Learning without loss

Veit Elser

Tóm tắt

We explore a new approach for training neural networks where all loss functions are replaced by hard constraints. The same approach is very successful in phase retrieval, where signals are reconstructed from magnitude constraints and general characteristics (sparsity, support, etc.). Instead of taking gradient steps, the optimizer in the constraint based approach, called relaxed–reflect–reflect (RRR), derives its steps from projections to local constraints. In neural networks one such projection makes the minimal modification to the inputs x, the associated weights w, and the pre-activation value y at each neuron, to satisfy the equation $x\cdot w=y$ . These projections, along with a host of other local projections (constraining pre- and post-activations, etc.) can be partitioned into two sets such that all the projections in each set can be applied concurrently—across the network and across all data in the training batch. This partitioning into two sets is analogous to the situation in phase retrieval and the setting for which the general purpose RRR optimizer was designed. Owing to the novelty of the method, this paper also serves as a self-contained tutorial. Starting with a single-layer network that performs nonnegative matrix factorization, and concluding with a generative model comprising an autoencoder and classifier, all applications and their implementations by projections are described in complete detail. Although the new approach has the potential to extend the scope of neural networks (e.g. by defining activation not through functions but constraint sets), most of the featured models are standard to allow comparison with stochastic gradient descent.

Tài liệu tham khảo

Bauschke, H.H., Bui, M.N., Wang, X.: Projecting onto the intersection of a cone and a sphere. SIAM J. Optim. 28(3), 2158–2188 (2018) Bauschke, H.H., Combettes, P.L., et al.: Convex Analysis and Monotone Operator Theory in Hilbert Spaces, vol. 408. Springer, Berlin (2011) Benoist, J.: The Douglas–Rachford algorithm for the case of the sphere and the line. J. Glob. Optim. 63(2), 363–380 (2015) Boltzmann, L.: Vorlesungen über Gastheorie: 2. Teil. BoD–Books on Demand (2017) Borwein, J.M., Sims, B.: The Douglas–Rachford algorithm in the absence of convexity. In: Fixed-Point Algorithms for Inverse Problems in Science and Engineering, pp. 93–109. Springer, Berlin (2011) Boyd, S., Parikh, N., Chu, E., Peleato, B., Eckstein, J., et al.: Distributed optimization and statistical learning via the alternating direction method of multipliers. Found. Trends Mach. Learn. 3(1), 1–122 (2011) Candes, E.J., Li, X., Soltanolkotabi, M.: Phase retrieval via Wirtinger flow: theory and algorithms. IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory 61(4), 1985–2007 (2015) Choromanska, A., Kumaravel, S., Luss, R., Rish, I., Kingsbury, B., Rigotti, M., DiAchille, P., Gurev, V., Tejwani, R., Bouneffouf, D.: Beyond backprop: online alternating minimization with auxiliary variables (2018) arXiv preprint. arXiv:1806.09077 Cichocki, A., Zdunek, R., Amari, S.-I.: Hierarchical ALS algorithms for nonnegative matrix and 3D tensor factorization. In: International Conference on Independent Component Analysis and Signal Separation, pp. 169–176. Springer, Berlin (2007) Cohen, N., Sharir, O., Shashua, A.: On the expressive power of deep learning: a tensor analysis. In: Conference on Learning Theory, pp. 698–728. PMLR (2016) Elser, V.: The complexity of bit retrieval. IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory 64(1), 412–428 (2018) Holmes, P.: Poincaré, celestial mechanics, dynamical-systems theory and “chaos”. Phys. Rep. 193(3), 137–163 (1990) Hrubeš, P.: On the nonnegative rank of distance matrices. Inf. Process. Lett. 112(11), 457–461 (2012) Lindstrom, S.B., Survey, B.S.: Sixty year of Douglas–Rachford. J. Aust. Math. Soc., 1–38 (2021) Rolnick, D., Donti, P.L., Kaack, L.H., Kochanski, K., Lacoste, A., Sankaran, K., Ross, A.S., Milojevic-Dupont, N., Jaques, N., Waldman-Brown, A., et al.: Tackling climate change with machine learning. arXiv preprint (2019) arXiv:1906.05433 Rumelhart, D.E., Hinton, G.E., Williams, R.J.: Learning internal representations by error propagation. Technical report, California Univ. San Diego, La Jolla Inst for Cognitive Science (1985) Strubell, E., Ganesh, A., McCallum, A.: Energy and policy considerations for deep learning in nlp (2019) arXiv preprint. arXiv:1906.02243 Taylor, G., Burmeister, R., Xu, Z., Singh, B., Patel, A., Goldstein, T.: Training neural networks without gradients: a scalable ADMM approach. In: International Conference on Machine Learning, pp. 2722–2731 (2016) Vandaele, A., Gillis, N., Glineur, F., Tuyttens, D.: Heuristics for exact nonnegative matrix factorization. J. Glob. Optim. 65(2), 369–400 (2016) Vavasis, S.A.: On the complexity of nonnegative matrix factorization. SIAM J. Optim. 20(3), 1364–1377 (2010) Zhang, C., Bengio, S., Hardt, M., Recht, B., Vinyals, O.: Understanding deep learning requires rethinking generalization (2016) arXiv preprint. arXiv:1611.03530