RNNs: An Overview
Last updated
Last updated
Source: https://www.commonlounge.com/discussion/69ecda7b57fe4b22bb3b6cbcc2c3ae60
RNNs are built on the same computational unit as the feed forward neural net, but differ in the architecture of how these neurons are connected to one another. RNNs do not have to be organized in layers and directed cycles are allowed. In fact, neurons are actually allowed to be connected to themselves.
The RNN consists of a bunch of input units, labeled u1,...,uK and output units, labeled y1,...,yL. There are also the hidden units x1,...,xN, which do most of the interesting work.In some cases, RNNs break the latter restriction with connections leading from the output units back to the hidden units. These are called "backprojections," and don't make the analysis of RNNs too much more complicated.
There are a lot of pretty challenging technical difficulties that arise when training recurrent neural networks, and it's still a very active area of research.
The problem with using backpropagation here is that we have cyclical dependencies. In feed forward nets, when we calculated the error derivatives with respect to the weights in one layer, we could express them completely in terms of the error derivatives from the layer above. In a recurrent neural network, we don't have this nice layering because the neurons do not form a directed acyclic graph. Trying to backpropagate through a RNN could force us to try to express an error derivative in terms of itself, which doesn't make for easy analysis.
The answer lies in employing a clever transformation, where we convert our RNN into a new structure that's essentially a feed-forward neural network! We call this strategy "unrolling" the RNN through time, and an example can be seen in the figure below (with only one input/output per time step to simplify the illustration):
The process is actually quite simple, but it has a profound impact on our ability to analyze the neural network. We take the RNN's inputs, outputs, and hidden units and replicate it for every time step. These replications correspond to layers in our new feed forward neural network. We then connect hidden units as follows. If the original RNN has a connection of weight ω from neuron i to neuron j, in our feed forward neural net, we draw a connection of weight ω from neuron i in every layer t_{k} to neuron j in every layer t_{k+1}.
Thus, to train our RNN, we randomly initialize the weights, "unroll" it into a feed forward neural net, and backpropogate to determine the optimal weights! To determine the initializations for the hidden states at time 0, we can treat the initial activities as parameters fed into the feed forward network at the lowest layer and backpropagate to determine their optimal values as well!
We run into a problem however, which is that after every batch of training examples we use, we need to modify the weights based on the error derivatives we calculated. In our feed-forward net, we have sets of connections that all correspond to the same connection in the original RNN. The error derivatives calculated with respect to their weights, however, are not guaranteed to be equal, which means we might be modifying them by different amounts. We definitely don't want to be doing that!
We can get around this challenge, by averaging (or summing) the error derivatives over all the connections that belong to the same set. This means that after each batch, we modify corresponding connections by the same amount, so if they were initialized to the same value, they will end up at the same value. This solves our problem :)
Unlike traditional feed forward nets, the feed forward nets generated by unrolling RNNs can be enormously deep.
You'll notice that as we use gradient descent, we get closer and closer to the local minimum on the surface. But suddenly, when we slightly overreach the valley and hit the cliff, we are presented with a massive gradient in the opposite direction. This forces us to bounce extremely far away from the local minimum. And once we're in nowhere land, we quickly find that the gradients are so vanishingly small that coming close again will take a seemingly endless amount of time. This issue is called the problem of exploding and vanishing gradients. You can imagine perhaps controlling this issue by rescaling gradients to never exceed a maximal magnitude (see the dotted path after hitting the cliff), but this approach still doesn't perform spectacularly well, especially in more complex RNNs. For a more mathematical treatment of this issue, check out this paper.
The LSTM unit consists of a memory cell which attempts to store information for extended periods of time. Access to this memory cell is protected by specialized gate neurons - the keep, write, and read gates - which are all logistic units. These gate cells, instead of sending their activities as inputs to other neurons, set the weights on edges connecting the rest of the neural net to the memory cell. The memory cell is a linear neuron that has a connection to itself. When the keep gate is turned on (with an activity of 1), the self connection has weight one and the memory cell writes its contents into itself. When the keep gate outputs a zero, the memory cell forgets its previous contents. The write gate allows the rest of the neural net to write into the memory cell when it outputs a 1 while the read gate allows the rest of the neural net to read from the memory cell when it outputs a 1.
So how exactly does this force a constant error flow through time to locally protect against exploding and vanishing gradients? To visualize this, let's unroll the LSTM unit through time:
To address the issues of deep back-propagation, researchers proposed a modified architecture for recurrent neural networks to help bridge long time lags between forcing inputs and appropriate responses and protect against exploding gradients. The architecture forces constant error flow (thus, neither exploding nor vanishing) through the internal state of special memory units. This long short term memory (LSTM) architecture utilized units that were structured as follows:
