Hubbry Logo
Deep learningDeep learningMain
Open search
Deep learning
Community hub
Deep learning
logo
8 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Contribute something
Deep learning
Deep learning
from Wikipedia
Representing images on multiple layers of abstraction in deep learning
Representing images on multiple layers of abstraction in deep learning[1]

In machine learning, deep learning focuses on utilizing multilayered neural networks to perform tasks such as classification, regression, and representation learning. The field takes inspiration from biological neuroscience and is centered around stacking artificial neurons into layers and "training" them to process data. The adjective "deep" refers to the use of multiple layers (ranging from three to several hundred or thousands) in the network. Methods used can be supervised, semi-supervised or unsupervised.[2]

Some common deep learning network architectures include fully connected networks, deep belief networks, recurrent neural networks, convolutional neural networks, generative adversarial networks, transformers, and neural radiance fields. These architectures have been applied to fields including computer vision, speech recognition, natural language processing, machine translation, bioinformatics, drug design, medical image analysis, climate science, material inspection and board game programs, where they have produced results comparable to and in some cases surpassing human expert performance.[3][4][5]

Early forms of neural networks were inspired by information processing and distributed communication nodes in biological systems, particularly the human brain. However, current neural networks do not intend to model the brain function of organisms, and are generally seen as low-quality models for that purpose.[6]

Overview

[edit]

Most modern deep learning models are based on multi-layered neural networks such as convolutional neural networks and transformers, although they can also include propositional formulas or latent variables organized layer-wise in deep generative models such as the nodes in deep belief networks and deep Boltzmann machines.[7]

Fundamentally, deep learning refers to a class of machine learning algorithms in which a hierarchy of layers is used to transform input data into a progressively more abstract and composite representation. For example, in an image recognition model, the raw input may be an image (represented as a tensor of pixels). The first representational layer may attempt to identify basic shapes such as lines and circles, the second layer may compose and encode arrangements of edges, the third layer may encode a nose and eyes, and the fourth layer may recognize that the image contains a face.

Importantly, a deep learning process can learn which features to optimally place at which level on its own. Prior to deep learning, machine learning techniques often involved hand-crafted feature engineering to transform the data into a more suitable representation for a classification algorithm to operate on. In the deep learning approach, features are not hand-crafted and the model discovers useful feature representations from the data automatically. This does not eliminate the need for hand-tuning; for example, varying numbers of layers and layer sizes can provide different degrees of abstraction.[8][2]

The word "deep" in "deep learning" refers to the number of layers through which the data is transformed. More precisely, deep learning systems have a substantial credit assignment path (CAP) depth. The CAP is the chain of transformations from input to output. CAPs describe potentially causal connections between input and output. For a feedforward neural network, the depth of the CAPs is that of the network and is the number of hidden layers plus one (as the output layer is also parameterized). For recurrent neural networks, in which a signal may propagate through a layer more than once, the CAP depth is potentially unlimited.[9] No universally agreed-upon threshold of depth divides shallow learning from deep learning, but most researchers agree that deep learning involves CAP depth higher than two. CAP of depth two has been shown to be a universal approximator in the sense that it can emulate any function.[10] Beyond that, more layers do not add to the function approximator ability of the network. Deep models (CAP > two) are able to extract better features than shallow models and hence, extra layers help in learning the features effectively.

Deep learning architectures can be constructed with a greedy layer-by-layer method.[11] Deep learning helps to disentangle these abstractions and pick out which features improve performance.[8]

Deep learning algorithms can be applied to unsupervised learning tasks. This is an important benefit because unlabeled data is more abundant than the labeled data. Examples of deep structures that can be trained in an unsupervised manner are deep belief networks.[8][12]

The term deep learning was introduced to the machine learning community by Rina Dechter in 1986,[13] and to artificial neural networks by Igor Aizenberg and colleagues in 2000, in the context of Boolean threshold neurons.[14][15] Although the history of its appearance is apparently more complicated.[16]

Interpretations

[edit]

Deep neural networks are generally interpreted in terms of the universal approximation theorem[17][18][19][20][21] or probabilistic inference.[22][23][8][9][24]

The classic universal approximation theorem concerns the capacity of feedforward neural networks with a single hidden layer of finite size to approximate continuous functions.[17][18][19][20] In 1989, the first proof was published by George Cybenko for sigmoid activation functions[17] and was generalised to feed-forward multi-layer architectures in 1991 by Kurt Hornik.[18] Recent work also showed that universal approximation also holds for non-bounded activation functions such as Kunihiko Fukushima's rectified linear unit.[25][26]

The universal approximation theorem for deep neural networks concerns the capacity of networks with bounded width but the depth is allowed to grow. Lu et al.[21] proved that if the width of a deep neural network with ReLU activation is strictly larger than the input dimension, then the network can approximate any Lebesgue integrable function; if the width is smaller or equal to the input dimension, then a deep neural network is not a universal approximator.

The probabilistic interpretation[24] derives from the field of machine learning. It features inference,[23][7][8][9][12][24] as well as the optimization concepts of training and testing, related to fitting and generalization, respectively. More specifically, the probabilistic interpretation considers the activation nonlinearity as a cumulative distribution function.[24] The probabilistic interpretation led to the introduction of dropout as regularizer in neural networks. The probabilistic interpretation was introduced by researchers including Hopfield, Widrow and Narendra and popularized in surveys such as the one by Bishop.[27]

History

[edit]

Before 1980

[edit]

There are two types of artificial neural network (ANN): feedforward neural network (FNN) or multilayer perceptron (MLP) and recurrent neural networks (RNN). RNNs have cycles in their connectivity structure, FNNs don't. In the 1920s, Wilhelm Lenz and Ernst Ising created the Ising model[28][29] which is essentially a non-learning RNN architecture consisting of neuron-like threshold elements. In 1972, Shun'ichi Amari made this architecture adaptive.[30][31] His learning RNN was republished by John Hopfield in 1982.[32] Other early recurrent neural networks were published by Kaoru Nakano in 1971.[33][34] Already in 1948, Alan Turing produced work on "Intelligent Machinery" that was not published in his lifetime,[35] containing "ideas related to artificial evolution and learning RNNs".[31]

Frank Rosenblatt (1958)[36] proposed the perceptron, an MLP with 3 layers: an input layer, a hidden layer with randomized weights that did not learn, and an output layer. He later published a 1962 book that also introduced variants and computer experiments, including a version with four-layer perceptrons "with adaptive preterminal networks" where the last two layers have learned weights (here he credits H. D. Block and B. W. Knight).[37]: section 16  The book cites an earlier network by R. D. Joseph (1960)[38] "functionally equivalent to a variation of" this four-layer system (the book mentions Joseph over 30 times). Should Joseph therefore be considered the originator of proper adaptive multilayer perceptrons with learning hidden units? Unfortunately, the learning algorithm was not a functional one, and fell into oblivion.

The first working deep learning algorithm was the Group method of data handling, a method to train arbitrarily deep neural networks, published by Alexey Ivakhnenko and Lapa in 1965. They regarded it as a form of polynomial regression,[39] or a generalization of Rosenblatt's perceptron to handle more complex, nonlinear, and hierarchical relationships.[40] A 1971 paper described a deep network with eight layers trained by this method,[41] which is based on layer by layer training through regression analysis. Superfluous hidden units are pruned using a separate validation set. Since the activation functions of the nodes are Kolmogorov-Gabor polynomials, these were also the first deep networks with multiplicative units or "gates".[31]

The first deep learning multilayer perceptron trained by stochastic gradient descent[42] was published in 1967 by Shun'ichi Amari.[43] In computer experiments conducted by Amari's student Saito, a five layer MLP with two modifiable layers learned internal representations to classify non-linearily separable pattern classes.[31] Subsequent developments in hardware and hyperparameter tunings have made end-to-end stochastic gradient descent the currently dominant training technique.

In 1969, Kunihiko Fukushima introduced the ReLU (rectified linear unit) activation function.[25][31] The rectifier has become the most popular activation function for deep learning.[44]

Deep learning architectures for convolutional neural networks (CNNs) with convolutional layers and downsampling layers began with the Neocognitron introduced by Kunihiko Fukushima in 1979, though not trained by backpropagation.[45][46]

Backpropagation is an efficient application of the chain rule derived by Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz in 1673[47] to networks of differentiable nodes. The terminology "back-propagating errors" was actually introduced in 1962 by Rosenblatt,[37] but he did not know how to implement this, although Henry J. Kelley had a continuous precursor of backpropagation in 1960 in the context of control theory.[48] The modern form of backpropagation was first published in Seppo Linnainmaa's master thesis (1970).[49][50][31] G.M. Ostrovski et al. republished it in 1971.[51][52] Paul Werbos applied backpropagation to neural networks in 1982[53] (his 1974 PhD thesis, reprinted in a 1994 book,[54] did not yet describe the algorithm[52]). In 1986, David E. Rumelhart et al. popularised backpropagation but did not cite the original work.[55][56]

1980s-2000s

[edit]

The time delay neural network (TDNN) was introduced in 1987 by Alex Waibel to apply CNN to phoneme recognition. It used convolutions, weight sharing, and backpropagation.[57][58] In 1988, Wei Zhang applied a backpropagation-trained CNN to alphabet recognition.[59] In 1989, Yann LeCun et al. created a CNN called LeNet for recognizing handwritten ZIP codes on mail. Training required 3 days.[60] In 1990, Wei Zhang implemented a CNN on optical computing hardware.[61] In 1991, a CNN was applied to medical image object segmentation[62] and breast cancer detection in mammograms.[63] LeNet-5 (1998), a 7-level CNN by Yann LeCun et al., that classifies digits, was applied by several banks to recognize hand-written numbers on checks digitized in 32x32 pixel images.[64]

Recurrent neural networks (RNN)[28][30] were further developed in the 1980s. Recurrence is used for sequence processing, and when a recurrent network is unrolled, it mathematically resembles a deep feedforward layer. Consequently, they have similar properties and issues, and their developments had mutual influences. In RNN, two early influential works were the Jordan network (1986)[65] and the Elman network (1990),[66] which applied RNN to study problems in cognitive psychology.

