σ2
B←1
mm/summationdisplay
i=1(xi−µB)2// mini-batchvariance
/hatwidexi←xi−µB/radicalbig
σ2
B+ǫ// normalize
yi←γ/hatwidexi+β≡BNγ,β(xi) // scale andshift
Algorithm 1: Batch Normalizing Transform, applied to
activation xoveramini-batch.
TheBNtransformcanbeaddedtoanetworktomanipulate any activation. In the notation y=BNγ,β(x), we
3
indicate that the parameters γandβare to be learned,
but it should be noted that the BN transform does not
independently process the activation in each training example. Rather, BN γ,β(x)depends both on the training
exampleand the other examples in the mini-batch . The
scaled and shifted values yare passed to other network
layers. The normalized activations /hatwidexare internal to our
transformation, but their presence is crucial. The distributions of values of any /hatwidexhas the expected value of 0
and the variance of 1, as long as the elements of each
mini-batch are sampled from the same distribution, and
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.
Sergey Ioffe Christian Szegedy