Different spectrogram between audio_ops and tf.contrib.signal - python

I am trying to update the feature extraction pipeline of an speech command recognition model replacing the function audio_ops.audio_spectrogram() by tf.contrib.signal.stft(). I assumed that they were equivalent, but I am obtaining different spectrogram values with the same input audio. Could someone explain the relation between the two methods, or whether it is possible to obtain the same results using tf.contrib.signal.stft()?
My code:
1) audio_ops method:
from tensorflow.contrib.framework.python.ops import audio_ops
import tensorflow as tf
import numpy as np
from tensorflow.python.ops import io_ops
#WAV audio loader
wav_filename_placeholder_ = tf.placeholder(tf.string, [], name='wav_filename')
wav_loader = io_ops.read_file(wav_filename_placeholder_)
sample_rate = 16000
desired_samples = 16000 #1 sec audio
wav_decoder = audio_ops.decode_wav(wav_loader, desired_channels=1, desired_samples=desired_samples)
#Computing the spectrograms
spectrogram = audio_ops.audio_spectrogram(wav_decoder.audio,
window_size=320,
stride=160,
magnitude_squared=False)
with tf.Session() as sess:
feed_dict={wav_filename_placeholder_:"/<folder_path>/audio_sample.wav"}
#Get the input audio and the spectrogram
audio_ops_wav_decoder_audio, audio_ops_spectrogram = sess.run([wav_decoder.audio, spectrogram], feed_dict)
2) tf.contrib.signal method:
#Input WAV audio (will be initialized with the same audio signal: wav_decoder.audio )
signals = tf.placeholder(tf.float32, [None, None])
#Compute the spectrograms and get the absolute values
stfts = tf.contrib.signal.stft(signals,
frame_length=320,
frame_step=160,
fft_length=512,
window_fn=None)
magnitude_spectrograms = tf.abs(stfts)
with tf.Session() as sess:
feed_dict = {signals : audio_ops_wav_decoder_audio.reshape(1,16000)}
tf_original, tf_stfts, tf_spectrogram, = sess.run([signals, stfts, magnitude_spectrograms], feed_dict)
Thank you in advance

Found these helpful comments in github that discuss the differences:
https://github.com/tensorflow/tensorflow/issues/11339#issuecomment-345741527
https://github.com/tensorflow/tensorflow/issues/11339#issuecomment-443553788
You can think of audio_ops.audio_spectrogram and audio_ops.mfcc as
"fused" ops (like fused batch-norm or fused LSTM cells that TensorFlow
has) for the ops in tf.contrib.signal. I think the original motivation
of them was that a fused op makes it easier to provide mobile support.
I think long term it would be nice if we removed them and provided
automatic fusing via XLA, or unified the API to match
tf.contrib.signal API, and provided fused keyword arguments to
tf.contrib.signal functions, like we do for
tf.layers.batch_normalization.
audio_spectrogram is a C++ implementation of an STFT, while
tf.signal.stft uses TensorFlow ops to compute the STFT (and thus has
CPU, GPU and TPU support).
The main cause of difference between them is that audio_spectrogram
uses fft2d to compute FFTs while tf.contrib.signal.stft uses Eigen
(CPU), cuFFT (GPU), and XLA (TPU). There is another very minor
difference, which is that the default periodic Hann window used by
each is slightly different. tf.contrib.signal.stft follows
numpy/scipy's definition.

Related

How do you feed a tf.data.Dataset dynamically in eager execution mode where initializable_iterator isn't available?

