L. Manevitz U. Haifa 1 Neural Networks: Capabilities and Examples L. Manevitz Computer Science...

Preview:

Citation preview

L. Manevitz U. Haifa 1

Neural Networks: Capabilities and ExamplesL. Manevitz

Computer Science Department

HIACS Research Center

University of Haifa

L. Manevitz U. Haifa 2

What Are Neural Networks?What Are They Good for?How Do We Use Them?

• Definitions and some history

• Basics– Basic Algorithms

– Examples

• Recent Examples

• Future Directions

L. Manevitz U. Haifa 3

Natural versus Artificial Neuron

• Natural Neuron McCullough Pitts Neuron

L. Manevitz U. Haifa 4

Definitions and History

• McCullough –Pitts Neuron

• Perceptron

• Adaline

• Linear Separability

• Multi-Level Neurons

• Neurons with Loops

L. Manevitz U. Haifa 5

Sample Feed forward Network (No loops)

•Weights •Weights

•Weights

•Input

•Output

•Wji•Vik

F(wji xj

L. Manevitz U. Haifa 6

Replacement of Threshold Neurons with Sigmoid or Differentiable Neurons

•Threshold •Sigmoid

L. Manevitz U. Haifa 7

Reason for Explosion of Interest

• Two co-incident affects (around 1985 – 87)

– (Re-)discovery of mathematical tools and algorithms for handling large networks

– Availability (hurray for Intel and company!) of sufficient computing power to make experiments practical.

L. Manevitz U. Haifa 8

Some Properties of NNs

• Universal: Can represent and accomplish any task.

• Uniform: “Programming” is changing weights

• Automatic: Algorithms for Automatic Programming; Learning

L. Manevitz U. Haifa 9

Networks are Universal

• All logical functions represented by three level (non-loop) network (McCullough-Pitts)

• All continuous (and more) functions represented by three level feed-forward networks (Cybenko et al.)

• Networks can self organize (without teacher).

• Networks serve as associative memories

L. Manevitz U. Haifa 10

Universality

• McCullough-Pitts: Adaptive Logic Gates; can represent any logic function

• Cybenko: Any continuous function representable by three-level NN.

L. Manevitz U. Haifa 11

Networks can “LEARN” and Generalize (Algorithms)

• One Neuron (Perceptron and Adaline) Very popular in 1960s – early 70s– Limited by representability (only linearly separable

• Feed forward networks (Back Propagation)– Currently most popular network (1987 –now)

• Kohonen self-Organizing Network (1980s – now)(loops)

• Attractor Networks (loops)

L. Manevitz U. Haifa 12

Learnability (Automatic Programming)

• One neuron: Perceptron and Adaline algorithms (Rosenblatt and Widrow-Hoff) (1960s –now)

Feed forward Networks: Backpropagation (1987 – now)

Associative Memories and Looped Networks (“Attractors”) (1990s – now)

L. Manevitz U. Haifa 13

Generalizability

• Typically train a network on a sample set of examples

• Use it on general class

• Training can be slow; but execution is fast.

L. Manevitz U. Haifa 14

•Pattern Identification

•(Note: Neuron is trained)

•weights

field receptivein threshold Axw ii kdkdkfjlll

field. receptive in the is letter The Axw ii

Perceptron

L. Manevitz U. Haifa 15

•weights

field receptivein threshold Axw ii kdkdkfjlll

Feed Forward Network

•weights

L. Manevitz U. Haifa 16

Classical Applications(1986 – 1997)

• “Net Talk” : text to speech

• ZIPcodes: handwriting analysis

• Glovetalk: Sign Language to speech

• Data and Picture Compression: “Bottleneck”

• Steering of Automobile (up to 55 m.p.h)

• Market Predictions

• Associative Memories

• Cognitive Modeling: (especially reading, …)

• Phonetic Typewriter (Finnish)

L. Manevitz U. Haifa 17

Neural Network

• Once the architecture is fixed; the only free parameters are the weights

• Thus Uniform ProgrammingUniform Programming

• Potentially Potentially Automatic ProgrammingAutomatic Programming

• Search for Learning AlgorithmsSearch for Learning Algorithms

L. Manevitz U. Haifa 18

Programming: Just find the weights!

