inverse square root, to produce the whitened activations
Cov[x]−1/2(x−E[x]), as well as the derivatives of these
transformsforbackpropagation.Thismotivatesustoseek
an alternative that performs input normalization in a way
that is differentiable and does not require the analysis of
theentiretrainingset aftereveryparameterupdate.
Some of the previous approaches (e.g.
(Lyu&Simoncelli, 2008)) use statistics computed
over a single training example, or, in the case of image
networks, over differentfeature maps at a given location.
However, this changes the representation ability of a
network by discarding the absolute scale of activations.
We want to a preservethe informationin the network,by
normalizing the activations in a training example relative
tothe statisticsoftheentiretrainingdata.
3 Normalization via Mini-Batch
Statistics
Since the full whitening of each layer’s inputs is costly
and not everywhere differentiable, we make two necessary simpliﬁcations. The ﬁrst is that instead of whitening
the features in layer inputs and outputs jointly, we will
normalizeeachscalarfeatureindependently,bymakingit
have the mean of zero and the variance of 1. For a layer
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