I am trying to classify images. Those images have different shapes, but this is not a problem.
However, I am trying to create a dataset using the tf.data.Dataset.from_generator function provided by Tensorflow and I have the feeling that something is not working as it should.
Here is the code:
filenames_ds = tf.data.Dataset.from_tensor_slices(categ_img[:1000]['image_name'])
labels_ds = tf.data.Dataset.from_tensor_slices(categ_img[:1000]['category_label'])
images_ds = filenames_ds.map(lambda x: tf.image.decode_jpeg(tf.read_file(x)))
labels_ds = labels_ds.map(lambda x: tf.one_hot(x, NUM_CATEGORIES))
ds = tf.data.Dataset.zip((images_ds, labels_ds)).batch(1)
I also tried to create the labels_ds like this:
labels_ds.map(lambda x: tf.expand_dims(tf.one_hot(x, NUM_CATEGORIES), axis=0))
categ_imgis a pandas.DataFrame containing image paths and labels under image_name and category_label columns respectively.
And I keep getting this error:
InvalidArgumentError: logits and labels must have the same first dimension, got logits shape [1,50] and labels shape [50]
My model is based on a pretrained ResNet model provided by Keras:
base_model = ResNet50(weights='imagenet', include_top=False, input_shape=(None, None, 3))
for layer in base_model.layers:
layer.trainable = False
x = base_model.output
x = GlobalAveragePooling2D()(x)
for fc in FC_LAYERS:
x = Dense(fc, activation='relu')(x)
x = Dropout(DROPOUT)(x)
output = Dense(NUM_CATEGORIES, activation='softmax', name='fully-connected')(x)
model = Model(inputs=base_model.input, outputs=output)
optimizer = tf.keras.optimizers.SGD(lr=LEARNING_RATE)
cce = tf.keras.losses.CategoricalCrossentropy()
model.compile(optimizer, loss=cce)
return model
It is trained like this:
model_classification.fit(
ds,
epochs=epochs,
steps_per_epoch=steps
)
Which seems pretty straight-forward to me.
Any help would be appreciated.
Thank you.
I finally tried something that worked.
Here is the line you need to change:
model.compile(loss='categorical_crossentropy', optimizer='adam', metrics=['accuracy'])
I don't know why, but this made things working.
Related
I had 5 LSTM layers and 2 MLP's which must be concatenate together into another MLP which produce the final output. Here is the code I wrote using the API approach, which works fine:
lstm_input = Input(shape=(X_dynamic_LSTM.shape[1], X_dynamic_LSTM.shape[2]))
x = LSTM(70, activation='tanh', return_sequences=True)(lstm_input )
x = Dropout(0.3)(x)
x = Dense(1, activation='tanh')(x)
mlp_input=Input(shape=(X_static_MLP.shape[1]))
mlp = Dense(30, activation='relu')(mlp_input)
mlp = Dense(10, activation='relu')(mlp)
merge = Concatenate()([x, mlp])
hidden1 = Dense(5, activation='relu')(merge)
mlp_out = Dense(1, activation='relu')(hidden1)
model = Model(inputs=[lstm_input, mlp_input], outputs=mlp_out)
model.compile(loss='mae', optimizer='Adam')
history = model.fit([X_dynamic_LSTM, X_static_MLP], y_train, batch_size=20,
epochs=10, validation_split=0.2)
If I want to convert this format to one similar to below:
x = Sequential()
x.add(LSTM(70, return_sequences=True))
x.add(Dropout(0.3))
x.add(Dense(1, activation='tanh'))
Can any one help me how should I define the MLP, the Concatenate and the part regarding the "model = Model(inputs=[lstm_input, mlp_input], outputs=mlp_out)" ??
My main problem is I want to add an Embedding layer to the LSTM. when I add the dollowing code to non-API approach the model works perfect.
x.add(Embedding(X_dynamic_LSTM.shape[0], 1,mask_zero=True))
But when instead I used
lstm_input = Embedding(X_dynamic_LSTM.shape[0], 1,mask_zero=True)
It gave me the error : TypeError: Inputs to a layer should be tensors, So I got to stick with non-API approach.
I'm trying to build a multi-output keras model starting from a working single output model. Keras however, is complaining about tensors dimensions.
