Deep Learning Explained What It Is, and How It Can Deliver Business Value to Your Organization

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Load more

DEEP LEARNING EXPLAINED WHAT IT IS, AND HOW IT CAN DELIVER BUSINESS VALUE TO YOUR ORGANIZATION CHAPTER 1 | ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE What is the difference between artificial intelligence, machine learning, and deep learning? NVIDIA DEEP LEARNING | 2 ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE IS... THE FUTURE SCIENCE FICTION PART OF OUR EVERYDAY LIVES NVIDIA DEEP LEARNING | 3 Since an early flush of optimism in the 1950s, smaller subsets of artificial intelligence – the first machine learning, then deep learning, a subset of machine learning – have created ever larger disruptions. When Google DeepMind’s AlphaGo later, and finally deep learning – which program defeated South Korean Master is driving today’s AI explosion – fitting Lee Se-dol in the board game ‘Go’ this inside both. year, the terms AI, machine learning, and deep learning were used in the Since an early flush of optimism in media to describe how DeepMind won. the 1950s, smaller subsets of artificial And all three are part of the reason why intelligence – the first machine AlphaGo trounced Lee Se-Dol. But they learning, then deep learning, a subset are not the same things. of machine learning – have created ever larger disruptions. The easiest way to think of their relationship is to visualize them as concentric circles with AI -- the idea that came first – the largest, then machine learning – which blossomed NVIDIA DEEP LEARNING | 4 The easiest way to think of their relationship is to visualize them as concentric circles... ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE Early artificial intelligence stirs excitement. MACHINE LEARNING Machine learning begins to flourish. DEEP LEARNING Deep learning breakthroughs drive AI boom. 000101010010101100100 110101101011010010110 001011010101001010111 101010100101010101011 110101011001010101010 010110100101010101010 1950’s 1960’s 1970’s 1980’s 1990’s 2000’s 2010’s NVIDIA DEEP LEARNING | 5 AI HAS BEEN PART OF OUR IMAGINATIONS AND SIMMERING IN RESEARCH LABS … since a handful of computer scientists Over the past few years artificial rallied around the term at the intelligence (AI) has exploded, and Dartmouth Conferences in 1956 and especially since 2015. Much of that has birthed the field of AI. to do with the wide availability of GPUs that make parallel processing ever In the decades since, AI has faster, cheaper, and more powerful. alternatively been heralded as the key to our civilization’s brightest future, and It also has to do with the simultaneous tossed on technology’s trash heap as one-two punch of practically infinite a harebrained notion of over-reaching storage and a flood of data of every propeller-heads. stripe (that whole Big Data movement) – images, text, transactions, mapping Frankly, until 2012, it was a bit of both. data, you name it. NVIDIA DEEP LEARNING | 6 Computer scientists have moved from something of a bust – until 2012 – to a boom that has unleased applications used by hundreds of millions of people every day. 19,439 Higher Education Development Tools Internet 1,549 Automotive Finance Government Life Science 2014 2016 Other ORGANIZATIONS ENGAGED WITH NVIDIA ON DEEP LEARNING READ Ovum’s Report on how AI solutions can be applied to today’s business use cases NVIDIA DEEP LEARNING | 7 Back in that summer of ‘56 conference the dream of those AI pioneers was to construct complex – enabled by emerging computers – that possessed the same characteristics of human intelligence. This is the concept that we of as “General Computer programs that played checkers AI” – fabulous machines that have all of were among the earliest our senses (maybe even more), all our examples of Artificial reason, and think just like we do. Intelligence, stirring an early wave of excitement You’ve seen these machines endlessly in in the 1950s. movies as friends – C3PO – and foe – The Terminator. General AI machines have remained in the movies and science fiction novels for good reason; we can’t pull it off, at least not yet. NVIDIA DEEP LEARNING | 8 What we can do falls into Machine Learning “trained” using large the concept of “Narrow amounts of data and AI.” Technologies that are at its most basic algorithms that give it able to perform specific is the practice of the ability to learn how to tasks as well as, or better using algorithms perform the task. than, we humans can. Examples of narrow AI to parse data, Machine learning came are things such as image learn from it, directly from minds of the classification on a service early AI crowd, and the like Pinterest and face and then make a algorithmic approaches recognition on Facebook. determination or over the years included decision tree learning, Those are examples of prediction about inductive logic Narrow AI in