Information Flows of Diverse Autoencoders

Deep learning methods have had outstanding performances in various fields. A fundamental query is why they are so effective. Information theory provides a potential answer by interpreting the learning process as the information transmission and compression of data. The information flows can be visua...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Sungyeop Lee, Junghyo Jo
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: MDPI AG 2021-07-01
Series:Entropy
Subjects:
Online Access:https://www.mdpi.com/1099-4300/23/7/862
id doaj-b939358c7c68472cafc227651c8aff97
record_format Article
spelling doaj-b939358c7c68472cafc227651c8aff972021-07-23T13:39:42ZengMDPI AGEntropy1099-43002021-07-012386286210.3390/e23070862Information Flows of Diverse AutoencodersSungyeop Lee0Junghyo Jo1Department of Physics and Astronomy, Seoul National University, Seoul 08826, KoreaDepartment of Physics Education and Center for Theoretical Physics and Artificial Intelligence Institute, Seoul National University, Seoul 08826, KoreaDeep learning methods have had outstanding performances in various fields. A fundamental query is why they are so effective. Information theory provides a potential answer by interpreting the learning process as the information transmission and compression of data. The information flows can be visualized on the information plane of the mutual information among the input, hidden, and output layers. In this study, we examine how the information flows are shaped by the network parameters, such as depth, sparsity, weight constraints, and hidden representations. Here, we adopt autoencoders as models of deep learning, because (i) they have clear guidelines for their information flows, and (ii) they have various species, such as vanilla, sparse, tied, variational, and label autoencoders. We measured their information flows using Rényi’s matrix-based <inline-formula><math xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><semantics><mi>α</mi></semantics></math></inline-formula>-order entropy functional. As learning progresses, they show a typical fitting phase where the amounts of input-to-hidden and hidden-to-output mutual information both increase. In the last stage of learning, however, some autoencoders show a simplifying phase, previously called the “compression phase”, where input-to-hidden mutual information diminishes. In particular, the sparsity regularization of hidden activities amplifies the simplifying phase. However, tied, variational, and label autoencoders do not have a simplifying phase. Nevertheless, all autoencoders have similar reconstruction errors for training and test data. Thus, the simplifying phase does not seem to be necessary for the generalization of learning.https://www.mdpi.com/1099-4300/23/7/862information bottleneck theorymutual informationmatrix-based kernel estimationautoencoders
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Sungyeop Lee
Junghyo Jo
spellingShingle Sungyeop Lee
Junghyo Jo
Information Flows of Diverse Autoencoders
Entropy
information bottleneck theory
mutual information
matrix-based kernel estimation
autoencoders
author_facet Sungyeop Lee
Junghyo Jo
author_sort Sungyeop Lee
title Information Flows of Diverse Autoencoders
title_short Information Flows of Diverse Autoencoders
title_full Information Flows of Diverse Autoencoders
title_fullStr Information Flows of Diverse Autoencoders
title_full_unstemmed Information Flows of Diverse Autoencoders
title_sort information flows of diverse autoencoders
publisher MDPI AG
series Entropy
issn 1099-4300
publishDate 2021-07-01
description Deep learning methods have had outstanding performances in various fields. A fundamental query is why they are so effective. Information theory provides a potential answer by interpreting the learning process as the information transmission and compression of data. The information flows can be visualized on the information plane of the mutual information among the input, hidden, and output layers. In this study, we examine how the information flows are shaped by the network parameters, such as depth, sparsity, weight constraints, and hidden representations. Here, we adopt autoencoders as models of deep learning, because (i) they have clear guidelines for their information flows, and (ii) they have various species, such as vanilla, sparse, tied, variational, and label autoencoders. We measured their information flows using Rényi’s matrix-based <inline-formula><math xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><semantics><mi>α</mi></semantics></math></inline-formula>-order entropy functional. As learning progresses, they show a typical fitting phase where the amounts of input-to-hidden and hidden-to-output mutual information both increase. In the last stage of learning, however, some autoencoders show a simplifying phase, previously called the “compression phase”, where input-to-hidden mutual information diminishes. In particular, the sparsity regularization of hidden activities amplifies the simplifying phase. However, tied, variational, and label autoencoders do not have a simplifying phase. Nevertheless, all autoencoders have similar reconstruction errors for training and test data. Thus, the simplifying phase does not seem to be necessary for the generalization of learning.
topic information bottleneck theory
mutual information
matrix-based kernel estimation
autoencoders
url https://www.mdpi.com/1099-4300/23/7/862
work_keys_str_mv AT sungyeoplee informationflowsofdiverseautoencoders
AT junghyojo informationflowsofdiverseautoencoders
_version_ 1721288499336839168