In the 1980s, backpropagation did not work well for deep learning with long credit assignment paths. To overcome this problem, in 1991, Jürgen Schmidhuber proposed a hierarchy of RNNs pre-trained one level at a time by self-supervised learning where each RNN tries to predict its own next input, which is the next unexpected input of the RNN below.[67][68] This "neural history compressor" uses predictive coding to learn internal representations at multiple self-organizing time scales. This can substantially facilitate downstream deep learning. The RNN hierarchy can be collapsed into a single RNN, by distilling a higher level chunker network into a lower level automatizer network.[67][68][31] In 1993, a neural history compressor solved a "Very Deep Learning" task that required more than 1000 subsequent layers in an RNN unfolded in time.[69] The "P" in ChatGPT refers to such pre-training.

Sepp Hochreiter's diploma thesis (1991)[70] implemented the neural history compressor,[67] and identified and analyzed the vanishing gradient problem.[70][71] Hochreiter proposed recurrent residual connections to solve the vanishing gradient problem. This led to the long short-term memory (LSTM), published in 1995.[72] LSTM can learn "very deep learning" tasks[9] with long credit assignment paths that require memories of events that happened thousands of discrete time steps before. That LSTM was not yet the modern architecture, which required a "forget gate", introduced in 1999,[73] which became the standard RNN architecture.

In 1991, Jürgen Schmidhuber also published adversarial neural networks that contest with each other in the form of a zero-sum game, where one network's gain is the other network's loss.[74][75] The first network is a generative model that models a probability distribution over output patterns. The second network learns by gradient descent to predict the reactions of the environment to these patterns. This was called "artificial curiosity". In 2014, this principle was used in generative adversarial networks (GANs).[76]

During 1985–1995, inspired by statistical mechanics, several architectures and methods were developed by Terry Sejnowski, Peter Dayan, Geoffrey Hinton, etc., including the Boltzmann machine,[77] restricted Boltzmann machine,[78] Helmholtz machine,[79] and the wake-sleep algorithm.[80] These were designed for unsupervised learning of deep generative models. However, those were more computationally expensive compared to backpropagation. Boltzmann machine learning algorithm, published in 1985, was briefly popular before being eclipsed by the backpropagation algorithm in 1986. (p. 112 [81]). A 1988 network became state of the art in protein structure prediction, an early application of deep learning to bioinformatics.[82]

Both shallow and deep learning (e.g., recurrent nets) of ANNs for speech recognition have been explored for many years.[83][84][85] These methods never outperformed non-uniform internal-handcrafting Gaussian mixture model/Hidden Markov model (GMM-HMM) technology based on generative models of speech trained discriminatively.[86] Key difficulties have been analyzed, including gradient diminishing[70] and weak temporal correlation structure in neural predictive models.[87][88] Additional difficulties were the lack of training data and limited computing power.

Most speech recognition researchers moved away from neural nets to pursue generative modeling. An exception was at SRI International in the late 1990s. Funded by the US government's NSA and DARPA, SRI researched in speech and speaker recognition. The speaker recognition team led by Larry Heck reported significant success with deep neural networks in speech processing in the 1998 NIST Speaker Recognition benchmark.[89][90] It was deployed in the Nuance Verifier, representing the first major industrial application of deep learning.[91]

The principle of elevating "raw" features over hand-crafted optimization was first explored successfully in the architecture of deep autoencoder on the "raw" spectrogram or linear filter-bank features in the late 1990s,[90] showing its superiority over the Mel-Cepstral features that contain stages of fixed transformation from spectrograms. The raw features of speech, waveforms, later produced excellent larger-scale results.[92]

2000s

[edit]

Neural networks entered a lull, and simpler models that use task-specific handcrafted features such as Gabor filters and support vector machines (SVMs) became the preferred choices in the 1990s and 2000s, because of artificial neural networks' computational cost and a lack of understanding of how the brain wires its biological networks.[citation needed]

In 2003, LSTM became competitive with traditional speech recognizers on certain tasks.[93] In 2006, Alex Graves, Santiago Fernández, Faustino Gomez, and Schmidhuber combined it with connectionist temporal classification (CTC)[94] in stacks of LSTMs.[95] In 2009, it became the first RNN to win a pattern recognition contest, in connected handwriting recognition.[96][9]

In 2006, publications by Geoff Hinton, Ruslan Salakhutdinov, Osindero and Teh[97][98] deep belief networks were developed for generative modeling. They are trained by training one restricted Boltzmann machine, then freezing it and training another one on top of the first one, and so on, then optionally fine-tuned using supervised backpropagation.[99] They could model high-dimensional probability distributions, such as the distribution of MNIST images, but convergence was slow.[100][101][102]

The impact of deep learning in industry began in the early 2000s, when CNNs already processed an estimated 10% to 20% of all the checks written in the US, according to Yann LeCun.[103] Industrial applications of deep learning to large-scale speech recognition started around 2010.

The 2009 NIPS Workshop on Deep Learning for Speech Recognition was motivated by the limitations of deep generative models of speech, and the possibility that given more capable hardware and large-scale data sets that deep neural nets might become practical. It was believed that pre-training DNNs using generative models of deep belief nets (DBN) would overcome the main difficulties of neural nets. However, it was discovered that replacing pre-training with large amounts of training data for straightforward backpropagation when using DNNs with large, context-dependent output layers produced error rates dramatically lower than then-state-of-the-art Gaussian mixture model (GMM)/Hidden Markov Model (HMM) and also than more-advanced generative model-based systems.[104] The nature of the recognition errors produced by the two types of systems was characteristically different,[105] offering technical insights into how to integrate deep learning into the existing highly efficient, run-time speech decoding system deployed by all major speech recognition systems.[23][106][107] Analysis around 2009–2010, contrasting the GMM (and other generative speech models) vs. DNN models, stimulated early industrial investment in deep learning for speech recognition.[105] That analysis was done with comparable performance (less than 1.5% in error rate) between discriminative DNNs and generative models.[104][105][108] In 2010, researchers extended deep learning from TIMIT to large vocabulary speech recognition, by adopting large output layers of the DNN based on context-dependent HMM states constructed by decision trees.[109][110][111][106]

Deep learning revolution

[edit]
How deep learning is a subset of machine learning and how machine learning is a subset of artificial intelligence (AI)

The deep learning revolution started around CNN- and GPU-based computer vision.

Although CNNs trained by backpropagation had been around for decades and GPU implementations of NNs for years,[112] including CNNs,[113] faster implementations of CNNs on GPUs were needed to progress on computer vision. Later, as deep learning becomes widespread, specialized hardware and algorithm optimizations were developed specifically for deep learning.[114]

A key advance for the deep learning revolution was hardware advances, especially GPU. Some early work dated back to 2004.[112][113] In 2009, Raina, Madhavan, and Andrew Ng reported a 100M deep belief network trained on 30 Nvidia GeForce GTX 280 GPUs, an early demonstration of GPU-based deep learning. They reported up to 70 times faster training.[115]

In 2011, a CNN named DanNet[116][117] by Dan Ciresan, Ueli Meier, Jonathan Masci, Luca Maria Gambardella, and Jürgen Schmidhuber achieved for the first time superhuman performance in a visual pattern recognition contest, outperforming traditional methods by a factor of 3.[9] It then won more contests.[118][119] They also showed how max-pooling CNNs on GPU improved performance significantly.[3]

In 2012, Andrew Ng and Jeff Dean created an FNN that learned to recognize higher-level concepts, such as cats, only from watching unlabeled images taken from YouTube videos.[120]

In October 2012, AlexNet by Alex Krizhevsky, Ilya Sutskever, and Geoffrey Hinton[4] won the large-scale ImageNet competition by a significant margin over shallow machine learning methods. Further incremental improvements included the VGG-16 network by Karen Simonyan and Andrew Zisserman[121] and Google's Inceptionv3.[122]

The success in image classification was then extended to the more challenging task of generating descriptions (captions) for images, often as a combination of CNNs and LSTMs.[123][124][125]

In 2014, the state of the art was training "very deep neural network" with 20 to 30 layers.[126] Stacking too many layers led to a steep reduction in training accuracy,[127] known as the "degradation" problem.[128] In 2015, two techniques were developed to train very deep networks: the highway network was published in May 2015, and the residual neural network (ResNet)[129] in Dec 2015. ResNet behaves like an open-gated Highway Net.

Around the same time, deep learning started impacting the field of art. Early examples included Google DeepDream (2015), and neural style transfer (2015),[130] both of which were based on pretrained image classification neural networks, such as VGG-19.

Generative adversarial network (GAN) by (Ian Goodfellow et al., 2014)[131] (based on Jürgen Schmidhuber's principle of artificial curiosity[74][76]) became state of the art in generative modeling during 2014-2018 period. Excellent image quality is achieved by Nvidia's StyleGAN (2018)[132] based on the Progressive GAN by Tero Karras et al.[133] Here the GAN generator is grown from small to large scale in a pyramidal fashion. Image generation by GAN reached popular success, and provoked discussions concerning deepfakes.[134] Diffusion models (2015)[135] eclipsed GANs in generative modeling since then, with systems such as DALL·E 2 (2022) and Stable Diffusion (2022).

