DOCSLIB.ORG

Deep Learning Is Robust to Massive Label Noise

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Deep Learning Is Robust to Massive Label Noise Deep Learning is Robust to Massive Label Noise David Rolnick * 1 Andreas Veit * 2 Serge Belongie 2 Nir Shavit 3 Abstract Thus, annotation can be expensive and, for tasks requiring expert knowledge, may simply be unattainable at scale. Deep neural networks trained on large supervised datasets have led to impressive results in image To address this limitation, other training paradigms have classification and other tasks. However, well- been investigated to alleviate the need for expensive an- annotated datasets can be time-consuming and notations, such as unsupervised learning (Le, 2013), self- expensive to collect, lending increased interest to supervised learning (Pinto et al., 2016; Wang & Gupta, larger but noisy datasets that are more easily ob- 2015) and learning from noisy annotations (Joulin et al., tained. In this paper, we show that deep neural net- 2016; Natarajan et al., 2013; Veit et al., 2017). Very large works are capable of generalizing from training datasets (e.g., Krasin et al.(2016); Thomee et al.(2016)) data for which true labels are massively outnum- can often be obtained, for example from web sources, with bered by incorrect labels. We demonstrate remark- partial or unreliable annotation. This can allow neural net- ably high test performance after training on cor- works to be trained on a much wider variety of tasks or rupted data from MNIST, CIFAR, and ImageNet. classes and with less manual effort. The good performance For example, on MNIST we obtain test accuracy obtained from these large, noisy datasets indicates that deep above 90 percent even after each clean training learning approaches can tolerate modest amounts of noise example has been diluted with 100 randomly- in the training set. labeled examples. Such behavior holds across In this work, we study the behavior of deep neural networks multiple patterns of label noise, even when erro- under extremely low label reliability, only slightly above neous labels are biased towards confusing classes. chance. The insights from our study can help guide future We show that training in this regime requires a settings in which arbitrarily large amounts of data are easily significant but manageable increase in dataset size obtainable, but in which labels come without any guarantee that is related to the factor by which correct labels of validity and may merely be biased towards the correct have been diluted. Finally, we provide an analysis distribution. of our results that shows how increasing noise decreases the effective batch size. The key takeaways from this paper may be summarized as follows: Deep neural networks are able to generalize after 1. Introduction • training on massively noisy data, instead of merely Deep neural networks are typically trained using supervised memorizing noise. We demonstrate that standard deep learning on large, carefully annotated datasets. However, neural networks still perform well even on training arXiv:1705.10694v3 [cs.LG] 26 Feb 2018 the need for such datasets restricts the space of problems sets in which label accuracy is as low as 1 percent that can be addressed. This has led to a proliferation of above chance. On MNIST, for example, performance deep learning results on the same tasks using the same still exceeds 90 percent even with this level of label well-known datasets. However, carefully annotated data noise (see Figure1). This behavior holds, to varying is difficult to obtain, especially for classification tasks with extents, across datasets as well as patterns of label large numbers of classes (requiring extensive annotation) noise, including when noisy labels are biased towards or with fine-grained classes (requiring skilled annotation). confused classes. *Equal contribution 1Department of Mathematics, Mas- A sufficiently large training set can accommodate a • sachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA USA We find that the minimum 2 wide range of noise levels. Department of Computer Science & Cornell Tech, Cornell Uni- dataset size required for effective training increases versity, New York, NY USA 3Department of Computer Science, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA USA. Cor- with the noise level (see Figure9). A large enough respondence to: David Rolnick <[email protected]>, Andreas training set can accommodate a wide range of noise Veit <[email protected]>. levels. Increasing the dataset size further, however, Deep Learning is Robust to Massive Label Noise does not appreciably increase accuracy (see Figure8). MNIST - Uniform label noise 100 High levels of label noise decrease the effective • batch size, as noisy labels roughly cancel out and only 90 a small learning signal remains. As such, dataset noise can be partly compensated for by larger batch sizes 80 and by scaling the learning rate with the effective batch size. 70 60 Model architecture 2. Related Work Perceptron 50 MLP1 Learning from noisy data. Several studies have investi- Prediction accuracy MLP2 gated the impact of noisy datasets on machine classifiers. 