PofoliaShared via Pofolia

arXiv (Cornell University)· 2015· Preprint

Batch Normalization: Accelerating Deep Network Training by Reducing Internal Covariate Shift

Sergey Ioffe, Christian Szegedy

Short summary

Batch Normalization, a new technique that normalizes layer inputs within the model architecture, significantly accelerates deep neural network training by reducing internal covariate shift.

AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.

Key points

  • Batch Normalization normalizes layer inputs to combat internal covariate shift.
  • Enables significantly higher learning rates and less careful parameter initialization.
  • Achieves same accuracy with 14x fewer training steps on an image classification model.
  • Improves ImageNet classification accuracy, exceeding human performance (4.9% top-5 error).

AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.

Abstract

Training Deep Neural Networks is complicated by the fact that the distribution of each layer's inputs changes during training, as the parameters of the previous layers change. This slows down the training by requiring lower learning rates and careful parameter initialization, and makes it notoriously hard to train models with saturating nonlinearities. We refer to this phenomenon as internal covariate shift, and address the problem by normalizing layer inputs. Our method draws its strength from making normalization a part of the model architecture and performing the normalization for each training mini-batch. Batch Normalization allows us to use much higher learning rates and be less careful about initialization. It also acts as a regularizer, in some cases eliminating the need for Dropout. Applied to a state-of-the-art image classification model, Batch Normalization achieves the same accuracy with 14 times fewer training steps, and beats the original model by a significant margin. Using an ensemble of batch-normalized networks, we improve upon the best published result on ImageNet classification: reaching 4.9% top-5 validation error (and 4.8% test error), exceeding the accuracy of human raters.

The authors' abstract, as published at the source. arXiv (Cornell University), 2015 · DOI ↗

TakeawaysPremium
Ask the paperFree account

Continue with a free account

Ask the paper: 3 free questions a day about this paper; save it, get its citation, new summaries every day for your field. Takeaways are Premium.

Continue free on the web

Sign in with Google or Apple; no card needed. You come back to this paper.

On your phone:

Field: Artificial Intelligence

Artificial IntelligenceComputer Science