Content deleted Content added
Fix formatting. |
TokenByToken (talk | contribs) category |
||
| (3 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown) | |||
Line 12:
Thus, the encoder maps each point (such as an image) from a large complex dataset into a distribution within the latent space, rather than to a single point in that space. The decoder has the opposite function, which is to map from the latent space to the input space, again according to a distribution (although in practice, noise is rarely added during the decoding stage). By mapping a point to a distribution instead of a single point, the network can avoid overfitting the training data. Both networks are typically trained together with the usage of the [[#Reparameterization|reparameterization trick]], although the variance of the noise model can be learned separately.{{cn|date=June 2024}}
Although this type of model was initially designed for [[unsupervised learning]],<ref>{{cite arXiv |last1=Dilokthanakul |first1=Nat |last2=Mediano |first2=Pedro A. M. |last3=Garnelo |first3=Marta |last4=Lee |first4=Matthew C. H. |last5=Salimbeni |first5=Hugh |last6=Arulkumaran |first6=Kai |last7=Shanahan |first7=Murray |title=Deep Unsupervised Clustering with Gaussian Mixture Variational Autoencoders |date=2017-01-13 |class=cs.LG |eprint=1611.02648}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last1=Hsu |first1=Wei-Ning |last2=Zhang |first2=Yu |last3=Glass |first3=James |title=2017 IEEE Automatic Speech Recognition and Understanding Workshop (ASRU) |chapter=Unsupervised ___domain adaptation for robust speech recognition via variational autoencoder-based data augmentation |date=December 2017 |pages=16–23 |doi=10.1109/ASRU.2017.8268911 |arxiv=1707.06265 |isbn=978-1-5090-4788-8 |s2cid=22681625 |chapter-url=https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/8268911}}</ref> its effectiveness has been proven for [[semi-supervised learning]]<ref>{{cite book |last1=Ehsan Abbasnejad |first1=M. |last2=Dick |first2=Anthony |last3=van den Hengel |first3=Anton |title=Infinite Variational Autoencoder for Semi-Supervised Learning |date=2017 |pages=5888–5897 |url=https://openaccess.thecvf.com/content_cvpr_2017/html/Abbasnejad_Infinite_Variational_Autoencoder_CVPR_2017_paper.html}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Xu |first1=Weidi |last2=Sun |first2=Haoze |last3=Deng |first3=Chao |last4=Tan |first4=Ying |title=Variational Autoencoder for Semi-Supervised Text Classification |journal=Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence |date=2017-02-12 |volume=31 |issue=1 |doi=10.1609/aaai.v31i1.10966 |s2cid=2060721 |url=https://ojs.aaai.org/index.php/AAAI/article/view/10966 |language=en|doi-access=free }}</ref> and [[supervised learning]].<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Kameoka |first1=Hirokazu |last2=Li |first2=Li |last3=Inoue |first3=Shota |last4=Makino |first4=Shoji |title=Supervised Determined Source Separation with Multichannel Variational Autoencoder |journal=Neural Computation |date=2019-09-01 |volume=31 |issue=9 |pages=1891–1914 |doi=10.1162/neco_a_01217 |pmid=31335290 |s2cid=198168155 |url=https://direct.mit.edu/neco/article/31/9/1891/8494/Supervised-Determined-Source-Separation-with|url-access=subscription }}</ref>
== Overview of architecture and operation ==
Line 69:
= \ln p_\theta(x) - D_{KL}(q_\phi({\cdot| x})\parallel p_\theta({\cdot | x})) </math>Maximizing the ELBO<math display="block">\theta^*,\phi^* = \underset{\theta,\phi}\operatorname{arg max} \, L_{\theta,\phi}(x) </math>is equivalent to simultaneously maximizing <math>\ln p_\theta(x) </math> and minimizing <math> D_{KL}(q_\phi({z| x})\parallel p_\theta({z| x})) </math>. That is, maximizing the log-likelihood of the observed data, and minimizing the divergence of the approximate posterior <math>q_\phi(\cdot | x) </math> from the exact posterior <math>p_\theta(\cdot | x) </math>.
The form given is not very convenient for maximization, but the following, equivalent form, is:<math display="block">L_{\theta,\phi}(x) = \mathbb E_{z \sim q_\phi(\cdot | x)} \left[\ln p_\theta(x|z)\right] - D_{KL}(q_\phi({\cdot| x})\parallel p_\theta(\cdot)) </math>where <math>\ln p_\theta(x|z)</math> is implemented as <math>-\frac{1}{2}\| x - D_\theta(z)\|^2_2</math>, since that is, up to an additive constant, what <math>x|z \sim \mathcal N(D_\theta(z), I)</math> yields. That is, we model the distribution of <math>x</math> conditional on <math>z</math> to be a Gaussian distribution centered on <math>D_\theta(z)</math>. The distribution of <math>q_\phi(z |x)</math> and <math>p_\theta(z)</math> are often also chosen to be Gaussians as <math>z|x \sim \mathcal N(E_\phi(x), \sigma_\phi(x)^2I)</math> and <math>z \sim \mathcal N(0, I)</math>, with which we obtain by the formula for [[Kullback–Leibler divergence#Multivariate normal distributions|KL divergence of Gaussians]]:<math display="block">L_{\theta,\phi}(x) = -\frac 12\mathbb E_{z \sim q_\phi(\cdot | x)} \left[ \|x - D_\theta(z)\|_2^2\right] - \frac 12 \left( N\sigma_\phi(x)^2 + \|E_\phi(x)\|_2^2 - 2N\ln\sigma_\phi(x) \right) + Const </math>Here <math> N </math> is the dimension of <math> z </math>. For a more detailed derivation and more interpretations of ELBO and its maximization, see [[Evidence lower bound|its main page]].
== Reparameterization ==
Line 97:
Some structures directly deal with the quality of the generated samples<ref>{{Cite arXiv|last1=Dai|first1=Bin|last2=Wipf|first2=David|date=2019-10-30|title=Diagnosing and Enhancing VAE Models|class=cs.LG|eprint=1903.05789}}</ref><ref>{{Cite arXiv|last1=Dorta|first1=Garoe|last2=Vicente|first2=Sara|last3=Agapito|first3=Lourdes|last4=Campbell|first4=Neill D. F.|last5=Simpson|first5=Ivor|date=2018-07-31|title=Training VAEs Under Structured Residuals|class=stat.ML|eprint=1804.01050}}</ref> or implement more than one latent space to further improve the representation learning.
Some architectures mix VAE and [[generative adversarial network]]s to obtain hybrid models.<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Larsen|first1=Anders Boesen Lindbo|last2=Sønderby|first2=Søren Kaae|last3=Larochelle|first3=Hugo|last4=Winther|first4=Ole|date=2016-06-11|title=Autoencoding beyond pixels using a learned similarity metric|url=http://proceedings.mlr.press/v48/larsen16.html|journal=International Conference on Machine Learning|language=en|publisher=PMLR|pages=1558–1566|arxiv=1512.09300}}</ref><ref>{{cite arXiv|last1=Bao|first1=Jianmin|last2=Chen|first2=Dong|last3=Wen|first3=Fang|last4=Li|first4=Houqiang|last5=Hua|first5=Gang|date=2017|title=CVAE-GAN: Fine-Grained Image Generation Through Asymmetric Training|pages=2745–2754|class=cs.CV|eprint=1703.10155}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Gao|first1=Rui|last2=Hou|first2=Xingsong|last3=Qin|first3=Jie|last4=Chen|first4=Jiaxin|last5=Liu|first5=Li|last6=Zhu|first6=Fan|last7=Zhang|first7=Zhao|last8=Shao|first8=Ling|date=2020|title=Zero-VAE-GAN: Generating Unseen Features for Generalized and Transductive Zero-Shot Learning|url=https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/8957359|journal=IEEE Transactions on Image Processing|volume=29|pages=3665–3680|doi=10.1109/TIP.2020.2964429|pmid=31940538|bibcode=2020ITIP...29.3665G|s2cid=210334032|issn=1941-0042|url-access=subscription}}</ref>
It is not necessary to use gradients to update the encoder. In fact, the encoder is not necessary for the generative model. <ref>{{cite book | last1=Drefs | first1=J. | last2=Guiraud | first2=E. | last3=Panagiotou | first3=F. | last4=Lücke | first4=J. | chapter=Direct evolutionary optimization of variational autoencoders with binary latents | title=Joint European Conference on Machine Learning and Knowledge Discovery in Databases | series=Lecture Notes in Computer Science | pages=357–372 | year=2023 | volume=13715 | publisher=Springer Nature Switzerland | doi=10.1007/978-3-031-26409-2_22 | isbn=978-3-031-26408-5 | chapter-url=https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-031-26409-2_22 }}</ref>
Line 110:
We obtain the final formula for the loss:
<math display="block"> L_{\theta,\phi} = \mathbb{E}_{x \sim \mathbb{P}^{real}} \left[ \|x - D_\theta(E_\phi(x))\|_2^2\right]
+d \left( \mu(dz), E_\phi \sharp \mathbb{P}^{real} \right)^2</math>
+d \left( \mu(dz), E_\phi \sharp \mathbb{P}^{real} \right)^2</math><math>d</math> must have certain properties depending on the type of algorithm used to mimize this loss function. For example, it has to be expressable as an expectation if it is to be optimized by a [[Stochastic gradient descent|stochastic optimization algorithm]]. Several distances can be chosen and this has given rise to several flavors of VAEs:▼
▲
* the sliced Wasserstein distance used by S Kolouri, et al. in their VAE<ref>{{Cite conference |last1=Kolouri |first1=Soheil |last2=Pope |first2=Phillip E. |last3=Martin |first3=Charles E. |last4=Rohde |first4=Gustavo K. |date=2019 |title=Sliced Wasserstein Auto-Encoders |url=https://openreview.net/forum?id=H1xaJn05FQ |conference=International Conference on Learning Representations |publisher=ICPR |book-title=International Conference on Learning Representations}}</ref>
* the [[energy distance]] implemented in the Radon Sobolev Variational Auto-Encoder<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Turinici |first=Gabriel |year=2021 |title=Radon-Sobolev Variational Auto-Encoders |url=https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0893608021001556 |journal=Neural Networks |volume=141 |pages=294–305 |arxiv=1911.13135 |doi=10.1016/j.neunet.2021.04.018 |issn=0893-6080 |pmid=33933889}}</ref>
Line 144 ⟶ 146:
[[Category:Bayesian statistics]]
[[Category:Dimension reduction]]
[[Category:2013 in artificial intelligence]]
| |||