, date of current version September 22, 2020. Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/ACCESS.2020.3023037 Fighting Deepfake by Exposing the Convolutional Traces on Images LUCA GUARNERA 1,2, (Student Member, IEEE), OLIVER GIUDICE 1, AND SEBASTIANO BATTIATO 1,2, (Senior Member, IEEE) 1Department of Mathematics and Computer Science, University of Catania, 95124 Catania, Italy 2iCTLab s.r.l. Spinoff of University of Catania, 95124 Catania, Italy Corresponding author: Luca Guarnera ([email protected]) This work was supported by iCTLab s.r.l. - Spin-off of University of Catania. ABSTRACT Advances in Artificial Intelligence and Image Processing are changing the way people interacts with digital images and video. Widespread mobile apps like FACEAPP make use of the most advanced Generative Adversarial Networks (GAN) to produce extreme transformations on human face photos such gender swap, aging, etc. The results are utterly realistic and extremely easy to be exploited even for non-experienced users. This kind of media object took the name of Deepfake and raised a new challenge in the multimedia forensics field: the Deepfake detection challenge. Indeed, discriminating a Deepfake from a real image could be a difficult task even for human eyes but recent works are trying to apply the same technology used for generating images for discriminating them with preliminary good results but with many limitations: employed Convolutional Neural Networks are not so robust, demonstrate to be specific to the context and tend to extract semantics from images. In this paper, a new approach aimed to extract a Deepfake fingerprint from images is proposed.
    [Show full text]
  • Arxiv:2105.03322V1 [Cs.CL] 7 May 2021
    Are Pre-trained Convolutions Better than Pre-trained Transformers? Yi Tay Mostafa Dehghani Google Research Google Research, Brain Team Mountain View, California Amsterdam, Netherlands [email protected] [email protected] Jai Gupta Vamsi Aribandi∗ Dara Bahri Google Research Google Research Google Research Mountain View, California Mountain View, California Mountain View, California [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] Zhen Qin Donald Metzler Google Research Google Research Mountain View, California Mountain View, California [email protected] [email protected] Abstract 2015; Chidambaram et al., 2018; Liu et al., 2020; In the era of pre-trained language models, Qiu et al., 2020), modern pre-trained language mod- Transformers are the de facto choice of model eling started with models like ELMo (Peters et al., architectures. While recent research has 2018) and CoVE (McCann et al., 2017) which are shown promise in entirely convolutional, or based on recurrent (e.g. LSTM (Hochreiter and CNN, architectures, they have not been ex- Schmidhuber, 1997)) architectures. Although they plored using the pre-train-fine-tune paradigm. were successful, research using these architectures In the context of language models, are con- dwindled as Transformers stole the hearts of the volutional models competitive to Transform- NLP community, having, possibly implicitly, been ers when pre-trained? This paper investigates this research question and presents several in- perceived as a unequivocal advancement over its teresting findings. Across an extensive set of predecessors. experiments on 8 datasets/tasks, we find that Recent work demonstrates the promise of en- CNN-based pre-trained models are competi- tirely convolution-based models (Wu et al., 2019; tive and outperform their Transformer counter- Gehring et al., 2017) and questions the necessity of part in certain scenarios, albeit with caveats.
    [Show full text]