MATLAB Answers

Eli
0

reverse engineering a simple neural network

Asked by Eli
on 23 Apr 2016
Latest activity Commented on by Greg Heath
on 26 Apr 2016
Hello, For teaching purposes, I am interested in using matlab to calculate the weights for a simple neural network classification problem, and then doing the classification myself using net1.IW, net1.LW, net1.b, etc. If I put the code below into a nn_bare.m file and run it, y_matlab and y_my are the same the first time, but y_my is then different the next time I run this. any hints for why the behavior is not consistent? I tried disabling adaptation, and adding a random number seed, but this did not help. Many thanks... E
%%data to be classified:
X=[2 7 0 7 4 3 9 1 8 4 10 6 4 5 2 3 5 8 3 4;
10 6 7 10 8 1 3 4 4 1 1 7 10 8 0 0 2 4 6 9];
y=[3 3 1 3 3 1 2 1 2 1 2 3 3 3 1 1 2 2 1 3];
%%for classification, turn labels into matrix format:
T=zeros(max(y),length(y)); for i=1:length(y); T(y(i),i)=1; end
rng('default'); % for reproducible results, as weights are initialized randomly
net1 = patternnet([5 5]);
net1.divideFcn=''; % don't divide data into training, testing, validation.
[net1,tr] = train(net1,X,T);
net1.adaptFcn=''; % don't change network during usage after training
%%use the trained network to classify a new point:
Xtest=[7 2]'
y_matlab=net1(Xtest)
%%Test matlab's classification manually:
a1 = tansig(net1.IW{1,:}*Xtest + net1.b{1});
a2 = tansig(net1.LW{2,1}*a1 + net1.b{2});
y_my = softmax(net1.LW{3,2}*a2 + net1.b{3});
y_my
Output: >> nn_bare
Xtest =
7
2
y_matlab =
0.0000
1.0000
0.0000
y_my =
0.0000
1.0000
0.0000
>> nn_bare
Xtest =
7
2
y_matlab =
0.0000
1.0000
0.0000
y_my =
0.0000
0.9307
0.0693
>>

  0 Comments

Sign in to comment.

1 Answer

Answer by Greg Heath
on 24 Apr 2016
 Accepted Answer

You did not take into account the default normalization of inputs to the range [-1,1] and the unnormalization of the output from the range [-1,1].
Type, without the ending semicolons:
net = patternnet
inputprocessFcns = net.input.processFcns
outputprocessFcns = net.output.processFcns
Hope this helps.
Thank you for formally accepting my answer
Greg