In 2015, Google's speech recognition improved by 49% by an LSTM-based model, which they made available through Google Voice Search on smartphone.[136][137]

Deep learning is part of state-of-the-art systems in various disciplines, particularly computer vision and automatic speech recognition (ASR). Results on commonly used evaluation sets such as TIMIT (ASR) and MNIST (image classification), as well as a range of large-vocabulary speech recognition tasks have steadily improved.[104][138] Convolutional neural networks were superseded for ASR by LSTM.[137][139][140][141] but are more successful in computer vision.

Yoshua Bengio, Geoffrey Hinton and Yann LeCun were awarded the 2018 Turing Award for "conceptual and engineering breakthroughs that have made deep neural networks a critical component of computing".[142]

Neural networks

[edit]
Simplified example of training a neural network in object detection: The network is trained by multiple images that are known to depict starfish and sea urchins, which are correlated with "nodes" that represent visual features. The starfish match with a ringed texture and a star outline, whereas most sea urchins match with a striped texture and oval shape. However, the instance of a ring textured sea urchin creates a weakly weighted association between them.
Subsequent run of the network on an input image (left):[143] The network correctly detects the starfish. However, the weakly weighted association between ringed texture and sea urchin also confers a weak signal to the latter from one of two intermediate nodes. In addition, a shell that was not included in the training gives a weak signal for the oval shape, also resulting in a weak signal for the sea urchin output. These weak signals may result in a false positive result for sea urchin.
In reality, textures and outlines would not be represented by single nodes, but rather by associated weight patterns of multiple nodes.

Artificial neural networks (ANNs) or connectionist systems are computing systems inspired by the biological neural networks that constitute animal brains. Such systems learn (progressively improve their ability) to do tasks by considering examples, generally without task-specific programming. For example, in image recognition, they might learn to identify images that contain cats by analyzing example images that have been manually labeled as "cat" or "no cat" and using the analytic results to identify cats in other images. They have found most use in applications difficult to express with a traditional computer algorithm using rule-based programming.

An ANN is based on a collection of connected units called artificial neurons, (analogous to biological neurons in a biological brain). Each connection (synapse) between neurons can transmit a signal to another neuron. The receiving (postsynaptic) neuron can process the signal(s) and then signal downstream neurons connected to it. Neurons may have state, generally represented by real numbers, typically between 0 and 1. Neurons and synapses may also have a weight that varies as learning proceeds, which can increase or decrease the strength of the signal that it sends downstream.

Typically, neurons are organized in layers. Different layers may perform different kinds of transformations on their inputs. Signals travel from the first (input), to the last (output) layer, possibly after traversing the layers multiple times.

The original goal of the neural network approach was to solve problems in the same way that a human brain would. Over time, attention focused on matching specific mental abilities, leading to deviations from biology such as backpropagation, or passing information in the reverse direction and adjusting the network to reflect that information.

Neural networks have been used on a variety of tasks, including computer vision, speech recognition, machine translation, social network filtering, playing board and video games and medical diagnosis.

As of 2017, neural networks typically have a few thousand to a few million units and millions of connections. Despite this number being several order of magnitude less than the number of neurons on a human brain, these networks can perform many tasks at a level beyond that of humans (e.g., recognizing faces, or playing "Go"[144]).

Deep neural networks

[edit]

A deep neural network (DNN) is an artificial neural network with multiple layers between the input and output layers.[7][9] There are different types of neural networks but they always consist of the same components: neurons, synapses, weights, biases, and functions.[145] These components as a whole function in a way that mimics functions of the human brain, and can be trained like any other ML algorithm.[citation needed]

For example, a DNN that is trained to recognize dog breeds will go over the given image and calculate the probability that the dog in the image is a certain breed. The user can review the results and select which probabilities the network should display (above a certain threshold, etc.) and return the proposed label. Each mathematical manipulation as such is considered a layer,[146] and complex DNN have many layers, hence the name "deep" networks.

DNNs can model complex non-linear relationships. DNN architectures generate compositional models where the object is expressed as a layered composition of primitives.[147] The extra layers enable composition of features from lower layers, potentially modeling complex data with fewer units than a similarly performing shallow network.[7] For instance, it was proved that sparse multivariate polynomials are exponentially easier to approximate with DNNs than with shallow networks.[148]

Deep architectures include many variants of a few basic approaches. Each architecture has found success in specific domains. It is not always possible to compare the performance of multiple architectures, unless they have been evaluated on the same data sets.[146]

DNNs are typically feedforward networks in which data flows from the input layer to the output layer without looping back. At first, the DNN creates a map of virtual neurons and assigns random numerical values, or "weights", to connections between them. The weights and inputs are multiplied and return an output between 0 and 1. If the network did not accurately recognize a particular pattern, an algorithm would adjust the weights.[149] That way the algorithm can make certain parameters more influential, until it determines the correct mathematical manipulation to fully process the data.

Recurrent neural networks, in which data can flow in any direction, are used for applications such as language modeling.[150][151][152][153][154] Long short-term memory is particularly effective for this use.[155][156]

Convolutional neural networks (CNNs) are used in computer vision.[157] CNNs also have been applied to acoustic modeling for automatic speech recognition (ASR).[158]

Challenges

[edit]

As with ANNs, many issues can arise with naively trained DNNs. Two common issues are overfitting and computation time.

DNNs are prone to overfitting because of the added layers of abstraction, which allow them to model rare dependencies in the training data. Regularization methods such as Ivakhnenko's unit pruning[41] or weight decay (-regularization) or sparsity (-regularization) can be applied during training to combat overfitting.[159] Alternatively dropout regularization randomly omits units from the hidden layers during training. This helps to exclude rare dependencies.[160] Another interesting recent development is research into models of just enough complexity through an estimation of the intrinsic complexity of the task being modelled. This approach has been successfully applied for multivariate time series prediction tasks such as traffic prediction.[161] Finally, data can be augmented via methods such as cropping and rotating such that smaller training sets can be increased in size to reduce the chances of overfitting.[162]

DNNs must consider many training parameters, such as the size (number of layers and number of units per layer), the learning rate, and initial weights. Sweeping through the parameter space for optimal parameters may not be feasible due to the cost in time and computational resources. Various tricks, such as batching (computing the gradient on several training examples at once rather than individual examples)[163] speed up computation. Large processing capabilities of many-core architectures (such as GPUs or the Intel Xeon Phi) have produced significant speedups in training, because of the suitability of such processing architectures for the matrix and vector computations.[164][165]

Alternatively, engineers may look for other types of neural networks with more straightforward and convergent training algorithms. CMAC (cerebellar model articulation controller) is one such kind of neural network. It doesn't require learning rates or randomized initial weights. The training process can be guaranteed to converge in one step with a new batch of data, and the computational complexity of the training algorithm is linear with respect to the number of neurons involved.[166][167]

Hardware

[edit]

Since the 2010s, advances in both machine learning algorithms and computer hardware have led to more efficient methods for training deep neural networks that contain many layers of non-linear hidden units and a very large output layer.[168] By 2019, graphics processing units (GPUs), often with AI-specific enhancements, had displaced CPUs as the dominant method for training large-scale commercial cloud AI .[169] OpenAI estimated the hardware computation used in the largest deep learning projects from AlexNet (2012) to AlphaZero (2017) and found a 300,000-fold increase in the amount of computation required, with a doubling-time trendline of 3.4 months.[170][171]

Special electronic circuits called deep learning processors were designed to speed up deep learning algorithms. Deep learning processors include neural processing units (NPUs) in Huawei cellphones[172] and cloud computing servers such as tensor processing units (TPU) in the Google Cloud Platform.[173] Cerebras Systems has also built a dedicated system to handle large deep learning models, the CS-2, based on the largest processor in the industry, the second-generation Wafer Scale Engine (WSE-2).[174][175]

Atomically thin semiconductors are considered promising for energy-efficient deep learning hardware where the same basic device structure is used for both logic operations and data storage. In 2020, Marega et al. published experiments with a large-area active channel material for developing logic-in-memory devices and circuits based on floating-gate field-effect transistors (FGFETs).[176]

In 2021, J. Feldmann et al. proposed an integrated photonic hardware accelerator for parallel convolutional processing.[177] The authors identify two key advantages of integrated photonics over its electronic counterparts: (1) massively parallel data transfer through wavelength division multiplexing in conjunction with frequency combs, and (2) extremely high data modulation speeds.[177] Their system can execute trillions of multiply-accumulate operations per second, indicating the potential of integrated photonics in data-heavy AI applications.[177]

Applications

[edit]

Automatic speech recognition

[edit]

Large-scale automatic speech recognition is the first and most convincing successful case of deep learning. LSTM RNNs can learn "Very Deep Learning" tasks[9] that involve multi-second intervals containing speech events separated by thousands of discrete time steps, where one time step corresponds to about 10 ms. LSTM with forget gates[156] is competitive with traditional speech recognizers on certain tasks.[93]

The initial success in speech recognition was based on small-scale recognition tasks based on TIMIT. The data set contains 630 speakers from eight major dialects of American English, where each speaker reads 10 sentences.[178] Its small size lets many configurations be tried. More importantly, the TIMIT task concerns phone-sequence recognition, which, unlike word-sequence recognition, allows weak phone bigram language models. This lets the strength of the acoustic modeling aspects of speech recognition be more easily analyzed. The error rates listed below, including these early results and measured as percent phone error rates (PER), have been summarized since 1991.

