for someone like me who has ventured into neural nets recently, this explanation is a boon. IT was like listening to classics. Legendary paper and equally awesome explanation.
I really wanted to drop you a line that I really, really enjoyed your paper walkthrough; super informative and entertaining! Thank you so much for uploading this! :)
I was doing something similar for a few decades before this paper came out (no ReLU on the stage output, though). I was engaged in studies in layer by layer training, and the argument for me was "why spend all that time generating a good output for layer k, just to distort it in layer k+1?" Also, I think the physicist in me liked the notion of nonlinear perturbation of a linear model, since linear models work really well a lot of the time (MNIST, I'm looking at you). At any rate, this approach worked quite well in the time series signal processing I was doing, and when the paper came out, I read with relish to see what else they had found that was new. Unfortunately, like you I found that underneath the key idea was a heap of tricks to make the whole thing hang together which seemed to obscure how much was ResNet and how much was tricks.
"Sadly, the world has taken the ResNet, but the world hasn't all taken the research methodology of this paper." I really appreciate your picks are not only those papers surpassing the performance of the state of the art, but also those with intriguing insights or papers inspiring us by their ways of conducting experiments and testing hypotheses. Most vanish, but residual, as it moves forward.
This is probably one of the better videos on these classic research papers on CZcams. I've seen some terrible explanations but you did pretty well. Good job!
Yannic - you are doing a superb job. Your quality content has "lower dopamine rush effect". Thus, it wud not be viral, but with time you would be a force to reckon with. Not many can explain with so much clarity, depth & speed(daily 1 paper). I have one request. If you can create an ACTIVE mapping of paper with CITATIONS(and similar metrics) so that I get to choose the MOST RELEVANT PAPERS to watch. It would be a great time saver & drastically improve views on better metric videos :) .
Really enjoyed this video! I think going through these older paper that had lasting impact for multiple years is really a great insight especially to those who are fairly new to the field like me
Thanks for this videos the classic series, not all of us have masters or PHD degree, this classic papers help us to understand the main and core ideas of deep learning, papers that important and push fordward the field.
COOL ! To discuss those classics. A formidable tribute to the writers and a great way to emphasize their contributions to the history of Artificial Intelligence.
im struggling to understand papers, but your explanation to me it really hand held me to grasp this particular paper. For that to me you are awesome. Thank you so much
This is a great series. I'm a very experienced software and hardware engineer who's just now getting serious about learning about ML and feel learning and the whole space. So, what really helps me at this point is not NN 101 but what is the landscape, what do all the acronyms mean, what is the relative importance of various ideas and techniques. This review of classic material is extremely helpful: it paints a picture of the world and helps me put things in their places in my mental model. Then I can dive deeper when I see something important for my current tasks and needs. Keep these coming!
Thanks. this was fun. I knew some of it but you put it on context. Please do more of these classics. If you can, maybe something on UNET/fully convolutional basic papers.
Great video! I think there is a lot of value on reviewing old papers when they a cited all the time by the new ones. That is exactly the case of ResNets.
I like how you have highlighted that if there is a small architecture exists that can solve a problem, residual connections will help discover it from within a larger architecture - I think this is a great explanation of the power of residual connections. This has two nice implications. I do not need to worry that I should exactly find how many layers are appropriate to capture. I can start with a supersized architecture and let training reduce to the subset that is needed! Let data carve out the subnetwork architecture. Secondly, even if the subnetwork is small, it is harder to directly train a small network. Easier to train a larger network with more degrees of freedom which functionally reduces to the smaller network. One can distill later.
Revisiting classic paper is SO NICE for new people enter into the field to understand the history of the million tricks that get automatically applied nowadays.