40 MLP4 Approaches to learn from noisy data can generally be cate- Conv4 gorized into two groups: In the first group, approaches aim 30 to learn directly from noisy labels and focus on noise-robust 0 20 40 60 80 100 algorithms, e.g., Beigman & Klebanov(2009); Guan et al. Number of noisy labels per clean label (2017); Joulin et al.(2016); Krause et al.(2016); Manwani & Sastry(2013); Misra et al.(2016); Van Horn et al.(2015); Reed et al.(2014). The second group comprises mostly Figure 1. Performance on MNIST as different amounts of noisy label-cleansing methods that aim to remove or correct mis- labels are added to a fixed training set of clean labels. We compare labeled data, e.g., Brodley & Friedl(1999). Methods in a perceptron, MLPs with 1, 2, and 4 hidden layers, and a 4-layer ConvNet. Even with 100 noisy labels for every clean label the this group frequently face the challenge of disambiguat- ConvNet still attains a performance of 91%. ing between mislabeled and hard training examples. To address this challenge, they often use semi-supervised ap- proaches by combining noisy data with a small set of clean labels (Zhu, 2005). Some approaches model the label noise formance (e.g., Sukhbaatar et al.(2014); Van Horn et al. as conditionally independent from the input image (Natara- (2015); Zhang et al.(2017)). In these studies an increase jan et al., 2013; Sukhbaatar et al., 2014) and some propose in noise is assumed to decrease not only the proportion of image-conditional noise models (Veit et al., 2017; Xiao correct examples, but also their absolute number. In con- et al., 2015). Our work differs from these approaches in trast to these studies, we separate the effects and show in 4 § that we do not aim to clean the training dataset or propose that a decrease in the number of correct examples is more new noise-robust training algorithms. Instead, we study the destructive to learning than an increase in the number of behavior of standard neural network training procedures noisy labels. in settings with massive label noise. We show that even without explicit cleaning or noise-robust algorithms, neural 3. Learning with massive label noise networks can learn from data that has been diluted by an arbitrary amount of label noise. In this work, we are concerned with scenarios of abundant data of very poor label quality, i.e., the regime in which Analyzing the robustness of neural networks. Several falsely labeled training examples vastly outnumber correctly investigative studies aim to improve our understanding of labeled examples. In particular, our experiments involve convolutional neural networks. One particular stream of re- observing the performance of deep neural networks on multi- search in this space seeks to investigate neural networks by class classification tasks as label noise is increased. analyzing their robustness. For example, Veit et al.(2016) show that network architectures with residual connections To formalize the problem, we denote the number of original have a high redundancy in terms of parameters and are training examples by n. To model the amount of noise, we robust to the deletion of multiple complete layers during dilute the dataset by adding α noisy examples to the train- test time. Further, Szegedy et al.(2014) investigate the ro- ing set for each original training example. Thus, the total bustness of neural networks to adversarial examples. They number of noisy labels in the training set is αn. Note that show that even for fully trained networks, small changes by varying the noise level α, we do not change the available in the input can lead to large changes in the output and number of original examples. Thus, even in the presence thus misclassification. In contrast, we are focusing on non- of high noise, there is still appreciable data to learn from, adversarial noise during training time. Within this stream if we are able to pick it out. This is in contrast to previous of research, closest to our work are studies that focus on work (e.g., Sukhbaatar et al.(2014); Van Horn et al.(2015); the impact of noisy training datasets on classification per- Zhang et al.(2017)), in which an increase in noise also im- Deep Learning is Robust to Massive Label Noise CIFAR-10 - Uniform label noise ImageNet - Uniform label noise 95 90 90 80 85 70 80 60 75 50 70 Model architecture 40 Prediction accuracy Prediction accuracy ResNet 18 65 Conv4 Top-5 accuracy Conv6 30 60 Top-1 accuracy ResNet 20 55 0 1 2 3 4 5 0 2 4 6 8 10 Number of noisy labels per clean label Number of noisy labels per clean label Figure 3. Performance on ImageNet as different amounts of noisy Figure 2. Performance on CIFAR-10 as different amounts of noisy labels are added to a fixed training set of clean labels.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 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
    [Show full text]
  • Automated Elastic Pipelining for Distributed Training of Transformers