• AUTOMATIC PROGRAMMING

• One Neuron: Perceptron or Adaline

• Multi-Level: Gradient Descent on Continuous Neuron (Sigmoid instead of step function).

L. Manevitz U. Haifa 19

Prediction

•Input/Output •NN

•delay

•Compare

L. Manevitz U. Haifa 20

Training NN to Predict

L. Manevitz U. Haifa 21

Finite Element Method

• Numerical Method for solving p.d.e.s

• Many user chosen parameters

• Replace user expertise with NNs.

L. Manevitz U. Haifa 22

FEM Flow chart

L. Manevitz U. Haifa 23

Problems and Methods

L. Manevitz U. Haifa 24

Finite Element Method and Neural Networks

• Place mesh on body

• Predict where to adapt mesh

L. Manevitz U. Haifa 25

Placing Mesh on Body (Manevitz, Givoli and Yousef)

• Need to place geometry on topology

• Method: Use Kohonen algorithm

• Idea: Identify neurons with FEM nodes

– Identify weights of nodes with geometric location

– Identify topology with adjaceny

– RESULT: Equi-probably placement

L. Manevitz U. Haifa 26

Kohonen Placement for FEM

• Include slide from Malik’s work.

L. Manevitz U. Haifa 27

Self-Organizing Network

•Weights from input to neurons

•Topology between neurons

L. Manevitz U. Haifa 28

Self-Organizing Network

•Weights from input give “location” to neuron

•Kohonen algorithm results in “winner” neuron

•After training, close input patterns have topologically close winners

•Results in Equi-probable Continuous

Mapping (without teacher)

L. Manevitz U. Haifa 29

Placement of Mesh via Self Organizing NNs

L. Manevitz U. Haifa 30

Placement of Mesh via Self Organizing NNs2

Iteration 0 Iteration 500;Quality =288

Iteration 2000;Quality = 238

Iteration 6000;Quality =223

Iteration 12000;Quality = 208

Iteration 30000;Quality =202

L. Manevitz U. Haifa 31

Comparison of NN and PLTMG

PLTMG (249 nodes) NN (225 nodes); Quality = 27922 )2()2(),( where),( yx

yyxx eeyxuuuyxf

Node

Error

Value

Error

Pltmg 2.4 E-02 4.51 E-02

NN 7.5 E-03 9.09E-03

L. Manevitz U. Haifa 32

FEM Temporal Adaptive Meshes

L. Manevitz U. Haifa 33

Prediction of Refinement of Elements

• Method simulates time

• Current adaptive method uses gradient

• Can just MISS all the action.

• We use NNs to PREDICT the gradient.

• Under development with Manevitz, Givoli and Bitar.

L. Manevitz U. Haifa 34

Training NN to Predict2

L. Manevitz U. Haifa 35

Refinement Predictors

•Need to choose features

•Need to identify kinds of elements

L. Manevitz U. Haifa 36

Other Predictions?

• Stock Market (really!)

• Credit Card Fraud (Master Card, USA)

L. Manevitz U. Haifa 37

Surfer’s Apprentice Program

• Manevitz and Yousef

• Make a “model” of user for retrieving information from internet.

• Many issues: here focus on retrieval of new pages similar to other pages of interest to user. Note ONLY POSITIVE DATA.

L. Manevitz U. Haifa 38

L. Manevitz U. Haifa 39

Bottleneck Network

•Train to Identity on Sample Data

•Should be identity only on similar data

•NOVELTY FILTER

L. Manevitz U. Haifa 40

How well does it work?

• Tested on Standard Reuter’s Data Base.

• Used 25% for training

• Withholding information on representation

• The best method for retrieval using only positive training. (Better than SVM, etc.)

L. Manevitz U. Haifa 41

How to help Intel? (Make Billions? Reset NASDAQ)

• Branch prediction?

• (Note similarity to FEM refinement.)

• Perhaps can use to give predictor that is even user or application dependent.

• (Note: Neural activity is, I am told, natural for VLSI design and there have been several such chips produced.)

L. Manevitz U. Haifa 42

Other Different Directions

• Modify basic model to handle temporal adaptivity. (Occurs in real neurons according to latest biological information.)

• Apply to model human diseases, etc.

Recommended