practice. something in the programming, clustering, These technologies reinforcement learning, exhibit some facets of world. and Bayesian networks human intelligence. among others. So rather than hand- But how? Where does coding software that intelligence. But routines with a specific how? Where does that set of instructions to intelligence come from? accomplish a particular That gets us to the next task, the machine is circle, Machine Learning. NVIDIA DEEP LEARNING | 9 ONE OF THE VERY BEST APPLICATIONS AREAS FOR MACHINE LEARNING FOR MANY YEARS WAS COMPUTER VISION though it still required a great deal part of it. There’s a reason computer of hand-coding to get the job done. vision and image detection didn’t come People would go in and write hand- close to rivaling humans until very coded classifiers like edge detection recently, it was too brittle and too prone filters so the program could identify to error. where an object started and stopped; shape detection to determine if it had Time, and the right learning algorithms eight sides; a classifier to recognize the made all the difference. letters “S-T-O-P.” From all these hand-coded classifiers they would develop algorithms to make sense of the image and “learn” to determine whether it was a stop sign. Good, but not mind-bendingly great. Especially on a foggy day when the sign isn’t perfectly visible, or a tree obscures NVIDIA DEEP LEARNING | 10 Deep Learning – A Technique for Implementing Machine Learning NVIDIA DEEP LEARNING | 11 between the neurons. final output is produced. But, unlike a brain where any neuron can connect to Each neuron assigns a any other neuron within a weighting to its input – certain physical distance, how correct or incorrect these artificial neural it is relative to the task networks have discrete of being performed. layers, connections, The final output is then and directions of data determined by the total propagation. of those weightings. So think of our stop sign You might, for example, example. Attributes of a Another algorithmic take an image, chop it stop sign are chopped up approach from the early up into a bunch of tiles and “examined” by the machine – learning that are inputted into the neurons – its octagonal crowd, Artificial Neural first layer of the neural shape, its fire-engine Networks, came and network. In the first layer red color, its distinctive mostly went over individual neurons, then letters, its traffic sign the decades. Neural passes the data to a size, and its motion or networks are inspired by second layer. The second lack thereof. our understanding of the layer of neurons does its biology of our brains – all tasks, and so on, until, The neural network’s task those interconnections the final layer and the is to conclude whether NVIDIA DEEP LEARNING | 12 this is a stop sign or since the earliest days ...it wasn’t until not. It come up with a of AI, and had produced “probability vector,” really very little in the way GPUs were a highly educated guess, of “intelligence.” The based on the weightings. problem was even deployed in the In our example the the most basic neural effort that the system might be 86% networks were very confident the image is a computationally promise was stop sign, 7% it’s a speed intensive, it just wasn’t realized. limit sign, and 5% it’s a a practical approach. kite stuck in a tree, and Still, a small heretical so on – and the network research group led by architecture then tells the Geoffrey Hinton at the neural network whether University of Toronto kept its right or not. at it, finally parallelizing the algorithms for Even this example is supercomputers to run getting ahead of itself, and proving the concept, because until recently but it wasn’t until GPUs neural networks were were deployed in the all but shunned by the effort that the promise AI research community. was realized. They had been around NVIDIA DEEP LEARNING | 13 If we go back again to our stop sign has taught itself what a stop sign looks example, chances are very good that like; or your mother’s face in the case as the network is getting tuned or of Facebook; or a cat, which is what “trained” it’s coming up with wrong Andrew Ng did in 2012 at Google. answers – a lot. What it needs is training. Ng’s breakthrough was to take these neural networks, and essentially make It needs to see hundreds of thousands, them huge, increase the layers and even millions of images, until the the neurons, and then run massive weightings of the neuron inputs are amounts of data through the system to tuned so precisely that it gets the train it. answer right practically every time – for or no fog, sun or rain. It’s at that point that the neural network NVIDIA DEEP LEARNING | 14 In Ng’s case it was images from 10 million YouTube videos. Ng put the “deep” in deep learning, which describes all the layers in these neural networks.
Recommended publications
  • Backpropagation and Deep Learning in the Brain