Would love to see papers like these which have used unique tricks to train, I request you do more videos on paper which solves the problem of training neural networks, tips and tricks and why they work. Why local response normalisation works, what's the best way to initialise your network layers for a vision task, for a NLP task. In a nutshell what works and why.🙏
I disagree with the assertion that the layers are learning “smaller” functions in ResNets. The results cited to support this claim, that the activations of the layers in the ResNets are larger than those in comparable feed-forward networks, can be caused by small weights and large biases, which L-2 regularization would encourage since it only operates on weights and not biases. The average magnitude of the weights in a layer have no relation to the complexity of the function they encode, since the weights of a layer can simply be scaled down without drastically changing this function. Moreover, in their paper on the Lottery Ticket Hypothesis, Frankle et al. find that ResNets are generally less compressible than feed-forward networks, meaning the functions they encode are more complex than in comparable feed-forward networks.
Very enjoyable, insight filled presentation, Yannic, thanks! It almost seems like residual connections allow the network to only use the layers that dont corrupt the insight. Since every fully connected or convolutional layer is a destructive operation (reduction) of its inputs, signal may get distorted beyond recovery over a few blocks. By having a sideline crosswire where not only the original input but any derived computation can potentially be preserved at each step, network is freed from the 'tyranny of tranformation'. :) Both the paper and Yannic highlight the idea that - the goal shifts from 'deriving new insights from data' to 'preserving input as long (deep) as needed' - while all other types of layers in a network distort information or derive inferences from data, the residual connection allows preserving information and protecting it from being automatically distorted, so that any information can be safely copied over to any later layer.
Revisiting the classics which had massively changed and forged the direction for DL research is so fun. Loved the way you explained the things. So cool. Thanks a lot :)
I loved this paper. Resnets are still cool. Nowadays there are a more complicated versions of these nets but the ideas still pretty much hold these days. Nice video by the way.
24:06 I think LeNet also did something similar but my memory fades. . Legendary paper. Great work. Too bad, I think in last two years we havent seen any major breakthroughs.
Another Great one! Would like to request if a review is possible on angular losses especially ArcFace, as it has begun being adopted for multiple classification tasks as another *classic* review. Thanks!
I love how you will *not* review papers based on impact, except when you do :D JK, please mix in more [classic] papers, or whatever else you feel like - just keep the drive for ML. Is's contagious! 💦 An idea: combined review/your take of a whole class of models (eg. MobileNet and its variants &| YOLO variants)
What is inception-net hypothesis?? In xception-net paper, the author explained the hypothesis of inception-net. But I couldn't grasp it fully and get lost a bit. Can you explain that??
Little question about the connections when the shape changes: a simple 1x1 convolution can give the right depth but the feature maps would still be the original size. So I assume the 1x1 convolutions are also with stride 2?
If questions due to the parameters of the ResNet. As far as I understood it you concatenate the input with the output of another layer. This enables you to train more stable networks. Why does this lead to fewer parameters than the VGG? I would suggest that this is the case because you perform the more costly operations (more filters) on layers that are already reduced in their dimensions due to the stride? Is this correct?
In 3.4 - Implimentation, it says that they use BN after each conv layer and before the activation. Does this stand true for ResNet50+? In the bottleneck blocks, do they add BN after the first 1x1 conv layer and then the 3x3 and lastly the 1x1 again? Or was the Implementation part, discussing the ResNet34 structure?
i dont understand from the starting of the quoted statement (which I will write) upto 9:28, you are saying, "instead of learning to transform X via neural networks to X, which is an identity function, why don't we have X stay X and then learn whatever we need to change?" can you explain me this part with some analogy? I am beginner here. Thanks !!
Thank you very much for the explanation! I'm just starting to use the pretrained nets I wondered how could I improve the performance of my models, and this video cleared many doubts I had. Keep up the amazing work!
![[Classic] ImageNet Classification with Deep Convolutional Neural Networks (Paper Explained)](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Nq3auVtvd9Q/mqdefault.jpg)
![[Classic] ImageNet Classification with Deep Convolutional Neural Networks (Paper Explained)](/img/tr.png)
![[Classic] Generative Adversarial Networks (Paper Explained)](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/eyxmSmjmNS0/mqdefault.jpg)
This is a pre-recorded scheduled release :D still on break :)
Yannic Kilcher welcomed surprise 😄
for someone like me who has ventured into neural nets recently, this explanation is a boon. IT was like listening to classics. Legendary paper and equally awesome explanation.
