data:
Inception : the network described at the beginning of
Section4.2,trainedwiththeinitiallearningrateof0.001 5.
BN-Baseline : Same as Inception with Batch Normalizationbeforeeachnonlinearity.
BN-x5: Inception with Batch Normalization and the
modiﬁcations in Sec. 4.2.1. The initial learning rate was
increased by a factor of 5, to 0.0075. The same learning
rateincreasewithoriginalInceptioncausedthemodelparameterstoreachmachineinﬁnity.
BN-x30: LikeBN-x5, but with the initial learning rate
0.045(30timesthatofInception).
BN-x5-Sigmoid : LikeBN-x5, but with sigmoid nonlinearityg(t) =1
1+exp(−x)instead of ReLU. We also attempted to train the original Inception with sigmoid, but
themodelremainedat theaccuracyequivalenttochance.
In Figure 2, we show the validation accuracy of the
networks, as a function of the number of training steps.
Inception reached the accuracy of 72.2% after 31·106
training steps. The Figure 3 shows, for each network,
the number of training steps required to reach the same
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