    Backpropagation and Deep Learning in the Brain

    Backpropagation and Deep Learning in the Brain Simons Institute -- Computational Theories of the Brain 2018 Timothy Lillicrap DeepMind, UCL With: Sergey Bartunov, Adam Santoro, Jordan Guerguiev, Blake Richards, Luke Marris, Daniel Cownden, Colin Akerman, Douglas Tweed, Geoffrey Hinton The “credit assignment” problem The solution in artificial networks: backprop Credit assignment by backprop works well in practice and shows up in virtually all of the state-of-the-art supervised, unsupervised, and reinforcement learning algorithms. Why Isn’t Backprop “Biologically Plausible”? Why Isn’t Backprop “Biologically Plausible”? Neuroscience Evidence for Backprop in the Brain? A spectrum of credit assignment algorithms: A spectrum of credit assignment algorithms: A spectrum of credit assignment algorithms: How to convince a neuroscientist that the cortex is learning via [something like] backprop - To convince a machine learning researcher, an appeal to variance in gradient estimates might be enough. - But this is rarely enough to convince a neuroscientist. - So what lines of argument help? How to convince a neuroscientist that the cortex is learning via [something like] backprop - What do I mean by “something like backprop”?: - That learning is achieved across multiple layers by sending information from neurons closer to the output back to “earlier” layers to help compute their synaptic updates. How to convince a neuroscientist that the cortex is learning via [something like] backprop 1. Feedback connections in cortex are ubiquitous and modify the
  • Artificial Intelligence in Health Care: the Hope, the Hype, the Promise, the Peril

    Artificial Intelligence in Health Care: the Hope, the Hype, the Promise, the Peril

    Artificial Intelligence in Health Care: The Hope, the Hype, the Promise, the Peril Michael Matheny, Sonoo Thadaney Israni, Mahnoor Ahmed, and Danielle Whicher, Editors WASHINGTON, DC NAM.EDU PREPUBLICATION COPY - Uncorrected Proofs NATIONAL ACADEMY OF MEDICINE • 500 Fifth Street, NW • WASHINGTON, DC 20001 NOTICE: This publication has undergone peer review according to procedures established by the National Academy of Medicine (NAM). Publication by the NAM worthy of public attention, but does not constitute endorsement of conclusions and recommendationssignifies that it is the by productthe NAM. of The a carefully views presented considered in processthis publication and is a contributionare those of individual contributors and do not represent formal consensus positions of the authors’ organizations; the NAM; or the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data to Come Copyright 2019 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America. Suggested citation: Matheny, M., S. Thadaney Israni, M. Ahmed, and D. Whicher, Editors. 2019. Artificial Intelligence in Health Care: The Hope, the Hype, the Promise, the Peril. NAM Special Publication. Washington, DC: National Academy of Medicine. PREPUBLICATION COPY - Uncorrected Proofs “Knowing is not enough; we must apply. Willing is not enough; we must do.” --GOETHE PREPUBLICATION COPY - Uncorrected Proofs ABOUT THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF MEDICINE The National Academy of Medicine is one of three Academies constituting the Nation- al Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (the National Academies). The Na- tional Academies provide independent, objective analysis and advice to the nation and conduct other activities to solve complex problems and inform public policy decisions.
  • AI Computer Wraps up 4-1 Victory Against Human Champion Nature Reports from Alphago's Victory in Seoul

    AI Computer Wraps up 4-1 Victory Against Human Champion Nature Reports from Alphago's Victory in Seoul