The single output Model:
This GRU model is training and predicting fine:
timesteps = 250
features = 2
input_tensor = Input(shape=(timesteps, features), name="input")
conv = Conv1D(filters=128, kernel_size=6,use_bias=True)(input_tensor)
b = BatchNormalization()(conv)
s_gru, states = GRU(256, return_sequences=True, return_state=True, name="gru_1")(b)
biases = keras.initializers.Constant(value=88.15)
out = Dense(1, activation='linear', name="output")(s_gru)
model = Model(inputs=input_tensor, outputs=out)
My numpy arrays are:
train_x # shape:(7110, 250, 2)
train_y # shape: (7110, 250, 1)
If fit the model with the following code and everything is fine:
model.fit(train_x, train_y,batch_size=128, epochs=10, verbose=1)
The Problem:
I want to use a slightly modified version of the network that outputs also the GRU states:
input_tensor = Input(shape=(timesteps, features), name="input")
conv = Conv1D(filters=128, kernel_size=6,use_bias=True)(input_tensor)
b = BatchNormalization()(conv)
s_gru, states = GRU(256, return_sequences=True, return_state=True, name="gru_1")(b)
biases = keras.initializers.Constant(value=88.15)
out = Dense(1, activation='linear', name="output")(s_gru)
model = Model(inputs=input_tensor, outputs=[out, states]) # multi output
#fit the model but with a list of numpy array as y
model.compile(optimizer=optimizer, loss='mae', loss_weights=[0.5, 0.5])
history = model.fit(train_x, [train_y,train_y], batch_size=128, epochs=10, callbacks=[])
This training fails and keras is complaining about the target dimensions:
ValueError: Error when checking target: expected gru_1 to have 2 dimensions, but got array with shape (7110, 250, 1)
I'm using Keras 2.3.0 and Tensorflow 2.0.
What am I missing here?
The dimensions of the second output and the second element in the outputs list should be of similar shape. In this case, states would be of shape (7110, 256), which can't really be compared to the train_y shape (which will be of shape (7110, 250, 1) as noted in the first code block. Make sure the outputs can be compared with a similar shape.
I am trying to apply transfer learning to my ANN for image classification.
I have found an example of it, and I would personalize the network.
Here there are the main blocks of code:
model = VGG19(weights='imagenet',
include_top=False,
input_shape=(224, 224, 3))
batch_size = 16
for layer in model.layers[:5]:
layer.trainable = False
x = model.output
x = Flatten()(x)
x = Dense(1024, activation="relu")(x)
x = Dense(1024, activation="relu")(x)
predictions = Dense(16, activation="sigmoid")(x)
model_final = Model(input = model.input, output = predictions)
model_final.fit_generator(
train_generator,
samples_per_epoch = nb_train_samples,
epochs = epochs,
validation_data = validation_generator,
validation_steps = nb_validation_samples,
callbacks = [checkpoint, early])
When I run the code above I get this error:
ValueError: Error when checking target: expected dense_3 to have shape (16,) but got array with shape (1,).
I suppose that the problem is about the dimensions' order in the dense layer, I have tried to transpose it, but I get the same error.
Maybe this simple example can help:
import numpy as np
test = np.array([1,2,3])
print(test.shape) # (3,)
test = test[np.newaxis]
print(test.shape) # (1, 3)
Try apply [np.newaxis] in your train_generator output.
I'm using pre-trained ResNet-50 model and want to feed the outputs of the penultimate layer to a LSTM Network. Here is my sample code containing only CNN (ResNet-50):
N = NUMBER_OF_CLASSES
#img_size = (224,224,3)....same as that of ImageNet
base_model = ResNet50(include_top=False, weights='imagenet',pooling=None)
x = base_model.output
x = GlobalAveragePooling2D()(x)
predictions = Dense(1024, activation='relu')(x)
model = Model(inputs=base_model.input, outputs=predictions)
Next, I want to feed it to a LSTM network, as follows...
final_model = Sequential()
final_model.add((model))
final_model.add(LSTM(64, return_sequences=True, stateful=True))
final_model.add(Dense(N, activation='softmax'))
But I'm confused how to reshape the output to the LSTM input. My original input is (224*224*3) to CNN.
Also, should I use TimeDistributed?
Any kind of help is appreciated.
Adding an LSTM after a CNN does not make a lot of sense, as LSTM is mostly used for temporal/sequence information, whereas your data seems to be only spatial, however if you still like to use it just use
x = Reshape((1024,1))(x)
This would convert it to a sequence of 1024 samples, with 1 feature
If you are talking of spatio-temporal data, Use Timedistributed on the Resnet Layer and then you can use convlstm2d
Example of using pretrained network with LSTM:
inputs = Input(shape=(config.N_FRAMES_IN_SEQUENCE, config.IMAGE_H, config.IMAGE_W, config.N_CHANNELS))
cnn = VGG16(include_top=False, weights='imagenet', input_shape=(config.IMAGE_H, config.IMAGE_W, config.N_CHANNELS))
x = TimeDistributed(cnn)(inputs)
x = TimeDistributed(Flatten())(x)
x = LSTM(256)(x)
I understand that the features extracted from an auto-encoder can be fed into an mlp for classification or regression purpose. This is something that I did earlier.