What is the new approach (under eager execution) to feeding data through a dataset pipeline in a dynamic fashion, when we need to feed it sample by sample?
I have a tf.data.Dataset which performs some preprocessing steps and reads data from a generator, drawing from a large dataset during training.
Let's say that dataset is represented as:
ds = tf.data.Dataset.from_tensor_slices([1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6])
ds = ds.map(tf.square).shuffle(2).batch(2)
iterator = tf.data.make_one_shot_iterator(ds)
After training I want to produce various visualizations which require that I feed one sample at a time through the network for inference. I've now got this dataset preprocessing pipeline that I need to feed my raw sample through to be sized and shaped appropriately for the network input.
This seems like a use case for the initializable iterator:
placeholder = tf.placeholder(tf.float32, shape=None)
ds = tf.data.Dataset.from_tensor_slices(placeholder)
ds = ds.map(tf.square).shuffle(2).batch(2)
iterator = tf.data.make_initializable_iterator(ds)
# now re-initialize for each sample
Keep in mind that the map operation in this example represents a long sequence of preprocessing operations that can't be duplicated for each new data sample being feed in.
This doesn't work with eager execution, you can't use the placeholder. The documentation examples all seem to assume a static input such as in the first example here.
The only way I can think of doing this is with a queue and tf.data.Dataset.from_generator(...) which reads from the queue that I push to before predicting on the data. But this feels both hacky, and appears prone to deadlocks that I've yet to solve.
TF 1.14.0
I just realized that the answer to this question is trivial:
Just create a new dataset!
In non-eager mode the code below would have degraded in performance because each dataset operation would have been added to the graph and never released, and in non-eager mode we have the initializable iterator to resolve that issue.
However, in eager execution mode tensorflow operations like this are ephemeral, added iterators aren't being added to a global graph, they just get created and die when no longer referenced. Win one for TF2.0!
The code below (copy/paste runnable) demonstrates:
import tensorflow as tf
import numpy as np
import time
tf.enable_eager_execution()
inp = np.ones(shape=5000, dtype=np.float32)
t = time.time()
while True:
ds = tf.data.Dataset.from_tensors(inp).batch(1)
val = next(iter(ds))
assert np.all(np.squeeze(val, axis=0) == inp)
print('Processing time {:.2f}'.format(time.time() - t))
t = time.time()
The motivation for the question came on the heels of this issue in 1.14 where creating multiple dataset operations in graph mode under Keras constitutes a memory leak.
https://github.com/tensorflow/tensorflow/issues/30448

Structuring a Keras project to achieve reproducible results in GPU

I am writing a tensorflow.Keras wrapper to perform ML experiments.
I need my framework to be able to perform an experiment as specified in a configuration yaml file and run in parallel in a GPU.
Then I need a guarantee that if I ran the experiment again I would get if not the exact same results something reasonably close.
To try to ensure this, my training script contains these lines at the beginning, following the guidelines in the official documentation:
# Set up random seeds
random.seed(seed)
np.random.seed(seed)
tf.set_random_seed(seed)
This has proven to not be enough.
I ran the same configuration 4 times, and plotted the results:
As you can see, results vary a lot between runs.
How can I set up a training session in Keras to ensure I get reasonably similar results when training in a GPU? Is this even possible?
The full training script can be found here.
Some of my colleagues are using just pure TF, and their results seem far more consistent. What is more, they do not seem to be seeding any randomness except to ensure that the train and validation split is always the same.
Keras + Tensorflow.
Step 1, disable GPU.
import os
os.environ["CUDA_DEVICE_ORDER"] = "PCI_BUS_ID"
os.environ["CUDA_VISIBLE_DEVICES"] = ""
Step 2, seed those libraries which are included in your code, say "tensorflow, numpy, random".
import tensorflow as tf
import numpy as np
import random as rn
sd = 1 # Here sd means seed.
np.random.seed(sd)
rn.seed(sd)
os.environ['PYTHONHASHSEED']=str(sd)
from keras import backend as K
config = tf.ConfigProto(intra_op_parallelism_threads=1,inter_op_parallelism_threads=1)
tf.set_random_seed(sd)
sess = tf.Session(graph=tf.get_default_graph(), config=config)
K.set_session(sess)
Make sure these two pieces of code are included at the start of your code, then the result will be reproducible.
Try adding seed parameters to weights/biases initializers. Just to add more specifics to Alexander Ejbekov's comment.
Tensorflow has two random seeds graph level and op level. If you're using more than one graph, you need to specify seed in every one. You can override graph level seed with op level, by setting seed parameter within function. And you can make two functions even from different graphs output same value if same seed is set.
Consider this example:
g1 = tf.Graph()
with g1.as_default():
tf.set_random_seed(1)
a = tf.get_variable('a', shape=(1,), initializer=tf.keras.initializers.glorot_normal())
b = tf.get_variable('b', shape=(1,), initializer=tf.keras.initializers.glorot_normal(seed=2))
with tf.Session(graph=g1) as sess:
sess.run(tf.global_variables_initializer())
print(sess.run(a))
print(sess.run(b))
g2 = tf.Graph()
with g2.as_default():
a1 = tf.get_variable('a1', shape=(1,), initializer=tf.keras.initializers.glorot_normal(seed=1))
with tf.Session(graph=g2) as sess:
sess.run(tf.global_variables_initializer())
print(sess.run(a1))
In this example, output of a is the same as a1, but b is different.

