Creating thinned models in during Dropout processMathematically modeling neural networks as graphical modelsQuestions about understanding convolutional neural network (with Tensorflow's example)How to efficiently and un-biasedly evaluate a deep net for classification taskRecursive neural networks for Part-of-speech tagging?Why do Srivastava et al. claim that “the best” theoretical regularization technique involves all possible network parameter settings?Understanding dropout method: one bask per batch, or more?Why is dropout causing my network to overfit so badly?Dropout in Deep Neural NetworksNeural Networks Mappings( Topology)What does it mean by “approach the performance of the Bayesian gold standard”?

Output visual diagram of picture

Did Nintendo change its mind about 68000 SNES?

"Marked down as someone wanting to sell shares." What does that mean?

Asserting that Atheism and Theism are both faith based positions

How to determine the greatest d orbital splitting?

Air travel with refrigerated insulin

Is VPN a layer 3 concept?

Isn't the word "experience" wrongly used in this context?

Homology of the fiber

What kind of footwear is suitable for walking in micro gravity environment?

Help with identifying unique aircraft over NE Pennsylvania

What is the tangent at a sharp point on a curve?

Why is this tree refusing to shed its dead leaves?

How to read string as hex number in bash?

Should a narrator ever describe things based on a characters view instead of fact?

How to find the largest number(s) in a list of elements, possibly non-unique?

Is this Pascal's Matrix?

Can other pieces capture a threatening piece and prevent a checkmate?

Friend wants my recommendation but I don't want to give it to him

Why didn’t Eve recognize the little cockroach as a living organism?

label a part of commutative diagram

Naïve RSA decryption in Python

Have any astronauts/cosmonauts died in space?

How old is Nick Fury?



Creating thinned models in during Dropout process


Mathematically modeling neural networks as graphical modelsQuestions about understanding convolutional neural network (with Tensorflow's example)How to efficiently and un-biasedly evaluate a deep net for classification taskRecursive neural networks for Part-of-speech tagging?Why do Srivastava et al. claim that “the best” theoretical regularization technique involves all possible network parameter settings?Understanding dropout method: one bask per batch, or more?Why is dropout causing my network to overfit so badly?Dropout in Deep Neural NetworksNeural Networks Mappings( Topology)What does it mean by “approach the performance of the Bayesian gold standard”?













4












$begingroup$



Applying dropout to a neural network amounts to sampling a “thinned” network from it. The thinned network consists of all the units that survived dropout. A neural net with n units can be seen as a collection of 2^n possible thinned neural networks.




Source:
Dropout: A Simple Way to Prevent Neural Networks fromOverfitting, pg. 1931.



How are we getting these 2^n models?










share|cite|improve this question









New contributor




ashirwad is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.







$endgroup$
















    4












    $begingroup$



    Applying dropout to a neural network amounts to sampling a “thinned” network from it. The thinned network consists of all the units that survived dropout. A neural net with n units can be seen as a collection of 2^n possible thinned neural networks.




    Source:
    Dropout: A Simple Way to Prevent Neural Networks fromOverfitting, pg. 1931.



    How are we getting these 2^n models?










    share|cite|improve this question









    New contributor




    ashirwad is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
    Check out our Code of Conduct.







    $endgroup$














      4












      4








      4





      $begingroup$



      Applying dropout to a neural network amounts to sampling a “thinned” network from it. The thinned network consists of all the units that survived dropout. A neural net with n units can be seen as a collection of 2^n possible thinned neural networks.




      Source:
      Dropout: A Simple Way to Prevent Neural Networks fromOverfitting, pg. 1931.



      How are we getting these 2^n models?










      share|cite|improve this question









      New contributor




      ashirwad is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.







      $endgroup$





      Applying dropout to a neural network amounts to sampling a “thinned” network from it. The thinned network consists of all the units that survived dropout. A neural net with n units can be seen as a collection of 2^n possible thinned neural networks.




      Source:
      Dropout: A Simple Way to Prevent Neural Networks fromOverfitting, pg. 1931.



