layersthroughoutthenetwork. Thisindicatesthatwhileth e additionalnon-linearitydoeshelp(Cis
better than B), it is also important to capture spatial conte xt by using conv. ﬁlters with non-trivial
receptive ﬁelds (D is better than C). The error rate of our arc hitecture saturates when the depth
reaches19layers,butevendeepermodelsmightbebeneﬁcialforlarger datasets. Wealsocompared
the net B with a shallow net with ﬁve 5×5conv. layers, which was derived from B by replacing
eachpairof 3×3conv. layerswithasingle 5×5conv. layer(whichhasthesamereceptiveﬁeldas
explained in Sect. 2.3). The top-1 error of the shallow net wa s measured to be 7%higher than that
of B (on a center crop),which conﬁrmsthat a deepnet with smal l ﬁlters outperformsa shallow net
withlargerﬁlters.
Finally, scale jittering at training time ( S∈[256;512] ) leads to signiﬁcantly better results than
In this work we investigate the effect of the convolutional network depth on
its accuracy in the large-scale image recognition setting. Our main
contribution is a thorough evaluation of networks of increasing depth using an
architecture with very small (3x3) convolution filters, which shows that a
significant improvement on the prior-art configurations can be achieved by
pushing the depth to 16-19 weight layers. These findings were the basis of our
ImageNet Challenge 2014 submission, where our team secured the first and the
second places in the localisation and classification tracks respectively. We
also show that our representations generalise well to other datasets, where
they achieve state-of-the-art results. We have made our two best-performing
ConvNet models publicly available to facilitate further research on the use of
deep visual representations in computer vision.
Karen Simonyan Andrew Zisserman