Yep, revisiting this classic paper in your usual style was still interesting to me. Thanks as always
I've watched like 5 other videos explaining ResNets and this was the only video I needed. Thank you so much for explaining it so clearly!!
I really wanted to drop you a line that I really, really enjoyed your paper walkthrough; super informative and entertaining! Thank you so much for uploading this! :)
Visiting old and influential papers seems like a great idea
I was doing something similar for a few decades before this paper came out (no ReLU on the stage output, though). I was engaged in studies in layer by layer training, and the argument for me was "why spend all that time generating a good output for layer k, just to distort it in layer k+1?" Also, I think the physicist in me liked the notion of nonlinear perturbation of a linear model, since linear models work really well a lot of the time (MNIST, I'm looking at you). At any rate, this approach worked quite well in the time series signal processing I was doing, and when the paper came out, I read with relish to see what else they had found that was new. Unfortunately, like you I found that underneath the key idea was a heap of tricks to make the whole thing hang together which seemed to obscure how much was ResNet and how much was tricks.
"Sadly, the world has taken the ResNet, but the world hasn't all taken the research methodology of this paper." I really appreciate your picks are not only those papers surpassing the performance of the state of the art, but also those with intriguing insights or papers inspiring us by their ways of conducting experiments and testing hypotheses. Most vanish, but residual, as it moves forward.
Building hype for attention is all you need v2! Nice selection!
This is probably one of the better videos on these classic research papers on CZcams. I've seen some terrible explanations but you did pretty well. Good job!
Yannic - you are doing a superb job. Your quality content has "lower dopamine rush effect". Thus, it wud not be viral, but with time you would be a force to reckon with. Not many can explain with so much clarity, depth & speed(daily 1 paper). I have one request. If you can create an ACTIVE mapping of paper with CITATIONS(and similar metrics) so that I get to choose the MOST RELEVANT PAPERS to watch. It would be a great time saver & drastically improve views on better metric videos :) .
Thanks Yannic. Revisiting these classic papers is very helpful for beginners like me.
Really enjoyed this video! I think going through these older paper that had lasting impact for multiple years is really a great insight especially to those who are fairly new to the field like me
Great paper. It must be obvious to you but, to a layman, I finally understand where the "Res" in "ResNet" comes from. Great work.
I appreciate these videos! Very helpful for putting ML developments in context
I've used Resnets quite a bit and thought I understood the paper reasonably well when I read it, but I was wrong. Great video!
Thanks for this videos the classic series, not all of us have masters or PHD degree, this classic papers help us to understand the main and core ideas of deep learning, papers that important and push fordward the field.
Thanks for visiting iconic papers, great content!!!
COOL ! To discuss those classics. A formidable tribute to the writers and a great way to emphasize their contributions to the history of Artificial Intelligence.
im struggling to understand papers, but your explanation to me it really hand held me to grasp this particular paper. For that to me you are awesome. Thank you so much
This is a great series. I'm a very experienced software and hardware engineer who's just now getting serious about learning about ML and feel learning and the whole space. So, what really helps me at this point is not NN 101 but what is the landscape, what do all the acronyms mean, what is the relative importance of various ideas and techniques. This review of classic material is extremely helpful: it paints a picture of the world and helps me put things in their places in my mental model. Then I can dive deeper when I see something important for my current tasks and needs. Keep these coming!
nice explanation. I've read the paper before and missed a lot of details. still more insights to learn from that paper.
Great video! I have watched like five videos about ResNet on youtube and this one is by far the best. Thanks.
self learning anns and coming across these papers is daunting - tysm!!
Thanks. this was fun. I knew some of it but you put it on context.