Method Percent phone
error rate (PER) (%)
Randomly Initialized RNN[179] 26.1
Bayesian Triphone GMM-HMM 25.6
Hidden Trajectory (Generative) Model 24.8
Monophone Randomly Initialized DNN 23.4
Monophone DBN-DNN 22.4
Triphone GMM-HMM with BMMI Training 21.7
Monophone DBN-DNN on fbank 20.7
Convolutional DNN[180] 20.0
Convolutional DNN w. Heterogeneous Pooling 18.7
Ensemble DNN/CNN/RNN[181] 18.3
Bidirectional LSTM 17.8
Hierarchical Convolutional Deep Maxout Network[182] 16.5

The debut of DNNs for speaker recognition in the late 1990s and speech recognition around 2009-2011 and of LSTM around 2003–2007, accelerated progress in eight major areas:[23][108][106]

  • Scale-up/out and accelerated DNN training and decoding
  • Sequence discriminative training
  • Feature processing by deep models with solid understanding of the underlying mechanisms
  • Adaptation of DNNs and related deep models
  • Multi-task and transfer learning by DNNs and related deep models
  • CNNs and how to design them to best exploit domain knowledge of speech
  • RNN and its rich LSTM variants
  • Other types of deep models including tensor-based models and integrated deep generative/discriminative models.

More recent speech recognition models use Transformers or Temporal Convolution Networks with significant success and widespread applications.[183][184][185] All major commercial speech recognition systems (e.g., Microsoft Cortana, Xbox, Skype Translator, Amazon Alexa, Google Now, Apple Siri, Baidu and iFlyTek voice search, and a range of Nuance speech products, etc.) are based on deep learning.[23][186][187]

Image recognition

[edit]
Richard Green explains how deep learning is used with a remotely operated vehicle in mussel aquaculture.

A common evaluation set for image classification is the MNIST database data set. MNIST is composed of handwritten digits and includes 60,000 training examples and 10,000 test examples. As with TIMIT, its small size lets users test multiple configurations. A comprehensive list of results on this set is available.[188]

Deep learning-based image recognition has become "superhuman", producing more accurate results than human contestants. This first occurred in 2011 in recognition of traffic signs, and in 2014, with recognition of human faces.[189][190]

Deep learning-trained vehicles now interpret 360° camera views.[191] Another example is Facial Dysmorphology Novel Analysis (FDNA) used to analyze cases of human malformation connected to a large database of genetic syndromes.

Visual art processing

[edit]
Visual art processing of Jimmy Wales in France, with the style of Munch's "The Scream" applied using neural style transfer

Closely related to the progress that has been made in image recognition is the increasing application of deep learning techniques to various visual art tasks. DNNs have proven themselves capable, for example, of

  • identifying the style period of a given painting[192][193]
  • Neural Style Transfer – capturing the style of a given artwork and applying it in a visually pleasing manner to an arbitrary photograph or video[192][193]
  • generating striking imagery based on random visual input fields.[192][193]

Natural language processing

[edit]

Neural networks have been used for implementing language models since the early 2000s.[150] LSTM helped to improve machine translation and language modeling.[151][152][153]

Other key techniques in this field are negative sampling[194] and word embedding. Word embedding, such as word2vec, can be thought of as a representational layer in a deep learning architecture that transforms an atomic word into a positional representation of the word relative to other words in the dataset; the position is represented as a point in a vector space. Using word embedding as an RNN input layer allows the network to parse sentences and phrases using an effective compositional vector grammar. A compositional vector grammar can be thought of as probabilistic context free grammar (PCFG) implemented by an RNN.[195] Recursive auto-encoders built atop word embeddings can assess sentence similarity and detect paraphrasing.[195] Deep neural architectures provide the best results for constituency parsing,[196] sentiment analysis,[197] information retrieval,[198][199] spoken language understanding,[200] machine translation,[151][201] contextual entity linking,[201] writing style recognition,[202] named-entity recognition (token classification),[203] text classification, and others.[204]

Recent developments generalize word embedding to sentence embedding.

Google Translate (GT) uses a large end-to-end long short-term memory (LSTM) network.[205][206][207][208] Google Neural Machine Translation (GNMT) uses an example-based machine translation method in which the system "learns from millions of examples".[206] It translates "whole sentences at a time, rather than pieces". Google Translate supports over one hundred languages.[206] The network encodes the "semantics of the sentence rather than simply memorizing phrase-to-phrase translations".[206][209] GT uses English as an intermediate between most language pairs.[209]

Drug discovery and toxicology

[edit]

A large percentage of candidate drugs fail to win regulatory approval. These failures are caused by insufficient efficacy (on-target effect), undesired interactions (off-target effects), or unanticipated toxic effects.[210][211] Research has explored use of deep learning to predict the biomolecular targets,[212][213] off-targets, and toxic effects of environmental chemicals in nutrients, household products and drugs.[214][215][216]

AtomNet is a deep learning system for structure-based rational drug design.[217] AtomNet was used to predict novel candidate biomolecules for disease targets such as the Ebola virus[218] and multiple sclerosis.[219][218]

In 2017 graph neural networks were used for the first time to predict various properties of molecules in a large toxicology data set.[220] In 2019, generative neural networks were used to produce molecules that were validated experimentally all the way into mice.[221][222]

Recommendation systems

[edit]

Recommendation systems have used deep learning to extract meaningful features for a latent factor model for content-based music and journal recommendations.[223][224] Multi-view deep learning has been applied for learning user preferences from multiple domains.[225] The model uses a hybrid collaborative and content-based approach and enhances recommendations in multiple tasks.

Bioinformatics

[edit]

An autoencoder ANN was used in bioinformatics, to predict gene ontology annotations and gene-function relationships.[226]

In medical informatics, deep learning was used to predict sleep quality based on data from wearables[227] and predictions of health complications from electronic health record data.[228]

Deep neural networks have shown unparalleled performance in predicting protein structure, according to the sequence of the amino acids that make it up. In 2020, AlphaFold, a deep-learning based system, achieved a level of accuracy significantly higher than all previous computational methods.[229][230]

Deep Neural Network Estimations

[edit]

Deep neural networks can be used to estimate the entropy of a stochastic process through an arrangement called a Neural Joint Entropy Estimator (NJEE).[231] Such an estimation provides insights on the effects of input random variables on an independent random variable. Practically, the DNN is trained as a classifier that maps an input vector or matrix X to an output probability distribution over the possible classes of random variable Y, given input X. For example, in image classification tasks, the NJEE maps a vector of pixels' color values to probabilities over possible image classes. In practice, the probability distribution of Y is obtained by a Softmax layer with number of nodes that is equal to the alphabet size of Y. NJEE uses continuously differentiable activation functions, such that the conditions for the universal approximation theorem holds. It is shown that this method provides a strongly consistent estimator and outperforms other methods in cases of large alphabet sizes.[231]

Medical image analysis

[edit]

Deep learning has been shown to produce competitive results in medical applications such as cancer cell classification, lesion detection, organ segmentation and image enhancement.[232][233] Modern deep learning tools demonstrate the high accuracy of detecting various diseases and the helpfulness of their use by specialists to improve the diagnosis efficiency.[234][235]

Mobile advertising

[edit]

Finding the appropriate mobile audience for mobile advertising is always challenging, since many data points must be considered and analyzed before a target segment can be created and used in ad serving by any ad server.[236] Deep learning has been used to interpret large, many-dimensioned advertising datasets. Many data points are collected during the request/serve/click internet advertising cycle. This information can form the basis of machine learning to improve ad selection.

Image restoration

[edit]

Deep learning has been successfully applied to inverse problems such as denoising, super-resolution, inpainting, and film colorization.[237] These applications include learning methods such as "Shrinkage Fields for Effective Image Restoration"[238] which trains on an image dataset, and Deep Image Prior, which trains on the image that needs restoration.

Financial fraud detection

[edit]

Deep learning is being successfully applied to financial fraud detection, tax evasion detection,[239] and anti-money laundering.[240]

Materials science

[edit]

In November 2023, researchers at Google DeepMind and Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory announced that they had developed an AI system known as GNoME. This system has contributed to materials science by discovering over 2 million new materials within a relatively short timeframe. GNoME employs deep learning techniques to efficiently explore potential material structures, achieving a significant increase in the identification of stable inorganic crystal structures. The system's predictions were validated through autonomous robotic experiments, demonstrating a noteworthy success rate of 71%. The data of newly discovered materials is publicly available through the Materials Project database, offering researchers the opportunity to identify materials with desired properties for various applications. This development has implications for the future of scientific discovery and the integration of AI in material science research, potentially expediting material innovation and reducing costs in product development. The use of AI and deep learning suggests the possibility of minimizing or eliminating manual lab experiments and allowing scientists to focus more on the design and analysis of unique compounds.[241][242][243]

Military

[edit]

The United States Department of Defense applied deep learning to train robots in new tasks through observation.[244]

Partial differential equations

[edit]

Physics informed neural networks have been used to solve partial differential equations in both forward and inverse problems in a data driven manner.[245] One example is the reconstructing fluid flow governed by the Navier-Stokes equations. Using physics informed neural networks does not require the often expensive mesh generation that conventional CFD methods rely on.[246][247]. It is evident that geometric and physical constraints have a synergistic effect on neural PDE surrogates, thereby enhancing their efficacy in predicting stable and super long rollouts.[248]

Deep backward stochastic differential equation method

[edit]

Deep backward stochastic differential equation method is a numerical method that combines deep learning with Backward stochastic differential equation (BSDE). This method is particularly useful for solving high-dimensional problems in financial mathematics. By leveraging the powerful function approximation capabilities of deep neural networks, deep BSDE addresses the computational challenges faced by traditional numerical methods in high-dimensional settings. Specifically, traditional methods like finite difference methods or Monte Carlo simulations often struggle with the curse of dimensionality, where computational cost increases exponentially with the number of dimensions. Deep BSDE methods, however, employ deep neural networks to approximate solutions of high-dimensional partial differential equations (PDEs), effectively reducing the computational burden.[249]

In addition, the integration of Physics-informed neural networks (PINNs) into the deep BSDE framework enhances its capability by embedding the underlying physical laws directly into the neural network architecture. This ensures that the solutions not only fit the data but also adhere to the governing stochastic differential equations. PINNs leverage the power of deep learning while respecting the constraints imposed by the physical models, resulting in more accurate and reliable solutions for financial mathematics problems.