      How are we getting these 2^n models?







      machine-learning deep-learning dropout






      share|cite|improve this question









      New contributor




      ashirwad is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.











      share|cite|improve this question









      New contributor




      ashirwad is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.









      share|cite|improve this question




      share|cite|improve this question








      edited 17 hours ago









      Djib2011

      2,58931125




      2,58931125






      New contributor




      ashirwad is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.









      asked 18 hours ago









      ashirwadashirwad

      213




      213




      New contributor




      ashirwad is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.





      New contributor





      ashirwad is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.






      ashirwad is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.




















          2 Answers
          2






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          4












          $begingroup$

          The statement is a bit oversimplifying but the idea is that assuming we have $n$ nodes and each of these nodes might be "dropped", we have $2^n$ possible thinned neural networks. Obviously dropping out an entire layer would alter the whole structure of the network but the idea is straightforward: we ignore the activation/information from certain randomly selected neurons and thus encourage redundancy learning and discourage over-fitting on very specific features.



          The same idea has also been employed in Gradient Boosting Machines where instead of "ignoring neurons" we "ignore trees" at random (see Rashmi & Gilad-Bachrach (2015) DART: Dropouts meet Multiple Additive Regression Trees on that matter).



          Minor edit: I just saw Djib2011's answer. (+1) He/she specifically shows why the statement is somewhat over-simplifying. If we assume that we can drop any (or all, or none) of the neurons we have $2^n$ possible networks.






          share|cite|improve this answer











          $endgroup$




















            0












            $begingroup$

            I too haven't understood their reasoning, I always assumed it was a typo or something...



            The way I see it we if we have $n$ hidden units in a Neural Network with a single hidden layer and we apply dropout keeping $r$ of those, we'll have:



            $$
            fracn!r! cdot (n-r)!
            $$



            possible combinations (not $2^n$ as the authors state).




            Example:



            Assume a simple fully connected neural network with a single hidden layer with 4 neurons. This means the hidden layer will have 4 outputs $h_1, h_2, h_3, h_4$.



            Now, you want to apply dropout to this layer with a 0.5 probability (i.e. half of the outputs will be dropped).



            Since 2 out of the 4 outputs will be dropped, at each training iteration we'll have one of the following possibilities:



            1. $h_1, h_2$

            2. $h_1, h_3$

            3. $h_1, h_4$

            4. $h_2, h_3$

            5. $h_2, h_4$

            6. $h_3, h_4$

            or by applying the formula:



            $$
            frac4!2! cdot (4-2)! = frac242 cdot 2 = 6
            $$






            share|cite|improve this answer









            $endgroup$








            • 3




              $begingroup$
              I do not think that most implementations of dropout work by saying: If there are 100 neurons, and the probability is 0.05, I have to disable exactly 5 neurons chosen at random. Instead each neuron is disabled with a probability of 0.05, independently of what happens with the rest. Hence, the cases where all or no neurons are disabled, while unlikely, are possible.
              $endgroup$
              – Daniel López
              16 hours ago






            • 1




              $begingroup$
              @DanielLópez: I think both you and Djib2011 (+1 both) are "factually correct" on this. The statement is clearly oversimplifying things. You also need to take into account that most the networks that this paper is concerned with, have thousands of neurons so certain it is kind of accepted that no layer will be totally switched off.
              $endgroup$
              – usεr11852
              16 hours ago







            • 2




              $begingroup$
              Agree, but I believe the above example is transmitting the idea that exactly $n cdot textprob$ units are disabled with dropout, where $textprob$ is the dropout probability. And this is not how dropout works.
              $endgroup$
              – Daniel López
              16 hours ago











            • $begingroup$
              Well... LLN is our friend. :)
              $endgroup$
              – usεr11852
              16 hours ago