Please do more of these classics. If you can, maybe something on UNET/fully convolutional basic papers.
Another excellent summary! Yannic is one of the best educators out there!
Great video! I think there is a lot of value on reviewing old papers when they a cited all the time by the new ones. That is exactly the case of ResNets.
I like how you have highlighted that if there is a small architecture exists that can solve a problem, residual connections will help discover it from within a larger architecture - I think this is a great explanation of the power of residual connections. This has two nice implications. I do not need to worry that I should exactly find how many layers are appropriate to capture. I can start with a supersized architecture and let training reduce to the subset that is needed! Let data carve out the subnetwork architecture. Secondly, even if the subnetwork is small, it is harder to directly train a small network. Easier to train a larger network with more degrees of freedom which functionally reduces to the smaller network. One can distill later.
Hey Yannic, you are such a good company for learning deep learning. You lifted me from all the struggles. Thank you for sharing your insight.
Your explanations resonate so good with me that is like pushing knowledge directly in my head. Does anyone has the same feeling?
Revisiting classic paper is SO NICE for new people enter into the field to understand the history of the million tricks that get automatically applied nowadays.
10:50 This should have been so obvious, how did I never think of it like that 😨
Thank you for explaining it! So much easier for a beginner like me to understand
Amazing explanation. Keep up the good work!
Loved the way u are reviewing papers.
Wow, you read the author names perfectly!
Loved it and subscribed! And yes please do more of classics!
Would love to see papers like these which have used unique tricks to train, I request you do more videos on paper which solves the problem of training neural networks, tips and tricks and why they work. Why local response normalisation works, what's the best way to initialise your network layers for a vision task, for a NLP task. In a nutshell what works and why.🙏
Thank You for this beautiful explanation!!
what a fantastic summary, thank you very much !
I love the old papers idea! Nice video
Thanks for this! And I really enjoy going through the old papers, since you can pick up things you missed when first reading them. Enjoy the break!!
This is beautiful! a beautiful paper and a beautiful explanation, simplicity is genius!
That was a short break
:D
It's pre-recorded :)
Love the [Classic] series.
I think the identity layer on a 3x3 matrix wud be a diagonal set of 1 instead of a 1 in the center. @Yannic Kilcher 08:50
I disagree with the assertion that the layers are learning “smaller” functions in ResNets. The results cited to support this claim, that the activations of the layers in the ResNets are larger than those in comparable feed-forward networks, can be caused by small weights and large biases, which L-2 regularization would encourage since it only operates on weights and not biases. The average magnitude of the weights in a layer have no relation to the complexity of the function they encode, since the weights of a layer can simply be scaled down without drastically changing this function. Moreover, in their paper on the Lottery Ticket Hypothesis, Frankle et al. find that ResNets are generally less compressible than feed-forward networks, meaning the functions they encode are more complex than in comparable feed-forward networks.
looking forward to more videos like this!
Very enjoyable, insight filled presentation, Yannic, thanks! It almost seems like residual connections allow the network to only use the layers that dont corrupt the insight. Since every fully connected or convolutional layer is a destructive operation (reduction) of its inputs, signal may get distorted beyond recovery over a few blocks. By having a sideline crosswire where not only the original input but any derived computation can potentially be preserved at each step, network is freed from the 'tyranny of tranformation'. :)
Both the paper and Yannic highlight the idea that - the goal shifts from 'deriving new insights from data' to 'preserving input as long (deep) as needed' - while all other types of layers in a network distort information or derive inferences from data, the residual connection allows preserving information and protecting it from being automatically distorted, so that any information can be safely copied over to any later layer.
residual connection can be seen as similar to the invention of zero to arithmetic.
Thank you for this clear explanation!
Would love a video enumerating with explanation all the learned lessons organized by importance to modern solutions.
Great discussion of the paper. Thanks for doing this.
Revisiting the classics which had massively changed and forged the direction for DL research is so fun. Loved the way you explained the things. So cool. Thanks a lot :)
This helped me so much , big thanks to you
Great idea to review classic papers.
