Researcher profile

Shankar Krishnan

Shankar Krishnan contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 13 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
2works
0followers
2topics
3close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

2 published item(s)

preprint2020arXiv

Filter Response Normalization Layer: Eliminating Batch Dependence in the Training of Deep Neural Networks

Batch Normalization (BN) uses mini-batch statistics to normalize the activations during training, introducing dependence between mini-batch elements. This dependency can hurt the performance if the mini-batch size is too small, or if the elements are correlated. Several alternatives, such as Batch Renormalization and Group Normalization (GN), have been proposed to address this issue. However, they either do not match the performance of BN for large batches, or still exhibit degradation in performance for smaller batches, or introduce artificial constraints on the model architecture. In this paper we propose the Filter Response Normalization (FRN) layer, a novel combination of a normalization and an activation function, that can be used as a replacement for other normalizations and activations. Our method operates on each activation channel of each batch element independently, eliminating the dependency on other batch elements. Our method outperforms BN and other alternatives in a variety of settings for all batch sizes. FRN layer performs $\approx 0.7-1.0\%$ better than BN on top-1 validation accuracy with large mini-batch sizes for Imagenet classification using InceptionV3 and ResnetV2-50 architectures. Further, it performs $>1\%$ better than GN on the same problem in the small mini-batch size regime. For object detection problem on COCO dataset, FRN layer outperforms all other methods by at least $0.3-0.5\%$ in all batch size regimes.

preprint2020arXiv

Weak and Strong Gradient Directions: Explaining Memorization, Generalization, and Hardness of Examples at Scale

Coherent Gradients (CGH) is a recently proposed hypothesis to explain why over-parameterized neural networks trained with gradient descent generalize well even though they have sufficient capacity to memorize the training set. The key insight of CGH is that, since the overall gradient for a single step of SGD is the sum of the per-example gradients, it is strongest in directions that reduce the loss on multiple examples if such directions exist. In this paper, we validate CGH on ResNet, Inception, and VGG models on ImageNet. Since the techniques presented in the original paper do not scale beyond toy models and datasets, we propose new methods. By posing the problem of suppressing weak gradient directions as a problem of robust mean estimation, we develop a coordinate-based median of means approach. We present two versions of this algorithm, M3, which partitions a mini-batch into 3 groups and computes the median, and a more efficient version RM3, which reuses gradients from previous two time steps to compute the median. Since they suppress weak gradient directions without requiring per-example gradients, they can be used to train models at scale. Experimentally, we find that they indeed greatly reduce overfitting (and memorization) and thus provide the first convincing evidence that CGH holds at scale. We also propose a new test of CGH that does not depend on adding noise to training labels or on suppressing weak gradient directions. Using the intuition behind CGH, we posit that the examples learned early in the training process (i.e., "easy" examples) are precisely those that have more in common with other training examples. Therefore, as per CGH, the easy examples should generalize better amongst themselves than the hard examples amongst themselves. We validate this hypothesis with detailed experiments, and believe that it provides further orthogonal evidence for CGH.