            • $begingroup$
              The flaw with the reasoning presented here is that dropout sets weights to 0 with some fixed probability independently. This implies that the number of zero weights at each step has a binomial distribution, because dropout has the three defining characteristics of a binomial distribution 1 dichotomous outcomes (weights are on or off) 2 fixed number of trials (number of weights in the model doesn't change) 3 probability of success is fixed & independent for each trial.
              $endgroup$
              – Sycorax
              4 hours ago











            Your Answer





            StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
            return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function ()
            StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix)
            StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
            );
            );
            , "mathjax-editing");

            StackExchange.ready(function()
            var channelOptions =
            tags: "".split(" "),
            id: "65"
            ;
            initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

            StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
            // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
            if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
            StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
            createEditor();
            );

            else
            createEditor();

            );

            function createEditor()
            StackExchange.prepareEditor(
            heartbeatType: 'answer',
            autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
            convertImagesToLinks: false,
            noModals: true,
            showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
            reputationToPostImages: null,
            bindNavPrevention: true,
            postfix: "",
            imageUploader:
            brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
            contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
            allowUrls: true
            ,
            onDemand: true,
            discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
            ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
            );



            );






            ashirwad is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.









            draft saved

            draft discarded


















            StackExchange.ready(
            function ()
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstats.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f398114%2fcreating-thinned-models-in-during-dropout-process%23new-answer', 'question_page');

            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown

























            2 Answers
            2






            active

            oldest

            votes








            2 Answers
            2






            active

            oldest

            votes









            active

            oldest

            votes






            active

            oldest

            votes









            4












            $begingroup$

            The statement is a bit oversimplifying but the idea is that assuming we have $n$ nodes and each of these nodes might be "dropped", we have $2^n$ possible thinned neural networks. Obviously dropping out an entire layer would alter the whole structure of the network but the idea is straightforward: we ignore the activation/information from certain randomly selected neurons and thus encourage redundancy learning and discourage over-fitting on very specific features.



            The same idea has also been employed in Gradient Boosting Machines where instead of "ignoring neurons" we "ignore trees" at random (see Rashmi & Gilad-Bachrach (2015) DART: Dropouts meet Multiple Additive Regression Trees on that matter).



            Minor edit: I just saw Djib2011's answer. (+1) He/she specifically shows why the statement is somewhat over-simplifying. If we assume that we can drop any (or all, or none) of the neurons we have $2^n$ possible networks.






            share|cite|improve this answer











            $endgroup$

















              4












              $begingroup$

              The statement is a bit oversimplifying but the idea is that assuming we have $n$ nodes and each of these nodes might be "dropped", we have $2^n$ possible thinned neural networks. Obviously dropping out an entire layer would alter the whole structure of the network but the idea is straightforward: we ignore the activation/information from certain randomly selected neurons and thus encourage redundancy learning and discourage over-fitting on very specific features.



              The same idea has also been employed in Gradient Boosting Machines where instead of "ignoring neurons" we "ignore trees" at random (see Rashmi & Gilad-Bachrach (2015) DART: Dropouts meet Multiple Additive Regression Trees on that matter).



              Minor edit: I just saw Djib2011's answer. (+1) He/she specifically shows why the statement is somewhat over-simplifying. If we assume that we can drop any (or all, or none) of the neurons we have $2^n$ possible networks.






              share|cite|improve this answer











              $endgroup$















                4












                4








                4





                $begingroup$

                The statement is a bit oversimplifying but the idea is that assuming we have $n$ nodes and each of these nodes might be "dropped", we have $2^n$ possible thinned neural networks. Obviously dropping out an entire layer would alter the whole structure of the network but the idea is straightforward: we ignore the activation/information from certain randomly selected neurons and thus encourage redundancy learning and discourage over-fitting on very specific features.



                The same idea has also been employed in Gradient Boosting Machines where instead of "ignoring neurons" we "ignore trees" at random (see Rashmi & Gilad-Bachrach (2015) DART: Dropouts meet Multiple Additive Regression Trees on that matter).