But what if I have 2 auto-encoders? Can I extract the features from the bottleneck layers of 2 auto-encoders and feed them into an mlp which performs classification based on these features? If yes, then how? I am not sure how to concatenate these two feature sets. I tried with numpy.hstack() which gives me 'unhashable slice' error, whereas, using tf.concat() gives me the error 'Input tensors to a Model must be Keras tensors.' the bottleneck layers of the two auto-encoders are of dimension (None,100) each. So, essentially, if I stack them horizontally, I should be getting a (None, 200). The hidden layer of the mlp may contain some (num_hidden=100) neurons. Could anyone please help?
x1 = autoencoder1.get_layer('encoder2').output
x2 = autoencoder2.get_layer('encoder2').output
#inp = np.hstack((x1, x2))
inp = tf.concat([x1, x2], 1)
x = tf.concat([x1, x2], 1)
h = Dense(num_hidden, activation='relu', name='hidden')(x)
y = Dense(1, activation='sigmoid', name='prediction')(h)
mymlp = Model(inputs=inp, outputs=y)
# Compile model
mymlp.compile(loss='binary_crossentropy', optimizer='adam', metrics=['accuracy'])
# Train model
mymlp.fit(x_train, y_train, epochs=20, batch_size=8)
updated as per #twolffpiggott's suggestion:
from keras.layers import Input, Dense, Dropout
from keras import layers
from keras.models import Model
from sklearn.preprocessing import MinMaxScaler
from sklearn.model_selection import train_test_split
import numpy as np
x1 = Data1
x2 = Data2
y = Data3
num_neurons1 = x1.shape[1]
num_neurons2 = x2.shape[1]
# Train-test split
x1_train, x1_test, x2_train, x2_test, y_train, y_test = train_test_split(x1, x2, y, test_size=0.2)
# scale data within [0-1] range
scalar = MinMaxScaler()
x1_train = scalar.fit_transform(x1_train)
x1_test = scalar.transform(x1_test)
x2_train = scalar.fit_transform(x2_train)
x2_test = scalar.transform(x2_test)
x_train = np.concatenate([x1_train, x2_train], axis =-1)
x_test = np.concatenate([x1_test, x2_test], axis =-1)
# Auto-encoder1
encoding_dim1 = 500
encoding_dim2 = 100
input_data = Input(shape=(num_neurons1,))
encoded = Dense(encoding_dim1, activation='relu', name='encoder1')(input_data)
encoded1 = Dense(encoding_dim2, activation='relu', name='encoder2')(encoded)
decoded = Dense(encoding_dim2, activation='relu', name='decoder1')(encoded1)
decoded = Dense(num_neurons1, activation='sigmoid', name='decoder2')(decoded)
# this model maps an input to its reconstruction
autoencoder1 = Model(inputs=input_data, outputs=decoded)
autoencoder1.compile(optimizer='sgd', loss='mse')
# training
autoencoder1.fit(x1_train, x1_train,
epochs=100,
batch_size=8,
shuffle=True,
validation_data=(x1_test, x1_test))
# Auto-encoder2
encoding_dim1 = 500
encoding_dim2 = 100
input_data = Input(shape=(num_neurons2,))
encoded = Dense(encoding_dim1, activation='relu', name='encoder1')(input_data)
encoded2 = Dense(encoding_dim2, activation='relu', name='encoder2')(encoded)
decoded = Dense(encoding_dim2, activation='relu', name='decoder1')(encoded2)
decoded = Dense(num_neurons2, activation='sigmoid', name='decoder2')(decoded)
# this model maps an input to its reconstruction
autoencoder2 = Model(inputs=input_data, outputs=decoded)
autoencoder2.compile(optimizer='sgd', loss='mse')
# training
autoencoder2.fit(x2_train, x2_train,
epochs=100,
batch_size=8,
shuffle=True,
validation_data=(x2_test, x2_test))
# MLP
num_hidden = 100
encoded1.trainable = False
encoded2.trainable = False
encoded1 = autoencoder1(autoencoder1.inputs)
encoded2 = autoencoder2(autoencoder2.inputs)
concatenated = layers.concatenate([encoded1, encoded2], axis=-1)
x = Dropout(0.2)(concatenated)
h = Dense(num_hidden, activation='relu', name='hidden')(x)
h = Dropout(0.5)(h)
y = Dense(1, activation='sigmoid', name='prediction')(h)
myMLP = Model(inputs=[autoencoder1.inputs, autoencoder2.inputs], outputs=y)
# Compile model
myMLP.compile(loss='binary_crossentropy', optimizer='adam', metrics=['accuracy'])
# Training
myMLP.fit(x_train, y_train, epochs=200, batch_size=8)
# Testing
myMLP.predict(x_test)
giving me an error: unhashable type: 'list' from the line:
myMLP = Model(inputs=[autoencoder1.inputs, autoencoder2.inputs], outputs=y)
The problem is that you're mixing numpy arrays with keras tensors. This can't go.