    PipeTransformer: Automated Elastic Pipelining for Distributed Training of Transformers Chaoyang He 1 Shen Li 2 Mahdi Soltanolkotabi 1 Salman Avestimehr 1 Abstract the-art convolutional networks ResNet-152 (He et al., 2016) and EfficientNet (Tan & Le, 2019). To tackle the growth in The size of Transformer models is growing at an model sizes, researchers have proposed various distributed unprecedented rate. It has taken less than one training techniques, including parameter servers (Li et al., year to reach trillion-level parameters since the 2014; Jiang et al., 2020; Kim et al., 2019), pipeline paral- release of GPT-3 (175B). Training such models lel (Huang et al., 2019; Park et al., 2020; Narayanan et al., requires both substantial engineering efforts and 2019), intra-layer parallel (Lepikhin et al., 2020; Shazeer enormous computing resources, which are luxu- et al., 2018; Shoeybi et al., 2019), and zero redundancy data ries most research teams cannot afford. In this parallel (Rajbhandari et al., 2019). paper, we propose PipeTransformer, which leverages automated elastic pipelining for effi- T0 (0% trained) T1 (35% trained) T2 (75% trained) T3 (100% trained) cient distributed training of Transformer models. In PipeTransformer, we design an adaptive on the fly freeze algorithm that can identify and freeze some layers gradually during training, and an elastic pipelining system that can dynamically Layer (end of training) Layer (end of training) Layer (end of training) Layer (end of training) Similarity score allocate resources to train the remaining active layers. More specifically, PipeTransformer automatically excludes frozen layers from the Figure 1. Interpretable Freeze Training: DNNs converge bottom pipeline, packs active layers into fewer GPUs, up (Results on CIFAR10 using ResNet).
    [Show full text]
  • Convolutional Neural Network Transfer Learning for Robust Face
    Convolutional Neural Network Transfer Learning for Robust Face Recognition in NAO Humanoid Robot Daniel Bussey1, Alex Glandon2, Lasitha Vidyaratne2, Mahbubul Alam2, Khan Iftekharuddin2 1Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University, 2Old Dominion University Background Research Approach Results • Artificial Neural Networks • Retrain AlexNet on the CASIA-WebFace dataset to configure the neural • VGG-Face Shows better results in every performance benchmark measured • Computing systems whose model architecture is inspired by biological networf for face recognition tasks. compared to AlexNet, although AlexNet is able to extract features from an neural networks [1]. image 800% faster than VGG-Face • Capable of improving task performance without task-specific • Acquire an input image using NAO’s camera or a high resolution camera to programming. run through the convolutional neural network. • Resolution of the input image does not have a statistically significant impact • Show excellent performance at classification based tasks such as face on the performance of VGG-Face and AlexNet. recognition [2], text recognition [3], and natural language processing • Extract the features of the input image using the neural networks AlexNet [4]. and VGG-Face • AlexNet’s performance decreases with respect to distance from the camera where VGG-Face shows no performance loss. • Deep Learning • Compare the features of the input image to the features of each image in the • A subfield of machine learning that focuses on algorithms inspired by people database. • Both frameworks show excellent performance when eliminating false the function and structure of the brain called artificial neural networks. positives. The method used to allow computers to learn through a process called • Determine whether a match is detected or if the input image is a photo of a training.
    [Show full text]
  • Tiny Imagenet Challenge
    Tiny ImageNet Challenge Jiayu Wu Qixiang Zhang Guoxi Xu Stanford University Stanford University Stanford University [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] Abstract Our best model, a fine-tuned Inception-ResNet, achieves a top-1 error rate of 43.10% on test dataset. Moreover, we We present image classification systems using Residual implemented an object localization network based on a Network(ResNet), Inception-Resnet and Very Deep Convo- RNN with LSTM [7] cells, which achieves precise results. lutional Networks(VGGNet) architectures. We apply data In the Experiments and Evaluations section, We will augmentation, dropout and other regularization techniques present thorough analysis on the results, including per-class to prevent over-fitting of our models. What’s more, we error analysis, intermediate output distribution, the impact present error analysis based on per-class accuracy. We of initialization, etc. also explore impact of initialization methods, weight decay and network depth on system performance. Moreover, visu- 2. Related Work alization of intermediate outputs and convolutional filters are shown. Besides, we complete an extra object localiza- Deep convolutional neural networks have enabled the tion system base upon a combination of Recurrent Neural field of image recognition to advance in an unprecedented Network(RNN) and Long Short Term Memroy(LSTM) units. pace over the past decade. Our best classification model achieves a top-1 test error [10] introduces AlexNet, which has 60 million param- rate of 43.10% on the Tiny ImageNet dataset, and our best eters and 650,000 neurons. The model consists of five localization model can localize with high accuracy more convolutional layers, and some of them are followed by than 1 objects, given training images with 1 object labeled.
