table, please consult (Szegedyetal., 2014). The notable
architecture changes compared to the GoogLeNet model
include:
•The 5×5 convolutional layers are replaced by two
consecutive 3×3 convolutional layers. This increases the maximum depth of the network by 9
9
weight layers. Also it increases the number of parameters by 25% and the computational cost is increasedbyabout30%.
•The number 28×28 inception modules is increased
from2to 3.
•Inside the modules, sometimes average, sometimes
maximum-poolingis employed. This is indicated in
theentriescorrespondingtothepoolinglayersofthe
table.
•There are no across the board pooling layers between any two Inception modules, but stride-2 convolution/pooling layers are employed before the ﬁlterconcatenationin themodules3c,4e.
Our model employed separable convolution with depth
multiplier 8on the ﬁrst convolutionallayer. This reduces
thecomputationalcost while increasingthememoryconsumptionat trainingtime.
10
typepatch size/
strideoutput
sizedepth #1×1#3×3
reduce#3×3double#3×3
reducedouble
#3×3Pool+proj
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