Subscribe to the gold package and get unlimited access to Shamra Academy
Register a new userDeep Learning for Inverse Problems: Bounds and Regularizers
380
0
0.0
(
0
)
Ask ChatGPT about the research
No Arabic abstract
Inverse problems arise in a number of domains such as medical imaging, remote sensing, and many more, relying on the use of advanced signal and image processing approaches -- such as sparsity-driven techniques -- to determine their solution. This paper instead studies the use of deep learning approaches to approximate the solution of inverse problems. In particular, the paper provides a new generalization bound, depending on key quantity associated with a deep neural network -- its Jacobian matrix -- that also leads to a number of computationally efficient regularization strategies applicable to inverse problems. The paper also tests the proposed regularization strategies in a number of inverse problems including image super-resolution ones. Our numerical results conducted on various datasets show that both fully connected and convolutional neural networks regularized using the regularization or proxy regularization strategies originating from our theory exhibit much better performance than deep networks regularized with standard approaches such as weight-decay.
rate research
Read More
We present algorithms for efficiently learning regularizers that improve generalization. Our approach is based on the insight that regularizers can be viewed as upper bounds on the generalization gap, and that reducing the slack in the bound can improve performance on test data. For a broad class of regularizers, the hyperparameters that give the best upper bound can be computed using linear programming. Under certain Bayesian assumptions, solving the LP lets us jump to the optimal hyperparameters given very limited data. This suggests a natural algorithm for tuning regularization hyperparameters, which we show to be effective on both real and synthetic data.
We introduce novel communication strategies in synchronous distributed Deep Learning consisting of decentralized gradient reduction orchestration and computational graph-aware grouping of gradient tensors. These new techniques produce an optimal overlap between computation and communication and result in near-linear scaling (0.93) of distributed training up to 27,600 NVIDIA V100 GPUs on the Summit Supercomputer. We demonstrate our gradient reduction techniques in the context of training a Fully Convolutional Neural Network to approximate the solution of a longstanding scientific inverse problem in materials imaging. The efficient distributed training on a dataset size of 0.5 PB, produces a model capable of an atomically-accurate reconstruction of materials, and in the process reaching a peak performance of 2.15(4) EFLOPS$_{16}$.
While neural networks for learning representation of multi-view data have been previously proposed as one of the state-of-the-art multi-view dimension reduction techniques, how to make the representation discriminative with only a small amount of labeled data is not well-studied. We introduce a semi-supervised neural network model, named Multi-view Discriminative Neural Network (MDNN), for multi-view problems. MDNN finds nonlinear view-specific mappings by projecting samples to a common feature space using multiple coupled deep networks. It is capable of leveraging both labeled and unlabeled data to project multi-view data so that samples from different classes are separated and those from the same class are clustered together. It also uses the inter-view correlation between views to exploit the available information in both the labeled and unlabeled data. Extensive experiments conducted on four datasets demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed algorithm for multi-view semi-supervised learning.
Recent work in machine learning shows that deep neural networks can be used to solve a wide variety of inverse problems arising in computational imaging. We explore the central prevailing themes of this emerging area and present a taxonomy that can be used to categorize different problems and reconstruction methods. Our taxonomy is organized along two central axes: (1) whether or not a forward model is known and to what extent it is used in training and testing, and (2) whether or not the learning is supervised or unsupervised, i.e., whether or not the training relies on access to matched ground truth image and measurement pairs. We also discuss the trade-offs associated with these different reconstruction approaches, caveats and common failure modes, plus open problems and avenues for future work.
Deep Learning (DL), in particular deep neural networks (DNN), by design is purely data-driven and in general does not require physics. This is the strength of DL but also one of its key limitations when applied to science and engineering problems in which underlying physical properties (such as stability, conservation, and positivity) and desired accuracy need to be achieved. DL methods in their original forms are not capable of respecting the underlying mathematical models or achieving desired accuracy even in big-data regimes. On the other hand, many data-driven science and engineering problems, such as inverse problems, typically have limited experimental or observational data, and DL would overfit the data in this case. Leveraging information encoded in the underlying mathematical models, we argue, not only compensates missing information in low data regimes but also provides opportunities to equip DL methods with the underlying physics and hence obtaining higher accuracy. This short communication introduces several model-constrained DL approaches (including both feed-forward DNN and autoencoders) that are capable of learning not only information hidden in the training data but also in the underlying mathematical models to solve inverse problems. We present and provide intuitions for our formulations for general nonlinear problems. For linear inverse problems and linear networks, the first order optimality conditions show that our model-constrained DL approaches can learn information encoded in the underlying mathematical models, and thus can produce consistent or equivalent inverse solutions, while naive purely data-based counterparts cannot.
suggested questions
Log in to be able to interact and post comments
comments
Fetching comments
Sign in to be able to follow your search criteria