    [Show full text]
  • The History Began from Alexnet: a Comprehensive Survey on Deep Learning Approaches
    > REPLACE THIS LINE WITH YOUR PAPER IDENTIFICATION NUMBER (DOUBLE-CLICK HERE TO EDIT) < 1 The History Began from AlexNet: A Comprehensive Survey on Deep Learning Approaches Md Zahangir Alom1, Tarek M. Taha1, Chris Yakopcic1, Stefan Westberg1, Paheding Sidike2, Mst Shamima Nasrin1, Brian C Van Essen3, Abdul A S. Awwal3, and Vijayan K. Asari1 Abstract—In recent years, deep learning has garnered I. INTRODUCTION tremendous success in a variety of application domains. This new ince the 1950s, a small subset of Artificial Intelligence (AI), field of machine learning has been growing rapidly, and has been applied to most traditional application domains, as well as some S often called Machine Learning (ML), has revolutionized new areas that present more opportunities. Different methods several fields in the last few decades. Neural Networks have been proposed based on different categories of learning, (NN) are a subfield of ML, and it was this subfield that spawned including supervised, semi-supervised, and un-supervised Deep Learning (DL). Since its inception DL has been creating learning. Experimental results show state-of-the-art performance ever larger disruptions, showing outstanding success in almost using deep learning when compared to traditional machine every application domain. Fig. 1 shows, the taxonomy of AI. learning approaches in the fields of image processing, computer DL (using either deep architecture of learning or hierarchical vision, speech recognition, machine translation, art, medical learning approaches) is a class of ML developed largely from imaging, medical information processing, robotics and control, 2006 onward. Learning is a procedure consisting of estimating bio-informatics, natural language processing (NLP), cybersecurity, and many others.
    [Show full text]
  • Kernel Descriptors for Visual Recognition
    Kernel Descriptors for Visual Recognition Liefeng Bo University of Washington Seattle WA 98195, USA Xiaofeng Ren Dieter Fox Intel Labs Seattle University of Washington & Intel Labs Seattle Seattle WA 98105, USA Seattle WA 98195 & 98105, USA Abstract The design of low-level image features is critical for computer vision algorithms. Orientation histograms, such as those in SIFT [16] and HOG [3], are the most successful and popular features for visual object and scene recognition. We high- light the kernel view of orientation histograms, and show that they are equivalent to a certain type of match kernels over image patches. This novel view allows us to design a family of kernel descriptors which provide a unified and princi- pled framework to turn pixel attributes (gradient, color, local binary pattern, etc.) into compact patch-level features. In particular, we introduce three types of match kernels to measure similarities between image patches, and construct compact low-dimensional kernel descriptors from these match kernels using kernel princi- pal component analysis (KPCA) [23]. Kernel descriptors are easy to design and can turn any type of pixel attribute into patch-level features. They outperform carefully tuned and sophisticated features including SIFT and deep belief net- works. We report superior performance on standard image classification bench- marks: Scene-15, Caltech-101, CIFAR10 and CIFAR10-ImageNet. 1 Introduction Image representation (features) is arguably the most fundamental task in computer vision. The problem is highly challenging because images exhibit high variations, are highly structured, and lie in high dimensional spaces. In the past ten years, a large number of low-level features over images have been proposed.
    [Show full text]
  • Face Recognition Using Popular Deep Net Architectures: a Brief Comparative Study
    future internet Article Face Recognition Using Popular Deep Net Architectures: A Brief Comparative Study Tony Gwyn 1,* , Kaushik Roy 1 and Mustafa Atay 2 1 Department of Computer Science, North Carolina A&T State University, Greensboro, NC 27411, USA; [email protected] 2 Department of Computer Science, Winston-Salem State University, Winston-Salem, NC 27110, USA; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected] Abstract: In the realm of computer security, the username/password standard is becoming increas- ingly antiquated. Usage of the same username and password across various accounts can leave a user open to potential vulnerabilities. Authentication methods of the future need to maintain the ability to provide secure access without a reduction in speed. Facial recognition technologies are quickly becoming integral parts of user security, allowing for a secondary level of user authentication. Augmenting traditional username and password security with facial biometrics has already seen impressive results; however, studying these techniques is necessary to determine how effective these methods are within various parameters. A Convolutional Neural Network (CNN) is a powerful classification approach which is often used for image identification and verification. Quite recently, CNNs have shown great promise in the area of facial image recognition. The comparative study proposed in this paper offers an in-depth analysis of several state-of-the-art deep learning based- facial recognition technologies, to determine via accuracy and other metrics which of those are most effective. In our study, VGG-16 and VGG-19 showed the highest levels of image recognition accuracy, Citation: Gwyn, T.; Roy, K.; Atay, M. as well as F1-Score.