Tensorflow Dataset .map() API

Couple of questions about this
For occasions when I'd like to do something like the following in Tensorflow (assume I'm creating training examples by loading WAV files):
import tensorflow as tf
def _some_audio_preprocessing_func(filename):
# ... some logic here which mostly uses Tensorflow ops ...
with tf.Session(graph=tf.Graph()) as sess:
wav_filename_placeholder = tf.placeholder(tf.string, [])
wav_loader = io_ops.read_file(wav_filename_placeholder)
wav_decoder = contrib_audio.decode_wav(wav_loader, desired_channels=1)
data = sess.run(
[wav_decoder],
feed_dict={wav_filename_placeholder: filename})
return data
dataset = tf.data.Dataset.list_files('*.wav')
dataset = dataset.map(_some_preprocessing_func)
If I have a parse_image() function that uses tensor ops - should
this be part of the main Graph? Following the example set in Google's own audio TF tutorial, it looks like they create a separate graph! Doesn't this ruin the point of using Tensorflow to make things faster?
Do I use tf.py_func() any time any single line isn't from the tensorflow library? Again, I wonder what the performance implications are and when I should use this...
Thanks!
When you use Dataset.map(map_func), TensorFlow defines a subgraph for all the ops created in the function map_func, and arranges to execute it efficiently in the same session as the rest of your graph. There is almost never any need to create a tf.Graph or tf.Session inside map_func: if your parsing function is made up of TensorFlow ops, these ops can be embedded directly in the graph that defines the input pipeline.
The modified version of the code using tf.data would look like this:
import tensorflow as tf
from tensorflow.contrib.framework.python.ops import audio_ops as contrib_audio
def _some_audio_preprocessing_func(filename):
wav_loader = tf.read_file(filename)
return contrib_audio.decode_wav(wav_loader, desired_channels=1)
dataset = tf.data.Dataset.list_files('*.wav')
dataset = dataset.map(_some_preprocessing_func)
If your map_func contains non-TensorFlow operations that you want to apply to each element, you should wrap them in a tf.py_func() (or Dataset.from_generator(), if the data generation process is defined in Python logic). The main performance implication is that any code running in a tf.py_func() is subject to the Global Interpreter Lock, so I would generally recommend trying to find a native TensorFlow implementation for anything that is performance critical.

Keras + Tensorflow: Prediction on multiple gpus

I'm using Keras with tensorflow as backend.
I have one compiled/trained model.
My prediction loop is slow so I would like to find a way to parallelize the predict_proba calls to speed things up.
I would like to take a list of batches (of data) and then per available gpu, run model.predict_proba() over a subset of those batches.
Essentially:
data = [ batch_0, batch_1, ... , batch_N ]
on gpu_0 => return predict_proba(batch_0)
on gpu_1 => return predict_proba(batch_1)
...
on gpu_N => return predict_proba(batch_N)
I know that it's possible in pure Tensorflow to assign ops to a given gpu (https://www.tensorflow.org/tutorials/using_gpu). However, I don't know how this translates to my situation since I've built/compiled/trained my model using Keras' api.
I had thought that maybe I just needed to use python's multiprocessing module and start a process per gpu that would run predict_proba(batch_n). I know this is theoretically possible given another SO post of mine: Keras + Tensorflow and Multiprocessing in Python. However, this still leaves me with the dilemma of not knowing how to actually "choose" a gpu to operate the process on.
My question boils down to: how does one parallelize prediction for one model in Keras across multiple gpus when using Tensorflow as Keras' backend?
Additionally I am curious if similar parallelization for prediction is possible with only one gpu.
A high level description or code example would be greatly appreciated!
Thanks!
I created one simple example to show how to run keras model across multiple gpus. Basically, multiple processes are created and each of process owns a gpu. To specify the gpu id in process, setting env variable CUDA_VISIBLE_DEVICES is a very straightforward way (os.environ["CUDA_VISIBLE_DEVICES"]). Hope this git repo can help you.
https://github.com/yuanyuanli85/Keras-Multiple-Process-Prediction
You can use this function to parallelize a Keras model (credits to kuza55).
https://github.com/kuza55/keras-extras/blob/master/utils/multi_gpu.py
.
from keras.layers import merge
from keras.layers.core import Lambda
from keras.models import Model
import tensorflow as tf
def make_parallel(model, gpu_count):
def get_slice(data, idx, parts):
shape = tf.shape(data)
size = tf.concat([ shape[:1] // parts, shape[1:] ],axis=0)
stride = tf.concat([ shape[:1] // parts, shape[1:]*0 ],axis=0)
start = stride * idx
return tf.slice(data, start, size)
outputs_all = []
for i in range(len(model.outputs)):
outputs_all.append([])
#Place a copy of the model on each GPU, each getting a slice of the batch
for i in range(gpu_count):
with tf.device('/gpu:%d' % i):
with tf.name_scope('tower_%d' % i) as scope:
inputs = []
#Slice each input into a piece for processing on this GPU
for x in model.inputs:
input_shape = tuple(x.get_shape().as_list())[1:]
slice_n = Lambda(get_slice, output_shape=input_shape, arguments={'idx':i,'parts':gpu_count})(x)
inputs.append(slice_n)
outputs = model(inputs)
if not isinstance(outputs, list):
outputs = [outputs]
#Save all the outputs for merging back together later
for l in range(len(outputs)):
outputs_all[l].append(outputs[l])
# merge outputs on CPU
with tf.device('/cpu:0'):
merged = []
for outputs in outputs_all:
merged.append(merge(outputs, mode='concat', concat_axis=0))
return Model(input=model.inputs, output=merged)