Image reconstruction

[edit]

Image reconstruction is the reconstruction of the underlying images from the image-related measurements. Several works showed the better and superior performance of the deep learning methods compared to analytical methods for various applications, e.g., spectral imaging [250] and ultrasound imaging.[251]

Weather prediction

[edit]

Traditional weather prediction systems solve a very complex system of partial differential equations. GraphCast is a deep learning based model, trained on a long history of weather data to predict how weather patterns change over time. It is able to predict weather conditions for up to 10 days globally, at a very detailed level, and in under a minute, with precision similar to state of the art systems.[252][253]

Epigenetic clock

[edit]

An epigenetic clock is a biochemical test that can be used to measure age. Galkin et al. used deep neural networks to train an epigenetic aging clock of unprecedented accuracy using >6,000 blood samples.[254] The clock uses information from 1000 CpG sites and predicts people with certain conditions older than healthy controls: IBD, frontotemporal dementia, ovarian cancer, obesity. The aging clock was planned to be released for public use in 2021 by an Insilico Medicine spinoff company Deep Longevity.

Relation to human cognitive and brain development

[edit]

Deep learning is closely related to a class of theories of brain development (specifically, neocortical development) proposed by cognitive neuroscientists in the early 1990s.[255][256][257][258] These developmental theories were instantiated in computational models, making them predecessors of deep learning systems. These developmental models share the property that various proposed learning dynamics in the brain (e.g., a wave of nerve growth factor) support the self-organization somewhat analogous to the neural networks utilized in deep learning models. Like the neocortex, neural networks employ a hierarchy of layered filters in which each layer considers information from a prior layer (or the operating environment), and then passes its output (and possibly the original input), to other layers. This process yields a self-organizing stack of transducers, well-tuned to their operating environment. A 1995 description stated, "...the infant's brain seems to organize itself under the influence of waves of so-called trophic-factors ... different regions of the brain become connected sequentially, with one layer of tissue maturing before another and so on until the whole brain is mature".[259]

A variety of approaches have been used to investigate the plausibility of deep learning models from a neurobiological perspective. On the one hand, several variants of the backpropagation algorithm have been proposed in order to increase its processing realism.[260][261] Other researchers have argued that unsupervised forms of deep learning, such as those based on hierarchical generative models and deep belief networks, may be closer to biological reality.[262][263] In this respect, generative neural network models have been related to neurobiological evidence about sampling-based processing in the cerebral cortex.[264]

Although a systematic comparison between the human brain organization and the neuronal encoding in deep networks has not yet been established, several analogies have been reported. For example, the computations performed by deep learning units could be similar to those of actual neurons[265] and neural populations.[266] Similarly, the representations developed by deep learning models are similar to those measured in the primate visual system[267] both at the single-unit[268] and at the population[269] levels.

Commercial activity

[edit]

Facebook's AI lab performs tasks such as automatically tagging uploaded pictures with the names of the people in them.[270]

Google's DeepMind Technologies developed a system capable of learning how to play Atari video games using only pixels as data input. In 2015 they demonstrated their AlphaGo system, which learned the game of Go well enough to beat a professional Go player.[271][272][273] Google Translate uses a neural network to translate between more than 100 languages.

In 2017, Covariant.ai was launched, which focuses on integrating deep learning into factories.[274]

As of 2008,[275] researchers at The University of Texas at Austin (UT) developed a machine learning framework called Training an Agent Manually via Evaluative Reinforcement, or TAMER, which proposed new methods for robots or computer programs to learn how to perform tasks by interacting with a human instructor.[244] First developed as TAMER, a new algorithm called Deep TAMER was later introduced in 2018 during a collaboration between U.S. Army Research Laboratory (ARL) and UT researchers. Deep TAMER used deep learning to provide a robot with the ability to learn new tasks through observation.[244] Using Deep TAMER, a robot learned a task with a human trainer, watching video streams or observing a human perform a task in-person. The robot later practiced the task with the help of some coaching from the trainer, who provided feedback such as "good job" and "bad job".[276]

Criticism and comment

[edit]

Deep learning has attracted both criticism and comment, in some cases from outside the field of computer science.

Theory

[edit]

A main criticism concerns the lack of theory surrounding some methods.[277] Learning in the most common deep architectures is implemented using well-understood gradient descent. However, the theory surrounding other algorithms, such as contrastive divergence is less clear.[citation needed] (e.g., Does it converge? If so, how fast? What is it approximating?) Deep learning methods are often looked at as a black box, with most confirmations done empirically, rather than theoretically.[278]

In further reference to the idea that artistic sensitivity might be inherent in relatively low levels of the cognitive hierarchy, a published series of graphic representations of the internal states of deep (20-30 layers) neural networks attempting to discern within essentially random data the images on which they were trained[279] demonstrate a visual appeal: the original research notice received well over 1,000 comments, and was the subject of what was for a time the most frequently accessed article on The Guardian's[280] website.

With the support of Innovation Diffusion Theory (IDT), a study analyzed the diffusion of Deep Learning[281] in BRICS and OECD countries using data from Google Trends.

Errors

[edit]

Some deep learning architectures display problematic behaviors,[282] such as confidently classifying unrecognizable images as belonging to a familiar category of ordinary images (2014)[283] and misclassifying minuscule perturbations of correctly classified images (2013).[284] Goertzel hypothesized that these behaviors are due to limitations in their internal representations and that these limitations would inhibit integration into heterogeneous multi-component artificial general intelligence (AGI) architectures.[282] These issues may possibly be addressed by deep learning architectures that internally form states homologous to image-grammar[285] decompositions of observed entities and events.[282] Learning a grammar (visual or linguistic) from training data would be equivalent to restricting the system to commonsense reasoning that operates on concepts in terms of grammatical production rules and is a basic goal of both human language acquisition[286] and artificial intelligence (AI).[287]

Cyber threat

[edit]

As deep learning moves from the lab into the world, research and experience show that artificial neural networks are vulnerable to hacks and deception.[288] By identifying patterns that these systems use to function, attackers can modify inputs to ANNs in such a way that the ANN finds a match that human observers would not recognize. For example, an attacker can make subtle changes to an image such that the ANN finds a match even though the image looks to a human nothing like the search target. Such manipulation is termed an "adversarial attack".[289]

In 2016 researchers used one ANN to doctor images in trial and error fashion, identify another's focal points, and thereby generate images that deceived it. The modified images looked no different to human eyes. Another group showed that printouts of doctored images then photographed successfully tricked an image classification system.[290] One defense is reverse image search, in which a possible fake image is submitted to a site such as TinEye that can then find other instances of it. A refinement is to search using only parts of the image, to identify images from which that piece may have been taken.[291]

Another group showed that certain psychedelic spectacles could fool a facial recognition system into thinking ordinary people were celebrities, potentially allowing one person to impersonate another. In 2017 researchers added stickers to stop signs and caused an ANN to misclassify them.[290]

ANNs can however be further trained to detect attempts at deception, potentially leading attackers and defenders into an arms race similar to the kind that already defines the malware defense industry. ANNs have been trained to defeat ANN-based anti-malware software by repeatedly attacking a defense with malware that was continually altered by a genetic algorithm until it tricked the anti-malware while retaining its ability to damage the target.[290]

In 2016, another group demonstrated that certain sounds could make the Google Now voice command system open a particular web address, and hypothesized that this could "serve as a stepping stone for further attacks (e.g., opening a web page hosting drive-by malware)".[290]

In "data poisoning", false data is continually smuggled into a machine learning system's training set to prevent it from achieving mastery.[290]

Data collection ethics

[edit]

The deep learning systems that are trained using supervised learning often rely on data that is created or annotated by humans, or both.[292] It has been argued that not only low-paid clickwork (such as on Amazon Mechanical Turk) is regularly deployed for this purpose, but also implicit forms of human microwork that are often not recognized as such.[293] The philosopher Rainer Mühlhoff distinguishes five types of "machinic capture" of human microwork to generate training data: (1) gamification (the embedding of annotation or computation tasks in the flow of a game), (2) "trapping and tracking" (e.g. CAPTCHAs for image recognition or click-tracking on Google search results pages), (3) exploitation of social motivations (e.g. tagging faces on Facebook to obtain labeled facial images), (4) information mining (e.g. by leveraging quantified-self devices such as activity trackers) and (5) clickwork.[293]

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]

Further reading

[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia
from Grokipedia
Deep learning encompasses methods that employ artificial s with multiple layers to automatically learn hierarchical representations of , facilitating tasks such as without manual . These models process inputs through successive layers of interconnected nodes, where each layer transforms the data into increasingly abstract features via weighted connections adjusted through gradient-based optimization like . Originating from early research in the 1940s and 1980s, deep learning gained prominence in the 2010s propelled by in computational power, large-scale datasets, and algorithmic refinements, enabling breakthroughs in domains including and . Key achievements include convolutional neural networks surpassing human accuracy in image classification on like , demonstrating the capacity for end-to-end learning from raw pixels to semantic understanding. In reinforcement learning, deep architectures powered agents like to master complex strategy games such as Go, outperforming professional human players through self-play and integration. These successes underscore deep learning's empirical prowess in scaling with data and compute, following power-law improvements observed in performance metrics. Notwithstanding these advances, deep learning faces defining challenges rooted in its resource intensity and brittleness; training frontier demands vast quantities of data—often billions of examples—and immense computational expenditure, equivalent to thousands of GPU-years, which curtails accessibility and amplifies energy consumption concerns. Models exhibit poor , functioning as opaque where internal representations defy intuitive causal explanation, and remain susceptible to that induce erroneous outputs despite robustness in nominal conditions. Furthermore, generalization beyond training distributions lags human-like causal reasoning, with performance degrading sharply on out-of-distribution data, highlighting reliance on correlational patterns rather than underlying mechanisms. Ongoing research probes theoretical foundations to mitigate these limitations, yet empirical scaling remains the dominant paradigm for progress.