    [Show full text]
  • Key Ideas and Architectures in Deep Learning Applications That (Probably) Use DL
    Key Ideas and Architectures in Deep Learning Applications that (probably) use DL Autonomous Driving Scene understanding /Segmentation Applications that (probably) use DL WordLens Prisma Outline of today’s talk Image Recognition Fun application using CNNs ● LeNet - 1998 ● Image Style Transfer ● AlexNet - 2012 ● VGGNet - 2014 ● GoogLeNet - 2014 ● ResNet - 2015 Questions to ask about each architecture/ paper Special Layers Non-Linearity Loss function Weight-update rule Train faster? Reduce parameters Reduce Overfitting Help you visualize? LeNet5 - 1998 LeNet5 - Specs MNIST - 60,000 training, 10,000 testing Input is 32x32 image 8 layers 60,000 parameters Few hours to train on a laptop Modified LeNet Architecture - Assignment 3 Training Input Forward pass Maxp Max Conv ReLU Conv ReLU FC ReLU Softmax ool pool Backpropagation - Labels Loss update weights Modified LeNet Architecture - Assignment 3 Testing Input Forward pass Maxp Max Conv ReLU Conv ReLU FC ReLU Softmax ool pool Output Compare output with labels Modified LeNet - CONV Layer 1 Input - 28 x 28 Output - 6 feature maps - each 24 x 24 Convolution filter - 5 x 5 x 1 (convolution) + 1 (bias) How many parameters in this layer? Modified LeNet - CONV Layer 1 Input - 32 x 32 Output - 6 feature maps - each 28 x 28 Convolution filter - 5 x 5 x 1 (convolution) + 1 (bias) How many parameters in this layer? (5x5x1+1)*6 = 156 Modified LeNet - Max-pooling layer Decreases the spatial extent of the feature maps, makes it translation-invariant Input - 28 x 28 x 6 volume Maxpooling with filter size 2
    [Show full text]
  • Transfer Learning Based Face Recognition Using Deep Learning M
    International Journal of Recent Technology and Engineering (IJRTE) ISSN: 2277-3878, Volume-8 Issue-1S3, June 2019 Transfer Learning based Face Recognition using Deep Learning M. Madhu Latha, K. V. Krishnam Raju Abstract: Face Recognition technology is advancing rapidly learning also called as a hierarchical learning widespread as a with the current developments in computer vision. Face new area of the machine learning research. Deep learning Recognition can be done either in a single image or from a technique is a type of machine learning that gives computer tracked video. The task of face recognition can be improved with systems an ability to improve with knowledge and data. the recent surge of interest in the deep learning architectures. In Deep learning has attained great power and flexibility by this paper we proposed an Inception-V3 CNN using an approach representing knowledge. called Transfer learning. Deep learning algorithms are trained to solve specific tasks and designed to work in isolated. The idea of Nowadays Face Recognition [2] has legitimately broken transfer learning is to overcome isolated learning and leveraging in to widespread and benefits became more and more knowledge acquired from one task to solve the related ones. Thus, tangible. Face Recognition is the eminent biometric instead of training CNN from scratch we use Google’s pretrained technique extensively used in many areas in daily life such as Inception v3 model by applying transfer learning. Inception v3 military, finance, public security, etc. Face recognition is the model was trained on ImageNet dataset and transferred its outstanding research topic under the area of computer vision.