Caffe - inconsistency in the activation feature values - GPU mode

Hi I am using caffe on Ubuntu 14.04,
CUDA version 7.0 (latest)
cudnn version 2 (latest)
GPU : NVIDIA GT 730
In caffe first I get the initialization done and then I load the imagenet model (Alexnet). I also initialize the gpu using set_mode_gpu()
After that I take an image. I copy this image onto the caffe source blob. Then I perform a forward pass for this image by using : net.forward(end='fc7')
Then I extract the 4096 dimensional fc7 output.(the activation features of the fc7 layer)
The problem I am facing is that when I run the same code multiple times, everytime I obtain a different result. That is, in GPU mode, everytime the activation features are different for the same image. When I am using forward pass, the function of the network is supposed to be deterministic right ? So I should get the same output everytime for the same image.
On the other hand, when I run caffe on cpu by using set_mode_cpu() everything works perfectly, i.e, I get the same output each time
The code used and the outputs obtained are shown below. I am not able to understand what the problem is. Is it that the problem is caused due to GPU rounding off ? But the errors are very large. Or is it due to some issues with the latest CUDNN version ? Or is it something else altogether ?
Following is the CODE
1) IMPORT libraries
from cStringIO import StringIO
import numpy as np
import scipy.ndimage as nd
import PIL.Image
from IPython.display import clear_output, Image, display
from google.protobuf import text_format
import scipy
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt
import caffe
2) IMPORT Caffe Models and define utility functions
model_path = '../../../caffe/models/bvlc_alexnet/'
net_fn = model_path + 'deploy.prototxt'
param_fn = model_path + 'bvlc_reference_caffenet.caffemodel'
model = caffe.io.caffe_pb2.NetParameter()
text_format.Merge(open(net_fn).read(), model)
model.force_backward = True
open('tmp.prototxt', 'w').write(str(model))
net = caffe.Classifier('tmp.prototxt', param_fn,
mean = np.float32([104.0, 116.0, 122.0]), # ImageNet mean, training set dependent
channel_swap = (2,1,0),# the reference model has channels in BGR order instead of RGB
image_dims=(227, 227))
caffe.set_mode_gpu()
# caffe.set_mode_cpu()
# a couple of utility functions for converting to and from Caffe's input image layout
def preprocess(net, img):
return np.float32(np.rollaxis(img, 2)[::-1]) - net.transformer.mean['data']
def deprocess(net, img):
return np.dstack((img + net.transformer.mean['data'])[::-1])
3) LOADING Image and setting constants
target_img = PIL.Image.open('alpha.jpg')
target_img = target_img.resize((227,227), PIL.Image.ANTIALIAS)
target_img=np.float32(target_img)
target_img=preprocess(net, target_img)
end='fc7'
4) Setting the source image and making the forward pass to obtain fc7 activation features
src = net.blobs['data']
src.reshape(1,3,227,227) # resize the network's input image size
src.data[0] = target_img
dst = net.blobs[end]
net.forward(end=end)
target_data = dst.data[0]
print dst.data
FOLLOWING is the output that I obtained for 'print dst.data' when I ran the above code multiple times
output on 1st execution of code
[[-2.22313166 -1.66219997 -1.67641115 ..., -3.62765646 -2.78621101
-5.06158161]]
output on 2nd execution of code
[[ -82.72431946 -372.29296875 -160.5559845 ..., -367.49728394 -138.7151947
-343.32080078]]
output on 3rd execution of code
[[-10986.42578125 -10910.08105469 -10492.50390625 ..., -8597.87011719
-5846.95898438 -7881.21923828]]
output on 4th execution of code
[[-137360.3125 -130303.53125 -102538.78125 ..., -40479.59765625
-5832.90869141 -1391.91259766]]
The output values keep becoming larger and larger and then again become smaller after some time. I am not able to understand the issue.
Switch your network to Test mode to prevent the effect of dropout which is non-deterministic and needed for training mode.
Add the following line right after initializing your network:
net.set_phase_test()
So that you'll always have the same results.
Soner

Categories