    The Go Files: AI computer wraps up 4-1 victory against human champion Nature reports from AlphaGo's victory in Seoul. Tanguy Chouard 15 March 2016 SEOUL, SOUTH KOREA Google DeepMind Lee Sedol, who has lost 4-1 to AlphaGo. Tanguy Chouard, an editor with Nature, saw Google-DeepMind’s AI system AlphaGo defeat a human professional for the first time last year at the ancient board game Go. This week, he is watching top professional Lee Sedol take on AlphaGo, in Seoul, for a $1 million prize. It’s all over at the Four Seasons Hotel in Seoul, where this morning AlphaGo wrapped up a 4-1 victory over Lee Sedol — incidentally, earning itself and its creators an honorary '9-dan professional' degree from the Korean Baduk Association. After winning the first three games, Google-DeepMind's computer looked impregnable. But the last two games may have revealed some weaknesses in its makeup. Game four totally changed the Go world’s view on AlphaGo’s dominance because it made it clear that the computer can 'bug' — or at least play very poor moves when on the losing side. It was obvious that Lee felt under much less pressure than in game three. And he adopted a different style, one based on taking large amounts of territory early on rather than immediately going for ‘street fighting’ such as making threats to capture stones. This style – called ‘amashi’ – seems to have paid off, because on move 78, Lee produced a play that somehow slipped under AlphaGo’s radar. David Silver, a scientist at DeepMind who's been leading the development of AlphaGo, said the program estimated its probability as 1 in 10,000.
  • The Deep Learning Revolution and Its Implications for Computer Architecture and Chip Design

    The Deep Learning Revolution and Its Implications for Computer Architecture and Chip Design

    The Deep Learning Revolution and Its Implications for Computer Architecture and Chip Design Jeffrey Dean Google Research [email protected] Abstract The past decade has seen a remarkable series of advances in machine learning, and in particular deep learning approaches based on artificial neural networks, to improve our abilities to build more accurate systems across a broad range of areas, including computer vision, speech recognition, language translation, and natural language understanding tasks. This paper is a companion paper to a keynote talk at the 2020 International Solid-State Circuits Conference (ISSCC) discussing some of the advances in machine learning, and their implications on the kinds of computational devices we need to build, especially in the post-Moore’s Law-era. It also discusses some of the ways that machine learning may also be able to help with some aspects of the circuit design process. Finally, it provides a sketch of at least one interesting direction towards much larger-scale multi-task models that are sparsely activated and employ much more dynamic, example- and task-based routing than the machine learning models of today. Introduction The past decade has seen a remarkable series of advances in machine learning (ML), and in particular deep learning approaches based on artificial neural networks, to improve our abilities to build more accurate systems across a broad range of areas [LeCun et al. 2015]. Major areas of significant advances ​ ​ include computer vision [Krizhevsky et al. 2012, Szegedy et al. 2015, He et al. 2016, Real et al. 2017, Tan ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ and Le 2019], speech recognition [Hinton et al.
  • ARCHITECTS of INTELLIGENCE for Xiaoxiao, Elaine, Colin, and Tristan ARCHITECTS of INTELLIGENCE

    ARCHITECTS of INTELLIGENCE for Xiaoxiao, Elaine, Colin, and Tristan ARCHITECTS of INTELLIGENCE

    MARTIN FORD ARCHITECTS OF INTELLIGENCE For Xiaoxiao, Elaine, Colin, and Tristan ARCHITECTS OF INTELLIGENCE THE TRUTH ABOUT AI FROM THE PEOPLE BUILDING IT MARTIN FORD ARCHITECTS OF INTELLIGENCE Copyright © 2018 Packt Publishing All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, without the prior written permission of the publisher, except in the case of brief quotations embedded in critical articles or reviews. Every effort has been made in the preparation of this book to ensure the accuracy of the information presented. However, the information contained in this book is sold without warranty, either express or implied. Neither the author, nor Packt Publishing or its dealers and distributors, will be held liable for any damages caused or alleged to have been caused directly or indirectly by this book. Packt Publishing has endeavored to provide trademark information about all of the companies and products mentioned in this book by the appropriate use of capitals. However, Packt Publishing cannot guarantee the accuracy of this information. Acquisition Editors: Ben Renow-Clarke Project Editor: Radhika Atitkar Content Development Editor: Alex Sorrentino Proofreader: Safis Editing Presentation Designer: Sandip Tadge Cover Designer: Clare Bowyer Production Editor: Amit Ramadas Marketing Manager: Rajveer Samra Editorial Director: Dominic Shakeshaft First published: November 2018 Production reference: 2201118 Published by Packt Publishing Ltd. Livery Place 35 Livery Street Birmingham B3 2PB, UK ISBN 978-1-78913-151-2 www.packt.com Contents Introduction ........................................................................ 1 A Brief Introduction to the Vocabulary of Artificial Intelligence .......10 How AI Systems Learn ........................................................11 Yoshua Bengio .....................................................................17 Stuart J.
  • Deep Learning Architectures for Sequence Processing

