concatenation 和 element-wise summation 该选哪个?

一直不知道 concatenation 和 element-wise summation 该选哪个?这个回答很不错。

[from] https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-theory-behind-the-concatenation-vs-summation-of-2-tensors-in-deep-learning-How-does-this-empirically-relate-to-information-passed

What is the theory behind the concatenation vs. summation of 2 tensors in deep learning? How does this empirically relate to information passed?

2 Answers

 

Farshid Rayhan, studied at University of Manchester

Updated Jul 16

The summation of tensors are the signature of ResNet and concatenations of tensors were first used in Inception nets and later in DenseNet.

The identity matrix summation speeds up the training process and improves gradient flow since the skip connections are taken from previous conv operations. Thus the backpropagation can effectively transfer error corrections to earlier layers much easily. This addresses the vanishing gradient problem.

The channel wise concatenation was used in inception net to concatenate the feature maps generated by different filter sizes so that the user wont have to choose an effective filter size. DenseNet concatenates feature maps of previous layers, similar to Inception nets, so that the next layer can choose to work on either the features maps generated by the immediate earlier layer or it can work on the feature maps of the conv operation before the immediate earlier layer.

DenseNet procedure makes the model much more thick as channels are being joined after each conv operation while that doesnt happen in ResNet as it just sums the tensor. DenseNet paper argued that the summation harms the gradient flow as it sums up the values.

Both of the process are very state of the art. I personally prefer the channel concatenation process because I believe the summing up tensor regardless pollutes the feature map of both, the immediate conv operation and the source of the skip connection. Since deep nets are by nature a very strong learner this is why this ResNet process works quite well. Plus I also believe in the strategy of DenseNet where the goal is to make a smaller network with can do equivalent of very deep net like ResNet.

 

<think>嗯,用户想了解如何在TensorFlow或PyTorch中实现按通道拼接。首先,我需要回忆一下这两种框架中常用的拼接函数。PyTorch里应该是torch.cat,而TensorFlow可能是tf.concat。然后,关键点在于指定拼接的维度,也就是通道所在的轴。 接下来,我得考虑用户的使用场景。他们可能是在构建卷积神经网络,比如U-Net或者类似的需要多尺度特征融合的模型。这时候,按通道拼接常用于将不同层的特征图合并,增加通道数。需要明确的是,拼接操作需要除通道维度外其他维度(如高度宽度)必须相同,否则会出错。 用户可能对维度参数不太清楚,比如在PyTorch中,对于NCHW格式的数据,通道是第1维,所以dim=1;而TensorFlow默认是NHWC,通道是最后一维,所以axis=-1或3。需要举例子说明两种框架的用法,同时提醒维度一致的要求。 另外,用户可能有隐式的疑问,比如为什么要用按通道拼接而不是其他方式,比如相加。这时候可以简单提一下拼接的好处,比如保留更多信息,但也会增加计算量。不过用户的问题主要是如何实现,所以这部分可以作为扩展稍微提一下。 还需要检查是否有相关引用可以支持。比如引用[4]提到AGs可以整合到标准CNN如U-Net,可能涉及到特征拼接,但不确定,所以可能不直接引用。其他引用似乎不相关,所以可能不需要添加引用。 最后,生成相关问题时要考虑用户可能的后续问题,比如维度不匹配怎么办,应用场景,性能影响等,这样可以帮他们深入理解。</think>在深度学习框架中,按通道拼接(channel-wise concatenation)主要通过指定维度参数实现。以下是TensorFlowPyTorch的具体实现方法: ### 一、PyTorch实现 使用`torch.cat`函数,指定拼接维度为通道维度(通常为`dim=1`): ```python import torch # 输入特征图形状:(batch_size, channels, height, width) x1 = torch.randn(2, 64, 128, 128) # 64通道 x2 = torch.randn(2, 32, 128, 128) # 32通道 # 沿通道维度拼接 concatenated = torch.cat((x1, x2), dim=1) print(concatenated.shape) # 输出:torch.Size([2, 96, 128, 128]) ``` ### 二、TensorFlow实现 使用`tf.concat`函数,指定拼接轴为通道轴(通常为`axis=-1`或`axis=3`): ```python import tensorflow as tf # 输入特征图形状:(batch_size, height, width, channels) x1 = tf.random.normal([2, 128, 128, 64]) # 64通道 x2 = tf.random.normal([2, 128, 128, 32]) # 32通道 # 沿通道维度拼接 concatenated = tf.concat([x1, x2], axis=-1) print(concatenated.shape) # 输出:(2, 128, 128, 96) ``` ### 关键注意事项: 1. 拼接时除通道维度外,其他维度必须完全相同 2. 常用于: - U-Net等分割网络的跳跃连接[^4] - 多尺度特征融合 - 多模态数据融合(如RGB+深度图)
评论
添加红包

请填写红包祝福语或标题

红包个数最小为10个

红包金额最低5元

当前余额3.43前往充值 >
需支付:10.00
成就一亿技术人!
领取后你会自动成为博主和红包主的粉丝 规则
hope_wisdom
发出的红包
实付
使用余额支付
点击重新获取
扫码支付
钱包余额 0

抵扣说明:

1.余额是钱包充值的虚拟货币,按照1:1的比例进行支付金额的抵扣。
2.余额无法直接购买下载,可以购买VIP、付费专栏及课程。

余额充值