How to improve the validation accuracy of the CNN network in deep learing ?

3 vues (au cours des 30 derniers jours)
Mohamed Elbeialy
Mohamed Elbeialy le 8 Déc 2020
Commenté : Mahesh Taparia le 14 Déc 2020
How to increase the validation accuracy to more than 90%?
Used Layers and options are following:
layers = [
imageInputLayer([227 227 3],"Name","data")
convolution2dLayer([11 11],94,"Name","conv1","BiasLearnRateFactor",2,"Stride",[4 4])
reluLayer("Name","relu1")
crossChannelNormalizationLayer(5,"Name","norm1","K",1)
maxPooling2dLayer([3 3],"Name","pool1","Stride",[2 2])
groupedConvolution2dLayer([5 5],94,2,"Name","conv2","BiasLearnRateFactor",2,"Padding",[2 2 2 2])
reluLayer("Name","relu2")
crossChannelNormalizationLayer(5,"Name","norm2","K",1)
maxPooling2dLayer([3 3],"Name","pool2","Stride",[2 2])
convolution2dLayer([3 3],94,"Name","conv3","BiasLearnRateFactor",2,"Padding",[1 1 1 1])
reluLayer("Name","relu3")
groupedConvolution2dLayer([2 2],64,2,"Name","conv4","BiasLearnRateFactor",2,"Padding",[1 1 1 1])
reluLayer("Name","relu4")
groupedConvolution2dLayer([3 3],128,2,"Name","conv5","BiasLearnRateFactor",2,"Padding",[1 1 1 1])
reluLayer("Name","relu5")
maxPooling2dLayer([3 3],"Name","pool5","Stride",[2 2])
fullyConnectedLayer(500,"Name","fc6","BiasLearnRateFactor",2)
reluLayer("Name","relu6")
dropoutLayer(0.5,"Name","drop6")
fullyConnectedLayer(500,"Name","fc7","BiasLearnRateFactor",2)
reluLayer("Name","relu7")
dropoutLayer(0.5,"Name","drop7")
fullyConnectedLayer(100,"Name","fc8","BiasLearnRateFactor",2)
fullyConnectedLayer(4,"Name","new fc","BiasLearnRateFactor",10,"WeightLearnRateFactor",10)
softmaxLayer("Name","prob")
classificationLayer("Name","classoutput")];
miniBatchSize =25; % 128
valFrequency = floor(numel(augimdsTrain.Files)/miniBatchSize);
options = trainingOptions('sgdm', ...
'MiniBatchSize',36, ... %32
'MaxEpochs',10, ...
'InitialLearnRate',0.001, ... %0.01
'LearnRateDropFactor',0.1, ...
'Shuffle','every-epoch', ...
'ValidationData',augimdsValidation, ...
'ValidationFrequency',valFrequency, ...
'ValidationPatience',4,'Verbose',false, ...
'Plots','training-progress');

Réponses (1)

Mahesh Taparia
Mahesh Taparia le 14 Déc 2020
Hi
By looking at the loss curve, it seems the loss is not saturated. So you can train with more epochs and check the performance. Also try with adam optimizer, it may improve the performance. Moreover, you can experiment with network architecture and hyperparameters to check if there can be some improvement. For example, add 1-2 more fully connected layers (after layer with 100 nodes). Hope it will help!
  2 commentaires
Mohamed Elbeialy
Mohamed Elbeialy le 14 Déc 2020
I have tried all your suggestions even using Adam optimizer, however, no improvment happened. Do you have further advice?
Mahesh Taparia
Mahesh Taparia le 14 Déc 2020
By looking at this curve, it seems training and validation accuracy improved by 5% (approax). Train with more epochs as the curve is not saturated yet or try with other network architecture.

Connectez-vous pour commenter.

Catégories

En savoir plus sur Image Data Workflows dans Help Center et File Exchange

Produits


Version

R2019a

Community Treasure Hunt

Find the treasures in MATLAB Central and discover how the community can help you!

Start Hunting!

Translated by