    Deep Learning Architectures for Sequence Processing

    Speech and Language Processing. Daniel Jurafsky & James H. Martin. Copyright © 2021. All rights reserved. Draft of September 21, 2021. CHAPTER Deep Learning Architectures 9 for Sequence Processing Time will explain. Jane Austen, Persuasion Language is an inherently temporal phenomenon. Spoken language is a sequence of acoustic events over time, and we comprehend and produce both spoken and written language as a continuous input stream. The temporal nature of language is reflected in the metaphors we use; we talk of the flow of conversations, news feeds, and twitter streams, all of which emphasize that language is a sequence that unfolds in time. This temporal nature is reflected in some of the algorithms we use to process lan- guage. For example, the Viterbi algorithm applied to HMM part-of-speech tagging, proceeds through the input a word at a time, carrying forward information gleaned along the way. Yet other machine learning approaches, like those we’ve studied for sentiment analysis or other text classification tasks don’t have this temporal nature – they assume simultaneous access to all aspects of their input. The feedforward networks of Chapter 7 also assumed simultaneous access, al- though they also had a simple model for time. Recall that we applied feedforward networks to language modeling by having them look only at a fixed-size window of words, and then sliding this window over the input, making independent predictions along the way. Fig. 9.1, reproduced from Chapter 7, shows a neural language model with window size 3 predicting what word follows the input for all the. Subsequent words are predicted by sliding the window forward a word at a time.
  • Unsupervised Speech Representation Learning Using Wavenet Autoencoders Jan Chorowski, Ron J

    Unsupervised Speech Representation Learning Using Wavenet Autoencoders Jan Chorowski, Ron J

    1 Unsupervised speech representation learning using WaveNet autoencoders Jan Chorowski, Ron J. Weiss, Samy Bengio, Aaron¨ van den Oord Abstract—We consider the task of unsupervised extraction speaker gender and identity, from phonetic content, properties of meaningful latent representations of speech by applying which are consistent with internal representations learned autoencoding neural networks to speech waveforms. The goal by speech recognizers [13], [14]. Such representations are is to learn a representation able to capture high level semantic content from the signal, e.g. phoneme identities, while being desired in several tasks, such as low resource automatic speech invariant to confounding low level details in the signal such as recognition (ASR), where only a small amount of labeled the underlying pitch contour or background noise. Since the training data is available. In such scenario, limited amounts learned representation is tuned to contain only phonetic content, of data may be sufficient to learn an acoustic model on the we resort to using a high capacity WaveNet decoder to infer representation discovered without supervision, but insufficient information discarded by the encoder from previous samples. Moreover, the behavior of autoencoder models depends on the to learn the acoustic model and a data representation in a fully kind of constraint that is applied to the latent representation. supervised manner [15], [16]. We compare three variants: a simple dimensionality reduction We focus on representations learned with autoencoders bottleneck, a Gaussian Variational Autoencoder (VAE), and a applied to raw waveforms and spectrogram features and discrete Vector Quantized VAE (VQ-VAE). We analyze the quality investigate the quality of learned representations on LibriSpeech of learned representations in terms of speaker independence, the ability to predict phonetic content, and the ability to accurately re- [17].
  • In-Datacenter Performance Analysis of a Tensor Processing Unit