    [Show full text]
  • Transfer Imagenet for Medical Image Analyzing Using Unsupervised Learning
    Transfer ImageNet for Medical Image Analyzing Using Unsupervised Learning Ning Wang and Peng Chu Abstract˗˗Convolutional Neural Network (CNN) is powerful tool for image analyzing. It has demonstrated its success in multiple tasks. But requirement of large amount of annotated samples prohibits its widely using in medical image analyzing. This project explores using unsupervised convolutional auto-encoder (CAE) for fine-tuning CNN trained on ImageNet for medical images analyzing. The fine-tuned CNN then is test on a task for landmark estimation. Compared with CNN without unsupervised fine-tuning, CNN adjusted by CAE achieves 22% less average error on four landmarks. I. Introduction Deep neural network recently becomes a popular way for learning knowledge from massive annotated database. It shows great success in multiple tasks such as image classification and playing the board game Go. Specifically, convolutional neural network (CNN) which is believed to have mimicked the mammal visual vortex is the most widely used framework and achieves stat-of-art performance on the ImageNet classification [1] and AlphaGo project [2]. (a) (b) Figure 1: Image samples from (a) CIFAR10 and (b) Dental X-ray images. The CNN is usually trained on gradient descent algorithm which is a supervised process. Thus annotated date is require for the training process. A popular CNN configuration for ImageNet classification named ‘VGG-16’ has 138 million free parameters for training [3]. Fortunately, ImageNet also has over 10 million annotated images [4]. But for ordinary task, there is usually no such huge amount of annotated database for training. A popular way to solve this problem is to transfer knowledge learned on ImageNet to other domain by using small amount of annotated date to fine-tuning the network learned on ImageNet [6].
    [Show full text]
  • Using Neural Networks for Image Classification Tim Kang San Jose State University
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by SJSU ScholarWorks San Jose State University SJSU ScholarWorks Master's Projects Master's Theses and Graduate Research Spring 5-18-2015 Using Neural Networks for Image Classification Tim Kang San Jose State University Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.sjsu.edu/etd_projects Part of the Artificial Intelligence and Robotics Commons Recommended Citation Kang, Tim, "Using Neural Networks for Image Classification" (2015). Master's Projects. 395. DOI: https://doi.org/10.31979/etd.ssss-za3p https://scholarworks.sjsu.edu/etd_projects/395 This Master's Project is brought to you for free and open access by the Master's Theses and Graduate Research at SJSU ScholarWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in Master's Projects by an authorized administrator of SJSU ScholarWorks. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Using Neural Networks for Image Classification San Jose State University, CS298 Spring 2015 Author: Tim Kang ([email protected]), San Jose State University ​ ​ Advisor: Robert Chun ([email protected]), San Jose State University ​ ​ Committee: Thomas Austin ([email protected]), San Jose State University ​ ​ Committee: Thomas Howell ([email protected]), San Jose State University ​ ​ Abstract This paper will focus on applying neural network machine learning methods to images for the purpose of automatic detection and classification. The main advantage of using neural network methods in this project is its adeptness at fitting non­linear data and its ability to work as an unsupervised algorithm. The algorithms will be run on common, publically available datasets, namely the MNIST and CIFAR­10, so that our results will be easily reproducible.
    [Show full text]
  • The MNIST Database of Handwritten Digit Images for Machine Learning Research
    best of THE WEB Li Deng [ ] The MNIST Database of Handwritten Digit Images for Machine Learning Research n this issue, “Best of the Web” pres- The MNIST database was constructed their results that were obtained using the ents the modified National Institute of out of the original NIST database; hence, MNIST database. In most experiments, the Standards and Technology (MNIST) modified NIST or MNIST. There are existing training data from the database resources, consisting of a collection of 60,000 training images (some of these were used in learning the classifiers, where handwritten digit images used exten- training images can also be used for cross- “none” is entered in the “Preprocessing” Isively in optical character recognition and validation purposes) and 10,000 test column of the table on the Web site. In machine learning research. images, both drawn from the same distri- some experiments, the training set was Handwritten digit recognition is an bution. All these black and white digits are augmented with artificially distorted ver- important problem in optical character size normalized, and centered in a fixed- sions of the original training samples. The recognition, and it has been used as a test size image where the center of gravity of distortions include random combinations case for theories of pattern recognition the intensity lies at the center of the of jittering, shifts, scaling, deskewing, and machine learning algorithms for image with 28 # 28 pixels. Thus, the deslanting, blurring, and compression. The many years. Historically, to promote dimensionality of each image sample vec- type(s) of these and other distortions are machine learning and pattern recognition tor is 28 * 28 = 784, where each element specified in the “Preprocessing” column of research, several standard databases have is binary.
    [Show full text]