Came here from DongXii to support our NIO superstar, Ren Shaoqing!
Excellent video featuring an extraordinary paper. Good job bro
Very clear thank you!
Thanks for these great explanations , still a beginner in deep learning but I understood the paper very well !
I loved this paper. Resnets are still cool. Nowadays there are a more complicated versions of these nets but the ideas still pretty much hold these days.
Nice video by the way.
I love this series on historical papers
This is it!!!!! Great thanks from South Korea!!!!!
Love these reviews of earlier landmark papers! Thanks!!!
Loved the explanation Thank You so much!
Very insightful explanation for beginners like me. Thank you.
I've got the impression that you're a very good chinese speaker for your pronounciation of the authors' names.
Thank you! this is unbelievably helpful as someone whos just starting out. subscribed!
Hats off to Dedication level 💯
Thank you so much! Keep making such awesome videos
Best explanation I have seen, nice work
Fantastic explanation
Thank you Yannic for this great work
This is really valuable tbh. Great video!
24:06 I think LeNet also did something similar but my memory fades.
.
Legendary paper. Great work. Too bad, I think in last two years we havent seen any major breakthroughs.
Are large scale use of transformers not a big breakthrough?
@@tylertheeverlasting Transformers came out in 2017, if I remember it right.
such a great explanation... tysm
You are back! I was getting withdrawals lol
Amazing narration, keep up the excellent work.
Great video! Thanks
Very Helpful. thanks a lot. 👍👌
excellent explanation
Thank you man.
Very nice, thanks! :)
Another Great one! Would like to request if a review is possible on angular losses especially ArcFace, as it has begun being adopted for multiple classification tasks as another *classic* review.
Thanks!
I love how you will *not* review papers based on impact, except when you do :D
JK, please mix in more [classic] papers, or whatever else you feel like - just keep the drive for ML. Is's contagious! 💦
An idea: combined review/your take of a whole class of models (eg. MobileNet and its variants &| YOLO variants)
Universal transformer please! Love your videos, great job
What is inception-net hypothesis?? In xception-net paper, the author explained the hypothesis of inception-net. But I couldn't grasp it fully and get lost a bit. Can you explain that??
I'm sorry I have no clue what the inception-net hypothesis is, but also I don't know too much about inception networks.
Very good video
Thanks so much ! This is extremely helpful
Nice review about residual network!
Thanks a lot ! Amazing explanation :)
Little question about the connections when the shape changes: a simple 1x1 convolution can give the right depth but the feature maps would still be the original size. So I assume the 1x1 convolutions are also with stride 2?
This is correct and is specified in the paper. I had the same question
If questions due to the parameters of the ResNet. As far as I understood it you concatenate the input with the output of another layer. This enables you to train more stable networks. Why does this lead to fewer parameters than the VGG? I would suggest that this is the case because you perform the more costly operations (more filters) on layers that are already reduced in their dimensions due to the stride? Is this correct?
You have broken down the language in the paper to very simple and easily digestable form. Thank you
In 3.4 - Implimentation, it says that they use BN after each conv layer and before the activation. Does this stand true for ResNet50+? In the bottleneck blocks, do they add BN after the first 1x1 conv layer and then the 3x3 and lastly the 1x1 again? Or was the Implementation part, discussing the ResNet34 structure?
Please make more videos on Classic Papers..like yolo..inception!!
i dont understand from the starting of the quoted statement (which I will write) upto 9:28, you are saying, "instead of learning to transform X via neural networks to X, which is an identity function, why don't we have X stay X and then learn whatever we need to change?"
can you explain me this part with some analogy? I am beginner here. Thanks !!
Thank you very much for the explanation! I'm just starting to use the pretrained nets I wondered how could I improve the performance of my models, and this video cleared many doubts I had. Keep up the amazing work!
That was a great explanation.
that chuckle at 13:06 😂
thank you!!