Fundamentals

Definition and Core Principles

Deep learning constitutes a subset of employing artificial neural networks with multiple processing layers to learn hierarchical representations of data from empirical examples. These models, termed deep neural networks due to their depth—typically encompassing several hidden layers—enable the automatic extraction of features at varying levels of without extensive manual intervention. As articulated by LeCun, Bengio, and Hinton in their 2015 review, deep learning allows computational models composed of multiple processing layers to learn representations of data with multiple levels of , facilitating superior performance on complex tasks such as image recognition and . At the core of deep learning lies the principle of , wherein neural networks transform input data through successive layers to produce increasingly abstract and task-relevant features. Lower layers often detect basic patterns, such as edges in images, while higher layers combine these into more complex structures, like object parts or entire objects, emulating hierarchical processing observed in biological vision systems. This hierarchical is enabled by non-linear activation functions—such as rectified linear units (ReLU)—applied to each neuron's output, allowing the network to model non-linear relationships essential for capturing real-world data complexities. Training deep networks relies on backpropagation, an efficient algorithm for computing gradients of the loss function with respect to network parameters using the chain rule of calculus. These gradients guide optimization via variants, such as (SGD), which iteratively adjust weights to minimize prediction errors on . Empirical success hinges on three factors: vast datasets, substantial computational resources (often GPUs), and architectural innovations that mitigate issues like vanishing gradients in deep layers. While early formulations incorporated unsupervised pretraining for initialization, contemporary practice predominantly employs end-to-end with large-scale data.

Mathematical Foundations

Deep neural networks model data through compositions of functions, where each layer applies an to its input followed by a nonlinearity. Formally, for a network with LL hidden layers, the output y\mathbf{y} is computed as y=f(L+1)(h(L))\mathbf{y} = f^{(L+1)}(\mathbf{h}^{(L)}), with h(0)=x\mathbf{h}^{(0)} = \mathbf{x} the input, and for l=1l = 1 to LL, h(l)=σ(W(l)h(l1)+b(l))\mathbf{h}^{(l)} = \sigma(\mathbf{W}^{(l)} \mathbf{h}^{(l-1)} + \mathbf{b}^{(l)}), where W(l)\mathbf{W}^{(l)} is the weight matrix, b(l)\mathbf{b}^{(l)} the bias vector, and σ\sigma the applied elementwise. Common activations include the sigmoid σ(z)=(1+ez)1\sigma(z) = (1 + e^{-z})^{-1} or ReLU σ(z)=max(0,z)\sigma(z) = \max(0, z), the latter introduced to mitigate vanishing gradients during training. Training minimizes a L(y,y^)\mathcal{L}(\mathbf{y}, \hat{\mathbf{y}}) measuring discrepancy between predicted y^\hat{\mathbf{y}} and true y\mathbf{y} outputs, aggregated over a via empirical 1Ni=1NL(f(xi;θ),yi)\frac{1}{N} \sum_{i=1}^N \mathcal{L}(f(\mathbf{x}_i; \theta), \mathbf{y}_i), where θ\theta collects all parameters. For regression, L=12yy^22\mathcal{L} = \frac{1}{2} \|\mathbf{y} - \hat{\mathbf{y}}\|^2_2 quantifies 2\ell_2-norm deviation; for , L=kyklogy^k\mathcal{L} = -\sum_k y_k \log \hat{y}_k promotes probabilistic calibration under softmax outputs. Parameters update via gradient descent on the loss: θθϵθL\theta \leftarrow \theta - \epsilon \nabla_\theta \mathcal{L}, with learning rate ϵ\epsilon, often stochasticized over minibatches for efficiency. Gradients compute efficiently through backpropagation, applying the chain rule recursively: for layer ll, LW(l)=(Lh(l))(h(l1))T\frac{\partial \mathcal{L}}{\partial \mathbf{W}^{(l)}} = \left( \frac{\partial \mathcal{L}}{\partial \mathbf{h}^{(l)}} \right) \left( \mathbf{h}^{(l-1)} \right)^T and Lh(l1)=(W(l))TLh(l)σ(z(l))\frac{\partial \mathcal{L}}{\partial \mathbf{h}^{(l-1)}} = \left( \mathbf{W}^{(l)} \right)^T \frac{\partial \mathcal{L}}{\partial \mathbf{h}^{(l)}} \odot \sigma'(\mathbf{z}^{(l)}), propagating errors backward from output to input. This leverages vectorized matrix operations and automatic differentiation in practice, enabling scalability to millions of parameters. The expressivity of deep networks rests on the universal approximation theorem, which proves that a single-hidden-layer network with sufficiently many sigmoidal units can approximate any continuous function on compact subsets of Rd\mathbb{R}^d arbitrarily closely (Cybenko, 1989). Extensions show depth enhances approximation efficiency for hierarchical or compositional functions, requiring fewer parameters than shallow counterparts for tasks like image recognition, though empirical success outpaces complete theoretical guarantees for generalization. Linear algebra underpins representations via tensor operations, while probability informs regularization like dropout to combat overfitting.

Comparison to Traditional Machine Learning

Deep learning constitutes a specialized subset of that utilizes multi-layered artificial neural networks to learn intricate patterns directly from raw data, enabling automatic feature extraction across hierarchical representations. In traditional , algorithms such as , support vector machines (introduced by Vapnik in 1995), and decision trees depend on human experts for , where domain knowledge is applied to transform raw inputs into informative variables. This manual process, while effective for structured data, proves labor-intensive and suboptimal for high-dimensional like images or , where exhaustive feature crafting becomes infeasible. Deep learning addresses these limitations through end-to-end training, processing raw data via successive layers that progressively abstract features—from edges in early convolutional layers to complex objects in deeper ones—without explicit human intervention. However, this capability demands vast datasets; traditional methods suffice with thousands of samples, whereas deep learning typically requires millions to generalize effectively and mitigate overfitting risks. Training deep models also necessitates substantial computational power, often utilizing graphics processing units (GPUs) for efficient matrix operations, contrasting with the lighter resource footprint of classical algorithms. Interpretability favors traditional machine learning, where models like decision trees reveal explicit decision paths and feature importances, aiding and in fields such as . Deep learning's layered complexity renders it opaque, complicating despite post-hoc explanation techniques. Empirically, on tabular datasets common in business applications, classical ensemble methods like outperform deep neural networks, especially under data scarcity, as evidenced by benchmarks and competitions where traditional approaches achieve superior accuracy with fewer resources. Thus, traditional machine learning retains advantages in scenarios prioritizing explainability, efficiency, or limited data volumes, while deep learning dominates perception-heavy tasks with abundant resources.

Historical Development

Pre-Deep Learning Neural Networks (1940s-1970s)

The foundational concepts of artificial neural networks emerged in the 1940s with efforts to model biological neurons computationally. In 1943, neurophysiologist Warren McCulloch and logician published "A Logical of the Ideas Immanent in Nervous Activity," introducing a simplified of neurons as binary threshold units that perform logical operations through weighted sums and thresholds. This model demonstrated that networks of such units could simulate any finite logical process, establishing neural networks as Turing-complete systems in principle, though limited by their all-or-nothing firing akin to logic. These early abstractions prioritized logical expressiveness over biological fidelity, influencing subsequent work in and . By the 1950s, hardware implementations began to materialize, bridging theory to practice. In 1951, and Dean Edmonds constructed the SNARC (Stochastic Neural Analog Reinforcement Computer) at Harvard, an electromechanical device simulating a network of 40 neurons to model in rats navigating mazes via vacuum tubes and potentiometers for adjustable weights. This analog system highlighted practical challenges like noise and scalability but validated adaptive weight adjustment through trial-and-error feedback. Concurrently, in 1949, Donald Hebb's "The Organization of Behavior" proposed a biological —now termed Hebbian learning—positing that synaptic strengths increase when pre- and post-synaptic neurons fire simultaneously ("cells that fire together wire together"), providing an unsupervised mechanism for pattern association that informed early network training heuristics. The marked a significant advance in for during the late . In 1957, at Cornell Aeronautical Laboratory conceptualized the as a single-layer network of adjustable threshold units capable of for linearly separable inputs, with weights updated via a to minimize errors. The Mark I hardware, unveiled by the U.S. in July 1958, processed 400-word vocabulary recognition and simple image patterns using photocells and potentiometers, demonstrating empirical success on tasks like distinguishing geometric shapes but revealing inherent limitations in handling non-linear problems such as the XOR function. These shallow architectures, typically one or two layers deep, relied on linear separability and lacked mechanisms for feature extraction in complex data, constraining their applicability. The 1960s exposed theoretical shortcomings that curtailed enthusiasm for s. In their 1969 book Perceptrons, and rigorously proved that single-layer perceptrons cannot compute non-linearly separable functions like XOR without additional layers or preprocessing, and even multilayer variants without effective training algorithms faced vanishing gradient issues in practice. This analysis, grounded in geometric and algebraic proofs of , shifted research toward symbolic AI and rule-based systems, initiating a period of reduced funding and interest known as the first . Despite these critiques focusing on representational limits rather than outright dismissal of multi-layer potential, the era's networks remained empirically shallow, trained via ad-hoc methods like precursors, and computationally infeasible for depth beyond a few layers due to hardware constraints and the absence of . Overall, 1940s-1970s neural models prioritized logical and associative capabilities but faltered on scalability and non-linearity, setting the stage for later algorithmic innovations.