    In-Datacenter Performance Analysis of a Tensor Processing Unit

    In-Datacenter Performance Analysis of a Tensor Processing Unit Presented by Josh Fried Background: Machine Learning Neural Networks: ● Multi Layer Perceptrons ● Recurrent Neural Networks (mostly LSTMs) ● Convolutional Neural Networks Synapse - each edge, has a weight Neuron - each node, sums weights and uses non-linear activation function over sum Propagating inputs through a layer of the NN is a matrix multiplication followed by an activation Background: Machine Learning Two phases: ● Training (offline) ○ relaxed deadlines ○ large batches to amortize costs of loading weights from DRAM ○ well suited to GPUs ○ Usually uses floating points ● Inference (online) ○ strict deadlines: 7-10ms at Google for some workloads ■ limited possibility for batching because of deadlines ○ Facebook uses CPUs for inference (last class) ○ Can use lower precision integers (faster/smaller/more efficient) ML Workloads @ Google 90% of ML workload time at Google spent on MLPs and LSTMs, despite broader focus on CNNs RankBrain (search) Inception (image classification), Google Translate AlphaGo (and others) Background: Hardware Trends End of Moore’s Law & Dennard Scaling ● Moore - transistor density is doubling every two years ● Dennard - power stays proportional to chip area as transistors shrink Machine Learning causing a huge growth in demand for compute ● 2006: Excess CPU capacity in datacenters is enough ● 2013: Projected 3 minutes per-day per-user of speech recognition ○ will require doubling datacenter compute capacity! Google’s Answer: Custom ASIC Goal: Build a chip that improves cost-performance for NN inference What are the main costs? Capital Costs Operational Costs (power bill!) TPU (V1) Design Goals Short design-deployment cycle: ~15 months! Plugs in to PCIe slot on existing servers Accelerates matrix multiplication operations Uses 8-bit integer operations instead of floating point How does the TPU work? CISC instructions, issued by host.
  • Machine Learning V/S Deep Learning

    Machine Learning V/S Deep Learning

    International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET) e-ISSN: 2395-0056 Volume: 06 Issue: 02 | Feb 2019 www.irjet.net p-ISSN: 2395-0072 Machine Learning v/s Deep Learning Sachin Krishan Khanna Department of Computer Science Engineering, Students of Computer Science Engineering, Chandigarh Group of Colleges, PinCode: 140307, Mohali, India ---------------------------------------------------------------------------***--------------------------------------------------------------------------- ABSTRACT - This is research paper on a brief comparison and summary about the machine learning and deep learning. This comparison on these two learning techniques was done as there was lot of confusion about these two learning techniques. Nowadays these techniques are used widely in IT industry to make some projects or to solve problems or to maintain large amount of data. This paper includes the comparison of two techniques and will also tell about the future aspects of the learning techniques. Keywords: ML, DL, AI, Neural Networks, Supervised & Unsupervised learning, Algorithms. INTRODUCTION As the technology is getting advanced day by day, now we are trying to make a machine to work like a human so that we don’t have to make any effort to solve any problem or to do any heavy stuff. To make a machine work like a human, the machine need to learn how to do work, for this machine learning technique is used and deep learning is used to help a machine to solve a real-time problem. They both have algorithms which work on these issues. With the rapid growth of this IT sector, this industry needs speed, accuracy to meet their targets. With these learning algorithms industry can meet their requirements and these new techniques will provide industry a different way to solve problems.
  • Fast Neural Network Emulation of Dynamical Systems for Computer Animation

    Fast Neural Network Emulation of Dynamical Systems for Computer Animation

    Fast Neural Network Emulation of Dynamical Systems for Computer Animation Radek Grzeszczuk 1 Demetri Terzopoulos 2 Geoffrey Hinton 2 1 Intel Corporation 2 University of Toronto Microcomputer Research Lab Department of Computer Science 2200 Mission College Blvd. 10 King's College Road Santa Clara, CA 95052, USA Toronto, ON M5S 3H5, Canada Abstract Computer animation through the numerical simulation of physics-based graphics models offers unsurpassed realism, but it can be computation­ ally demanding. This paper demonstrates the possibility of replacing the numerical simulation of nontrivial dynamic models with a dramatically more efficient "NeuroAnimator" that exploits neural networks. Neu­ roAnimators are automatically trained off-line to emulate physical dy­ namics through the observation of physics-based models in action. De­ pending on the model, its neural network emulator can yield physically realistic animation one or two orders of magnitude faster than conven­ tional numerical simulation. We demonstrate NeuroAnimators for a va­ riety of physics-based models. 1 Introduction Animation based on physical principles has been an influential trend in computer graphics for over a decade (see, e.g., [1, 2, 3]). This is not only due to the unsurpassed realism that physics-based techniques offer. In conjunction with suitable control and constraint mechanisms, physical models also facilitate the production of copious quantities of real­ istic animation in a highly automated fashion. Physics-based animation techniques are beginning to find their way into high-end commercial systems. However, a well-known drawback has retarded their broader penetration--compared to geometric models, physical models typically entail formidable numerical simulation costs. This paper proposes a new approach to creating physically realistic animation that differs Emulation for Animation 883 radically from the conventional approach of numerically simulating the equations of mo­ tion of physics-based models.
  • Comparative Analysis of Recurrent Neural Network Architectures for Reservoir Inflow Forecasting

