and the variance of 1, as long as the elements of each
mini-batch are sampled from the same distribution, and
if we neglect ǫ. This can be seen by observing that/summationtextm
i=1/hatwidexi= 0and1
m/summationtextm
i=1/hatwidex2
i= 1, and taking expectations. Eachnormalizedactivation /hatwidex(k)canbeviewedas
an input to a sub-network composed of the linear transformy(k)=γ(k)/hatwidex(k)+β(k), followed by the other processing doneby the originalnetwork. Thesesub-network
inputs all have ﬁxed means and variances, and although
the jointdistributionofthese normalized /hatwidex(k)canchange
over the course of training, we expect that the introduction of normalized inputs accelerates the training of the
sub-networkand,consequently,thenetworkasawhole.
During training we need to backpropagate the gradient of loss ℓthrough this transformation,as well as compute the gradients with respect to the parameters of the
BN transform. We use chainrule,as follows(beforesimpliﬁcation):
∂ℓ
∂/hatwidexi=∂ℓ
∂yi·γ
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