  3 Comments

thanks, I can see that this would make a difference, here is the output. I am all set now, when I add net1.inputs{1}.processFcns = {}; net1.outputs{1}.processFcns = {}; things work just fine. I realize this is not optimal for a real application, but probably good enough for demonstration purposes. thanks again for the helpful response!
>> net = patternnet
inputprocessFcns = net.input.processFcns
outputprocessFcns = net.output.processFcns
net =
Neural Network
name: 'Pattern Recognition Neural Network'
userdata: (your custom info)
dimensions:
numInputs: 1
numLayers: 2
numOutputs: 1
numInputDelays: 0
numLayerDelays: 0
numFeedbackDelays: 0
numWeightElements: 10
sampleTime: 1
connections:
biasConnect: [1; 1]
inputConnect: [1; 0]
layerConnect: [0 0; 1 0]
outputConnect: [0 1]
subobjects:
input: Equivalent to inputs{1}
output: Equivalent to outputs{2}
inputs: {1x1 cell array of 1 input}
layers: {2x1 cell array of 2 layers}
outputs: {1x2 cell array of 1 output}
biases: {2x1 cell array of 2 biases}
inputWeights: {2x1 cell array of 1 weight}
layerWeights: {2x2 cell array of 1 weight}
functions:
adaptFcn: 'adaptwb'
adaptParam: (none)
derivFcn: 'defaultderiv'
divideFcn: 'dividerand'
divideParam: .trainRatio, .valRatio, .testRatio
divideMode: 'sample'
initFcn: 'initlay'
performFcn: 'crossentropy'
performParam: .regularization, .normalization
plotFcns: {'plotperform', plottrainstate, ploterrhist,
plotconfusion, plotroc}
plotParams: {1x5 cell array of 5 params}
trainFcn: 'trainscg'
trainParam: .showWindow, .showCommandLine, .show, .epochs,
.time, .goal, .min_grad, .max_fail, .sigma,
.lambda
weight and bias values:
IW: {2x1 cell} containing 1 input weight matrix
LW: {2x2 cell} containing 1 layer weight matrix
b: {2x1 cell} containing 2 bias vectors
methods:
adapt: Learn while in continuous use
configure: Configure inputs & outputs
gensim: Generate Simulink model
init: Initialize weights & biases
perform: Calculate performance
sim: Evaluate network outputs given inputs
train: Train network with examples
view: View diagram
unconfigure: Unconfigure inputs & outputs
evaluate: outputs = net(inputs)
inputprocessFcns =
'removeconstantrows' 'mapminmax'
outputprocessFcns =
'removeconstantrows' 'mapminmax'
There is nothing keeping you from doing the normalizations/denormalization,
explicitly, before and after training.
Hope this helps.
Greg
I ran your code multiple times but always got the same result which differs from yours.
I also made comments that may be helpful.
GEH1 = ' Use lowercase for double variables (uppercase for cells)'
X=[2 7 0 7 4 3 9 1 8 4 10 6 4 5 2 3 5 8 3 4;
10 6 7 10 8 1 3 4 4 1 1 7 10 8 0 0 2 4 6 9];
y=[3 3 1 3 3 1 2 1 2 1 2 3 3 3 1 1 2 2 1 3];
GEH2 = ' [ I N ] = size(X) , [ O N ] = size(y)' % [2 20], [1 20 ]
% for classification, turn labels into matrix format: T = zeros(max(y),length(y)); for i=1:length(y); T(y(i),i)=1; end
GEH3 = 'Use functions ind2vec and, later, vec2ind'
rng('default'); % for reproducible results, as weights are initialized randomly net1 = patternnet([5 5]);
GEH4 = 'One hidden layer is sufficient for a universal approximator'
net1.divideFcn=''; % don't divide data into training, testing, validation.
GEH5 = ' Number of training equations Ntrneq = N*O = 20'
GEH6 = [ ' Number of unknown weights Nw = ( I + 1 )*H1 + ' ...,
'( H1 + 1 )*H2 + ( H2 + 1)*O = 15+30+6 = 51' ]
GEH7 = [ 'More unknowns(51) than equations (20) ==> ' ...
'OVERFITTING ==> ' ...
' 1. Reduce No. of hidden nodes or ' ...
' 2. use a validation set or' ...
' 3. use Bayesian Regularization ']
[net1,tr] = train(net1,X,T); net1.adaptFcn=''; % don't change network during usage after training % use the trained network to classify a new point:
GEH8 = 'Delete above command: it"s irrelevant'
Xtest=[7 2]'
Xtest =
7
2
GEH9 = ' Where is verification of good performance on training data ???'
y_matlab=net1(Xtest)
y_matlab =
2.7747e-07
1
3.5459e-07
% Test matlab's classification manually: a1 = tansig(net1.IW{1,:}*Xtest + net1.b{1}); a2 = tansig(net1.LW{2,1}*a1 + net1.b{2}); y_my = softmax(net1.LW{3,2}*a2 + net1.b{3});
y_my =
6.5673e-07
0.71821
0.28179
% Output: >> nn_bare % % Xtest = % 7 % 2 % % y_matlab = % 0.0000 % 1.0000 % 0.0000 % % y_my = % 0.0000 % 1.0000 % 0.0000 % % >> nn_bare % % Xtest = % 7 % 2 % % y_matlab = % 0.0000 % 1.0000 % 0.0000 % % y_my = % 0.0000 % 0.9307 % 0.0693
Not sure why my results are different from yours.
Hope this helps.
Greg

Sign in to comment.