    Comparative Analysis of Recurrent Neural Network Architectures for Reservoir Inflow Forecasting

    water Article Comparative Analysis of Recurrent Neural Network Architectures for Reservoir Inflow Forecasting Halit Apaydin 1 , Hajar Feizi 2 , Mohammad Taghi Sattari 1,2,* , Muslume Sevba Colak 1 , Shahaboddin Shamshirband 3,4,* and Kwok-Wing Chau 5 1 Department of Agricultural Engineering, Faculty of Agriculture, Ankara University, Ankara 06110, Turkey; [email protected] (H.A.); [email protected] (M.S.C.) 2 Department of Water Engineering, Agriculture Faculty, University of Tabriz, Tabriz 51666, Iran; [email protected] 3 Department for Management of Science and Technology Development, Ton Duc Thang University, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam 4 Faculty of Information Technology, Ton Duc Thang University, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam 5 Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong, China; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected] or [email protected] (M.T.S.); [email protected] (S.S.) Received: 1 April 2020; Accepted: 21 May 2020; Published: 24 May 2020 Abstract: Due to the stochastic nature and complexity of flow, as well as the existence of hydrological uncertainties, predicting streamflow in dam reservoirs, especially in semi-arid and arid areas, is essential for the optimal and timely use of surface water resources. In this research, daily streamflow to the Ermenek hydroelectric dam reservoir located in Turkey is simulated using deep recurrent neural network (RNN) architectures, including bidirectional long short-term memory (Bi-LSTM), gated recurrent unit (GRU), long short-term memory (LSTM), and simple recurrent neural networks (simple RNN). For this purpose, daily observational flow data are used during the period 2012–2018, and all models are coded in Python software programming language.
  • Neural Networks for Machine Learning Lecture 4A Learning To

    Neural Networks for Machine Learning Lecture 4A Learning To

    Neural Networks for Machine Learning Lecture 4a Learning to predict the next word Geoffrey Hinton with Nitish Srivastava Kevin Swersky A simple example of relational information Christopher = Penelope Andrew = Christine Margaret = Arthur Victoria = James Jennifer = Charles Colin Charlotte Roberto = Maria Pierro = Francesca Gina = Emilio Lucia = Marco Angela = Tomaso Alfonso Sophia Another way to express the same information • Make a set of propositions using the 12 relationships: – son, daughter, nephew, niece, father, mother, uncle, aunt – brother, sister, husband, wife • (colin has-father james) • (colin has-mother victoria) • (james has-wife victoria) this follows from the two above • (charlotte has-brother colin) • (victoria has-brother arthur) • (charlotte has-uncle arthur) this follows from the above A relational learning task • Given a large set of triples that come from some family trees, figure out the regularities. – The obvious way to express the regularities is as symbolic rules (x has-mother y) & (y has-husband z) => (x has-father z) • Finding the symbolic rules involves a difficult search through a very large discrete space of possibilities. • Can a neural network capture the same knowledge by searching through a continuous space of weights? The structure of the neural net local encoding of person 2 output distributed encoding of person 2 units that learn to predict features of the output from features of the inputs distributed encoding of person 1 distributed encoding of relationship local encoding of person 1 inputs local encoding of relationship Christopher = Penelope Andrew = Christine Margaret = Arthur Victoria = James Jennifer = Charles Colin Charlotte What the network learns • The six hidden units in the bottleneck connected to the input representation of person 1 learn to represent features of people that are useful for predicting the answer.