What's the correct reasoning behind solving the vanishing/exploding gradient problem in deep neural...
$begingroup$
I have read several blog posts where the solution to solve the vanishing/exploding gradient problem in a deep neural network is suggested to be using Relu activation function instead of tanH & sigmoid.
But, I have encountered an explanation by Prof. Andrew NG lecture that explains that a partial solution to the vanishing gradient problem is a better or more careful choice of the random initialization of weights in your neural network.
i.e the solution is:
To set the variance of Wi to be equal to 1/n, where n is the number of input features that are going into a neuron. Along with the assumption that the input features of activations are roughly mean 0 and standard variance 1. So, what it's doing is that it's trying to set each of the weight matrices w so that it's not too much bigger than 1 and not too much less than 1, therefore, it doesn't explode or vanish too quickly.
- So, if you are using a ReLu activation function then setting the variance of Wi to be equal to
sqrt(2/n)works better**. - and if you are using a TanH activation function then setting the variance of Wi to be equal to
sqrt(2/n)works better. - or in some cases, it's being suggested to use Xavier initialization
- Also, if we need we can tune of
variance parameteras another hyperparameter by multiplying into the above formula and tune that multiplier as part of your hyperparameter search.
Therefore, choosing a reasonable scaling for how to initialize the weights helps weights not to explode too quickly and not decay to zero too quickly, which in turn could help in training a reasonably deep network without the weights or the gradients exploding or vanishing too much and not simply using ReLu!.
Please correct me if my understanding is wrong or incomplete!
deep-learning activation-function
asked 2 hours ago
anuanu
1115
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I have read several blog posts where the solution to solve the vanishing/exploding gradient problem in a deep neural network is suggested to be using Relu activation function instead of tanH & sigmoid.
But, I have encountered an explanation by Prof. Andrew NG lecture that explains that a partial solution to the vanishing gradient problem is a better or more careful choice of the random initialization of weights in your neural network.
i.e the solution is:
To set the variance of Wi to be equal to 1/n, where n is the number of input features that are going into a neuron. Along with the assumption that the input features of activations are roughly mean 0 and standard variance 1. So, what it's doing is that it's trying to set each of the weight matrices w so that it's not too much bigger than 1 and not too much less than 1, therefore, it doesn't explode or vanish too quickly.
- So, if you are using a ReLu activation function then setting the variance of Wi to be equal to
sqrt(2/n)works better**. - and if you are using a TanH activation function then setting the variance of Wi to be equal to
sqrt(2/n)works better. - or in some cases, it's being suggested to use Xavier initialization
- Also, if we need we can tune of
variance parameteras another hyperparameter by multiplying into the above formula and tune that multiplier as part of your hyperparameter search.
Therefore, choosing a reasonable scaling for how to initialize the weights helps weights not to explode too quickly and not decay to zero too quickly, which in turn could help in training a reasonably deep network without the weights or the gradients exploding or vanishing too much and not simply using ReLu!.
Please correct me if my understanding is wrong or incomplete!
deep-learning activation-function
asked 2 hours ago
anuanu
1115
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I have read several blog posts where the solution to solve the vanishing/exploding gradient problem in a deep neural network is suggested to be using Relu activation function instead of tanH & sigmoid.
But, I have encountered an explanation by Prof. Andrew NG lecture that explains that a partial solution to the vanishing gradient problem is a better or more careful choice of the random initialization of weights in your neural network.
i.e the solution is:
To set the variance of Wi to be equal to 1/n, where n is the number of input features that are going into a neuron. Along with the assumption that the input features of activations are roughly mean 0 and standard variance 1. So, what it's doing is that it's trying to set each of the weight matrices w so that it's not too much bigger than 1 and not too much less than 1, therefore, it doesn't explode or vanish too quickly.
- So, if you are using a ReLu activation function then setting the variance of Wi to be equal to
sqrt(2/n)works better**. - and if you are using a TanH activation function then setting the variance of Wi to be equal to
sqrt(2/n)works better. - or in some cases, it's being suggested to use Xavier initialization
- Also, if we need we can tune of
variance parameteras another hyperparameter by multiplying into the above formula and tune that multiplier as part of your hyperparameter search.
Therefore, choosing a reasonable scaling for how to initialize the weights helps weights not to explode too quickly and not decay to zero too quickly, which in turn could help in training a reasonably deep network without the weights or the gradients exploding or vanishing too much and not simply using ReLu!.
Please correct me if my understanding is wrong or incomplete!
deep-learning activation-function
asked 2 hours ago
anuanu
1115
$endgroup$
I have read several blog posts where the solution to solve the vanishing/exploding gradient problem in a deep neural network is suggested to be using Relu activation function instead of tanH & sigmoid.
But, I have encountered an explanation by Prof. Andrew NG lecture that explains that a partial solution to the vanishing gradient problem is a better or more careful choice of the random initialization of weights in your neural network.
i.e the solution is:
To set the variance of Wi to be equal to 1/n, where n is the number of input features that are going into a neuron. Along with the assumption that the input features of activations are roughly mean 0 and standard variance 1. So, what it's doing is that it's trying to set each of the weight matrices w so that it's not too much bigger than 1 and not too much less than 1, therefore, it doesn't explode or vanish too quickly.
- So, if you are using a ReLu activation function then setting the variance of Wi to be equal to
sqrt(2/n)works better**. - and if you are using a TanH activation function then setting the variance of Wi to be equal to
sqrt(2/n)works better. - or in some cases, it's being suggested to use Xavier initialization
- Also, if we need we can tune of
variance parameteras another hyperparameter by multiplying into the above formula and tune that multiplier as part of your hyperparameter search.
Therefore, choosing a reasonable scaling for how to initialize the weights helps weights not to explode too quickly and not decay to zero too quickly, which in turn could help in training a reasonably deep network without the weights or the gradients exploding or vanishing too much and not simply using ReLu!.
Please correct me if my understanding is wrong or incomplete!
deep-learning activation-function
deep-learning activation-function
asked 2 hours ago
anuanu
1115
asked 2 hours ago
anuanu
1115
asked 2 hours ago
anuanu
1115
asked 2 hours ago
anuanu
1115
asked 2 hours ago
anuanu
1115
1115
add a comment |
add a comment |
0
active
oldest
votes
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "557"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fdatascience.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f45322%2fwhats-the-correct-reasoning-behind-solving-the-vanishing-exploding-gradient-pro%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
0
active
oldest
votes
0
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Thanks for contributing an answer to Data Science Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fdatascience.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f45322%2fwhats-the-correct-reasoning-behind-solving-the-vanishing-exploding-gradient-pro%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