Backpropagation Era and Early Challenges (1980s-1990s)

The backpropagation algorithm, enabling efficient computation of gradients in multilayer neural networks via the chain rule, was first formalized by Paul Werbos in his 1974 doctoral thesis, though it received limited attention initially. Renewed interest emerged in the mid-1980s, with independent derivations by David Parker in 1985 and a seminal demonstration by David E. Rumelhart, Geoffrey E. Hinton, and Ronald J. Williams in their October 1986 Nature paper, "Learning representations by back-propagating errors," which illustrated its application to training networks for tasks like pattern recognition and showed it could produce distributed representations beyond simple input-output mappings. This work, part of the broader parallel distributed processing (PDP) framework outlined in the 1986 PDP volumes, sparked a revival of connectionist approaches, allowing supervised learning in hidden layers and overcoming the perceptron limitations exposed by Minsky and Papert in 1969. Early successes included applications in speech recognition and handwriting analysis, with developing convolutional neural networks trained via for digit recognition by 1989, achieving practical performance on modest hardware. However, scaling to deeper architectures—beyond 2-3 layers—proved elusive due to the , where gradients diminish exponentially during through many layers, impeding weight updates in earlier layers, as analyzed by in his 1991 thesis. Exploding gradients posed another risk, causing unstable training, while local minima trapped optimization in suboptimal solutions. Computational constraints exacerbated these issues; 1980s hardware, reliant on CPUs without parallelization like modern GPUs, made training even shallow networks time-intensive, often requiring days for modest datasets. Data scarcity limited empirical validation, as large labeled corpora were unavailable, leading to in complex models. Theoretical skepticism from symbolic AI advocates, who favored rule-based systems amid the second AI winter's funding cuts, further marginalized neural approaches, despite pockets of progress in specialized domains. These hurdles confined reliable applications to shallow networks, foreshadowing the dormancy of deep learning ambitions into the 2000s.

Dormancy and Incremental Advances (2000s)

Following the backpropagation advancements and subsequent challenges of the 1980s and 1990s, research on deep neural networks entered a phase of relative in the , characterized by limited funding, skepticism from the broader community, and dominance of shallower models like support vector machines (SVMs) and ensemble methods such as random forests, which offered better performance on available datasets without the computational demands of deep architectures. Deep networks faced persistent issues, including vanishing gradients during training and the lack of sufficiently large labeled datasets, rendering them impractical for most applications; by the early , neural networks were often viewed as a "dead end" compared to kernel methods. Only a small cadre of researchers, estimated at fewer than a dozen by figures like , persisted in exploring multilayer networks amid this landscape. Incremental progress occurred through refinements in specific architectures and training techniques. Yann LeCun's convolutional neural networks (CNNs), developed in the prior decade, found niche industrial applications, such as systems deployed by U.S. banks for processing an estimated 10-20% of handwritten checks by the early 2000s, leveraging convolutional layers for feature extraction on modest hardware. In recurrent neural networks, Jürgen Schmidhuber's group advanced (LSTM) units, introducing a "vanilla" LSTM with forget gates around 2000, which improved handling of long sequences; by 2004, LSTMs achieved first successes in online , and in 2005, bidirectional LSTMs with full through time enhanced sequence modeling. These developments, while promising for temporal data, remained confined to specialized tasks due to training inefficiencies. A pivotal incremental advance came in 2006 with Geoffrey Hinton and colleagues' introduction of deep belief networks (DBNs), comprising stacks of restricted Boltzmann machines (RBMs) trained greedily layer by layer via unsupervised pre-training followed by supervised fine-tuning. This approach mitigated vanishing gradient problems by initializing weights to avoid poor local minima, demonstrating improved error rates on benchmarks like the MNIST digit dataset (1.25% test error with a single hidden layer reduced further in deeper configurations). Complementary priors in the top layers facilitated in densely connected models. Despite these gains, DBNs required significant computational resources unavailable at scale, limiting broader impact; Schmidhuber's team extended similar ideas with (CTC) in 2006 for unsegmented , enabling end-to-end LSTM training for speech by 2007. By 2009, CTC-trained LSTMs won international competitions in connected across languages like French, Farsi, and , signaling potential but not yet revolutionizing the field. Overall, these efforts sustained theoretical progress amid dormancy, laying groundwork for later scaling with improved hardware and data.

Breakthrough and Scaling Revolution (2010s)

The breakthrough in deep learning during the was catalyzed by the 2012 Large Scale Visual Recognition Challenge (ILSVRC), where , a () developed by , , and , achieved a top-5 error rate of 15.3% on the dataset containing over 1.2 million images across 1,000 categories, surpassing the runner-up's 26.2% error rate. This performance demonstrated the efficacy of deep architectures trained end-to-end with , incorporating innovations such as ReLU activation functions for faster convergence and dropout regularization to mitigate , trained on two GTX 580 GPUs. The result marked a discontinuous improvement over prior methods, which relied on hand-engineered features, and ignited widespread adoption of deep s in . Hardware advancements, particularly graphics processing units (GPUs), were instrumental in enabling this scaling revolution by providing massive parallelism for matrix operations central to neural network training. AlexNet's use of GPUs reduced training time from weeks to days, allowing experimentation with deeper networks and larger datasets; subsequent works like VGGNet (2014) and ResNet (2015) further exploited this, pushing layer depths to hundreds while achieving error rates below 5% on . Open-source frameworks such as Caffe (2013) and (2015) democratized GPU-accelerated training, facilitating rapid iteration across research and industry. Empirical scaling trends underscored the era's core insight: performance improved predictably with increases in model parameters, dataset size, and computational resources, with training compute for notable AI systems doubling approximately every 6 months from around 2010 onward. This "scaling hypothesis" was validated through larger models trained on datasets exceeding billions of examples, as seen in applications beyond vision, including recurrent neural networks for sequence tasks and early generative models. By the late 2010s, deep learning dominated benchmarks in , , and , with economic impacts including its integration into products like and autonomous driving systems. Recognition of these foundational contributions came in 2018, when , , and received the for conceptual and engineering breakthroughs enabling deep s to surpass traditional AI methods through unsupervised feature learning and scalable training. Their work, building on earlier ideas, emphasized that deeper hierarchies could learn hierarchical representations directly from raw data, a causal mechanism driven by gradient flow improvements and abundant compute rather than novel theoretical paradigms alone. Despite debates over attribution—such as prior GPU-accelerated CNN successes in the and —the 2010s' empirical triumphs established deep learning as the dominant paradigm, propelled by data abundance from initiatives like (launched 2009) and hardware commoditization.

Contemporary Expansions and Maturation (2020s)

The decade of the marked a phase of aggressive scaling in deep learning, building on 2010s foundations with formal empirical scaling laws quantifying performance gains from larger models, datasets, and compute resources. OpenAI's 2020 analysis revealed power-law relationships where loss decreases predictably with increased parameters (N), data tokens (D), and training compute (C), approximately as loss ∝ N^{-α} D^{-β} C^{-γ}, guiding resource allocation for trillion-parameter models. This paradigm drove releases like in May 2020, a 175-billion-parameter pretrained on 570 gigabytes of text, demonstrating capabilities in zero- and few-shot tasks that emerged unpredictably at scale, such as arithmetic and translation without task-specific fine-tuning. Subsequent models, including (540 billion parameters, 2022) and (estimated over 1 trillion parameters, March 2023), further validated these laws, achieving state-of-the-art results on benchmarks like MMLU, though diminishing returns and data bottlenecks began surfacing by mid-decade. Expansions into multimodal architectures integrated diverse data types, enhancing across vision, , and other modalities. OpenAI's CLIP model, released in January 2021, aligned and text embeddings via contrastive learning on 400 million pairs, enabling zero-shot rivaling supervised methods and powering applications like . Vision Transformers (ViT), introduced in 2020, scaled transformer architectures to patches, outperforming convolutional networks on with sufficient data, and proliferated in variants like Swin Transformer (2021) for hierarchical processing. Generative modalities advanced with models, as in Ho et al.'s Denoising Diffusion Probabilistic Models (2020), which iteratively denoise data to generate high-fidelity samples, underpinning tools like (January 2021) for text-to-image synthesis and (August 2022), an open-source model democratizing accessible generation on consumer hardware. 2, unveiled by DeepMind in October 2020 and validated at CASP14 in July 2021, applied deep learning to predict protein structures with median GDT-TS scores exceeding 90 for many targets, accelerating by resolving ~200 million structures via the Database launched in July 2021. These developments extended deep learning to scientific domains, including and climate modeling, where hybrid models fused physics-informed losses with data-driven predictions. Maturation efforts addressed efficiency and reliability amid scaling's resource demands, with compute efficiency improvements accounting for about 35% of language modeling gains since 2014 through algorithmic advances like mixed-precision training and hardware optimizations. Techniques such as model pruning, quantization (reducing weights to 8-bit or lower), and knowledge distillation compressed models by factors of 10-100x while retaining 90-95% accuracy, enabling deployment on edge devices; for instance, MobileNetV3 (2019 refinements extended into 2020s) achieved real-time inference on smartphones. Distributed training scaling laws, explored in 2023-2025 studies, optimized parallelism across thousands of GPUs, mitigating bottlenecks in model size and data throughput. Challenges persisted, including data scarcity—exacerbated by internet text exhaustion around 2026 projections—hallucinations in generative outputs, and energy costs, with training a single large model consuming megawatt-hours equivalent to thousands of households annually, prompting research into synthetic data generation and sparse activation methods. Interpretability advanced via mechanistic probes revealing internal representations, such as induction heads in transformers for in-context learning, fostering causal understanding over black-box empiricism. By 2025, open-source ecosystems like Hugging Face's model hub hosted over 500,000 variants, accelerating community-driven maturation while highlighting tensions between proprietary scaling (e.g., by OpenAI, Google) and reproducible research.

