(LRN) normalisation (Krizhevskyet al., 2012): as will be sh own in Sect. 4, such normalisation
does not improve the performance on the ILSVRC dataset, but l eads to increased memory consumption and computation time. Where applicable, the param eters for the LRN layer are those
of(Krizhevskyetal., 2012).
2.2 C ONFIGURATIONS
The ConvNet conﬁgurations, evaluated in this paper, are out lined in Table 1, one per column. In
the following we will refer to the nets by their names (A–E). A ll conﬁgurationsfollow the generic
design presented in Sect. 2.1, and differ only in the depth: f rom 11 weight layers in the network A
(8conv.and3FClayers)to19weightlayersinthenetworkE(1 6conv.and3FClayers). Thewidth
of conv.layers (the number of channels) is rather small, sta rting from 64in the ﬁrst layer and then
increasingbyafactorof 2aftereachmax-poolinglayer,untilit reaches 512.
In Table 2 we reportthe numberof parametersfor each conﬁgur ation. In spite of a large depth, the
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