There are two approaches.
Predict numpy arrays from each autoencoder, concat the arrays, send them to the third model
Connect all models, probably make the autoencoders untrainable, fit with one input for each autoencoder.
Personally, I'd go for the first. (Assuming the autoencoders are already trained and don't need change).
First approach
numpyOutputFromAuto1 = autoencoder1.predict(numpyInputs1)
numpyOutputFromAuto2 = autoencoder2.predict(numpyInputs2)
inputDataForThird = np.concatenate([numpyOutputFromAuto1,numpyOutputFromAuto2],axis=-1)
inputTensorForMlp = Input(inputsForThird.shape[1:])
h = Dense(num_hidden, activation='relu', name='hidden')(inputTensorForMlp)
y = Dense(1, activation='sigmoid', name='prediction')(h)
mymlp = Model(inputs=inputTensorForMlp, outputs=y)
....
mymlp.fit(inputDataForThird ,someY)
Second Approach
This is a little more complicated, and at first I don't see much reason to do this. (But of course there may be cases where it's a good choice)
Now we're totally forgetting numpy and working with keras tensors.
Creating the mlp on its own (good if you will use it later without the autoencoders):
inputTensorForMlp = Input(input_shape_compatible_with_concatenated_encoder_outputs)
x = Dropout(0.2)(inputTensorForMlp)
h = Dense(num_hidden, activation='relu', name='hidden')(x)
h = Dropout(0.5)(h)
y = Dense(1, activation='sigmoid', name='prediction')(h)
myMLP = Model(inputs=[autoencoder1.inputs, autoencoder2.inputs], outputs=y)
We probably want the bottleneck features of the autoencoders, right? If you happened to create the autoencoders properly with: encoder model, decoder model, join both, then it's easier to use just the encoder model. Else:
encodedOutput1 = autoencoder1.layers[bottleneckLayer].outputs #or encoder1.outputs
encodedOutput2 = autoencoder1.layers[bottleneckLayer].outputs #or encoder2.outputs
Creating a joined model. The concatenation must use a keras layer (we're working with keras tensors):
concatenated = Concatenate()([encodedOutput1,encodedOutput2])
output = myMLP(concatenated)
joinedModel = Model([autoencoder1.input,autoencoder2.input],output)
I'd also go with Daniel's first approach (for simplicity and efficiency), but if you're interested in the second; for instance if you're interested in running the network end-to-end, you'd approach it like this:
# make autoencoders not trainable
autoencoder1.trainable = False
autoencoder2.trainable = False
encoded1 = autoencoder1(kerasInputs1)
encoded2 = autoencoder2(kerasInputs2)
concatenated = layers.concatenate([encoded1, encoded2], axis=-1)
h = Dense(num_hidden, activation='relu', name='hidden')(concatenated)
y = Dense(1, activation='sigmoid', name='prediction')(h)
myMLP = Model([input_data1, input_data2], y)
myMLP.compile(loss='binary_crossentropy', optimizer='adam', metrics=['accuracy'])
# Training
myMLP.fit([x1_train, x2_train], y_train, epochs=200, batch_size=8)
# Testing
myMLP.predict([x1_test, x2_test])
Key edits
The weights of both autoencoders should be frozen end-to-end (otherwise early-stage gradient updates from the randomly initialized MLP will likely result in the loss of much of their learning).
The autoencoder input layers should be assigned to separate variables input_data1 and input_data2 per autoencoder (instead of both to input_data). Even though autoencoder1.inputs returns a tf tensor, this is the source of the unhashable type: list exception, and replacing with [input_data1, input_data2] solves the issue.
When fitting the MLP for the end-to-end model, the input should be a list of x1_train and x2_train rather than the concatenated inputs. Same when predicting.