Architectures

Feedforward and Multilayer Perceptrons

A consists of nodes arranged in layers where connections direct information unidirectionally from input to output, without cycles or feedback loops. Each node, or , computes a weighted sum of its inputs plus a term, followed by application of an to introduce nonlinearity. This structure enables the network to model complex mappings from inputs to outputs through successive transformations across layers. Multilayer perceptrons (MLPs) represent a specific class of networks characterized by fully connected layers, including at least one hidden layer between the input and output layers. In an MLP, every in a given layer connects to every in the subsequent layer, facilitating dense interconnections that enhance representational capacity. The input layer receives features, hidden layers perform intermediate computations via nonlinear activations such as sigmoid, ReLU, or tanh, and the output layer produces predictions, often via softmax for or linear for regression. In deep learning contexts, MLPs qualify as deep networks when featuring multiple hidden layers, typically numbering from several to hundreds, allowing hierarchical feature extraction. The universal approximation theorem establishes that a feedforward network with a single hidden layer and sufficient s, using continuous nonlinear activations, can approximate any on compact subsets of to arbitrary precision, provided the network width is adequately large. This theoretical foundation underpins MLPs' versatility, though practical efficacy depends on factors like layer depth, neuron count, and data dimensionality; for instance, shallow MLPs suffice for simple tabular tasks, while deeper variants handle nonlinear manifolds but risk optimization challenges without specialized techniques. MLPs serve as foundational architectures in deep learning, often employed as baselines for unstructured or low-dimensional where spatial hierarchies are absent, contrasting with convolutional networks for images or recurrent models for sequences. Empirical , such as MNIST digit recognition accuracies exceeding 98% with modest MLPs of 784-30-10 neurons trained via , demonstrate their adequacy for certain benchmarks, though scaling to millions of parameters in modern deep MLPs amplifies computational demands. Limitations include parameter inefficiency for high-dimensional inputs due to full connectivity, prompting derivations like sparse or pruned variants to mitigate and costs.

Convolutional Neural Networks

Convolutional neural networks (CNNs) are a class of deep neural networks specialized for processing grid-like data, particularly images, by applying al operations to extract hierarchical spatial features. These networks leverage local connectivity and parameter sharing to detect patterns such as edges, textures, and objects while maintaining efficiency in computational resources compared to fully connected networks. Introduced by in 1989, CNNs were initially developed for handwritten digit recognition using to train convolution kernels on datasets like MNIST precursors. The core architecture of a CNN typically comprises convolutional layers, pooling layers, and fully connected layers. Convolutional layers apply learnable filters (kernels) that slide over the input, computing dot products to produce feature maps that highlight local patterns; for instance, early layers detect low-level features like edges, while deeper layers capture complex structures. Pooling layers, such as max-pooling, follow to downsample feature maps, enforcing translation invariance and reducing dimensionality by selecting maximum values within windows, which mitigates and computational load. Activation functions like ReLU are applied post-convolution to introduce nonlinearity, enabling the network to model complex decision boundaries. Fully connected layers at the end aggregate high-level features for tasks. CNNs offer key advantages over fully connected networks for visual data: fewer parameters due to weight sharing across spatial locations, which scales better with input resolution and reduces training time; and built-in spatial hierarchy that exploits the of locality and equivariance, improving on tasks without explicit engineering of features. For a 224x224 RGB , a fully connected network might require millions more parameters than a CNN with equivalent representational power, as convolutions avoid dense connections. A pivotal advancement occurred in 2012 with AlexNet, an 8-layer CNN developed by Alex Krizhevsky, Ilya Sutskever, and Geoffrey Hinton, which achieved a top-5 error rate of 15.3% on the ImageNet dataset—outperforming prior methods by over 10 percentage points and sparking widespread adoption of deep CNNs. AlexNet incorporated innovations like ReLU activations for faster convergence, dropout regularization to prevent overfitting, and GPU acceleration for training its 60 million parameters on 1.2 million images across 1,000 classes. Applications of CNNs span computer vision tasks, including image classification where models like ResNet variants achieve over 99% accuracy on MNIST; in frameworks like YOLO or Faster R-CNN for real-time localization; and for in X-rays with reported sensitivities exceeding 90% in peer-reviewed studies. They also extend to video analysis via 3D convolutions and non-visual grids like time-series data for . Despite successes, CNNs remain computationally intensive, often requiring large datasets and hardware like GPUs, and can struggle with rotational invariance without augmentations.

Recurrent Neural Networks and LSTMs

Recurrent neural networks (RNNs) extend neural networks to handle sequential data by incorporating loops that allow hidden states to capture temporal dependencies, processing inputs xtx_t at time step tt through a hidden state ht=f(Wxhxt+Whhht1+bh)h_t = f(W_{xh} x_t + W_{hh} h_{t-1} + b_h), where ff is a nonlinearity like tanh, and weights WW are shared across time steps. This architecture enables RNNs to model tasks requiring memory of prior inputs, such as predicting the next element in a sequence. Early formulations appeared in the 1980s, with David Rumelhart, , and Ronald Williams demonstrating through time (BPTT) for training RNNs in 1986, adapting the algorithm to unfold the network temporally. Despite their theoretical appeal, vanilla RNNs face the during BPTT, where repeated multiplication of gradients by the Jacobian of the hidden state transition (with eigenvalues often less than 1) causes them to decay exponentially over long sequences, impeding learning of dependencies spanning many time steps. Sepp Hochreiter's analysis highlighted this issue as a core limitation for long-term credit assignment in sequential learning tasks. Exploding gradients can also occur if eigenvalues exceed 1, leading to unstable training, though clipping techniques later mitigated this empirically. Long short-term memory (LSTM) networks, proposed by Hochreiter and in , address these shortcomings via a specialized unit with a cell state ctc_t that propagates largely unchanged, regulated by three multiplicative gates: the forget gate ft=σ(Wf[ht1,xt]+bf)f_t = \sigma(W_f [h_{t-1}, x_t] + b_f) discards irrelevant information from ct1c_{t-1}; the input gate it=σ(Wi[ht1,xt]+bi)i_t = \sigma(W_i [h_{t-1}, x_t] + b_i) and candidate values c~t=tanh(Wc[ht1,xt]+bc)\tilde{c}_t = \tanh(W_c [h_{t-1}, x_t] + b_c) add new content; and the output gate ot=σ(Wo[ht1,xt]+bo)o_t = \sigma(W_o [h_{t-1}, x_t] + b_o) filters ht=ottanh(ct)h_t = o_t \tanh(c_t). These sigmoid-activated gates (outputting values in [0,1]) enable additive flow through the cell state, preserving signal over hundreds of time steps without vanishing, as verified in experiments on tasks like long-time-lag prediction where vanilla RNNs failed. The original LSTM implementation used constant error carousels to truncate s selectively, avoiding harm to learning. LSTMs gained prominence in the 2010s for applications including , where they outperformed hidden Markov models in large-vocabulary continuous tasks by modeling acoustic sequences; , powering early encoder-decoder systems before transformers; and time series forecasting, such as stock prediction or , by capturing non-stationary patterns. In , bidirectional LSTMs process sequences forward and backward to improve contextual representations, as in achieving over 97% accuracy on benchmarks like Penn Treebank. Though computationally intensive—requiring four times the parameters of vanilla RNNs per layer due to gates—LSTMs demonstrated superior empirical performance on long-sequence benchmarks until attention mechanisms largely supplanted them post-2017. Variants like peephole connections (adding cell state to gate inputs) were explored but showed marginal gains in controlled studies.

Transformer Models and Attention Mechanisms

The Transformer architecture, introduced in the 2017 paper "Attention Is All You Need" by and colleagues at , represents a departure from recurrent and convolutional neural networks by relying exclusively on for sequence processing. This model processes input sequences in parallel rather than sequentially, enabling efficient handling of long-range dependencies without the vanishing gradient issues prevalent in recurrent neural networks (RNNs). The base consists of an encoder-decoder structure, where the encoder stacks multiple identical layers to generate representations of the input, and the decoder similarly processes the output sequence while attending to the encoder's outputs. At the core of the Transformer is the self-attention mechanism, which computes weighted representations of input elements based on their relationships to all other elements in . In self-attention, for an input , three matrices— (Q), Key (K), and Value (V)—are derived via linear projections, and attention scores are calculated as the scaled dot-product: Attention(Q,K,V)=σ(QKTdk)V\text{Attention}(Q, K, V) = \sigma\left(\frac{QK^T}{\sqrt{d_k}}\right) V
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
Contribute something
User Avatar
No comments yet.