                Minor edit: I just saw Djib2011's answer. (+1) He/she specifically shows why the statement is somewhat over-simplifying. If we assume that we can drop any (or all, or none) of the neurons we have $2^n$ possible networks.






                share|cite|improve this answer











                $endgroup$



                The statement is a bit oversimplifying but the idea is that assuming we have $n$ nodes and each of these nodes might be "dropped", we have $2^n$ possible thinned neural networks. Obviously dropping out an entire layer would alter the whole structure of the network but the idea is straightforward: we ignore the activation/information from certain randomly selected neurons and thus encourage redundancy learning and discourage over-fitting on very specific features.



                The same idea has also been employed in Gradient Boosting Machines where instead of "ignoring neurons" we "ignore trees" at random (see Rashmi & Gilad-Bachrach (2015) DART: Dropouts meet Multiple Additive Regression Trees on that matter).



                Minor edit: I just saw Djib2011's answer. (+1) He/she specifically shows why the statement is somewhat over-simplifying. If we assume that we can drop any (or all, or none) of the neurons we have $2^n$ possible networks.







                share|cite|improve this answer














                share|cite|improve this answer



                share|cite|improve this answer








                edited 16 hours ago

























                answered 16 hours ago









                usεr11852usεr11852

                19.3k14274




                19.3k14274























                    0












                    $begingroup$

                    I too haven't understood their reasoning, I always assumed it was a typo or something...



                    The way I see it we if we have $n$ hidden units in a Neural Network with a single hidden layer and we apply dropout keeping $r$ of those, we'll have:



                    $$
                    fracn!r! cdot (n-r)!
                    $$



                    possible combinations (not $2^n$ as the authors state).




                    Example:



                    Assume a simple fully connected neural network with a single hidden layer with 4 neurons. This means the hidden layer will have 4 outputs $h_1, h_2, h_3, h_4$.



                    Now, you want to apply dropout to this layer with a 0.5 probability (i.e. half of the outputs will be dropped).



                    Since 2 out of the 4 outputs will be dropped, at each training iteration we'll have one of the following possibilities:



                    1. $h_1, h_2$

                    2. $h_1, h_3$

                    3. $h_1, h_4$

                    4. $h_2, h_3$

                    5. $h_2, h_4$

                    6. $h_3, h_4$

                    or by applying the formula:



                    $$
                    frac4!2! cdot (4-2)! = frac242 cdot 2 = 6
                    $$






                    share|cite|improve this answer









                    $endgroup$








                    • 3




                      $begingroup$
                      I do not think that most implementations of dropout work by saying: If there are 100 neurons, and the probability is 0.05, I have to disable exactly 5 neurons chosen at random. Instead each neuron is disabled with a probability of 0.05, independently of what happens with the rest. Hence, the cases where all or no neurons are disabled, while unlikely, are possible.
                      $endgroup$
                      – Daniel López
                      16 hours ago






                    • 1




                      $begingroup$
                      @DanielLópez: I think both you and Djib2011 (+1 both) are "factually correct" on this. The statement is clearly oversimplifying things. You also need to take into account that most the networks that this paper is concerned with, have thousands of neurons so certain it is kind of accepted that no layer will be totally switched off.
                      $endgroup$
                      – usεr11852
                      16 hours ago







                    • 2




                      $begingroup$
                      Agree, but I believe the above example is transmitting the idea that exactly $n cdot textprob$ units are disabled with dropout, where $textprob$ is the dropout probability. And this is not how dropout works.
                      $endgroup$
                      – Daniel López
                      16 hours ago











                    • $begingroup$
                      Well... LLN is our friend. :)
                      $endgroup$
                      – usεr11852
                      16 hours ago










                    • $begingroup$
                      The flaw with the reasoning presented here is that dropout sets weights to 0 with some fixed probability independently. This implies that the number of zero weights at each step has a binomial distribution, because dropout has the three defining characteristics of a binomial distribution 1 dichotomous outcomes (weights are on or off) 2 fixed number of trials (number of weights in the model doesn't change) 3 probability of success is fixed & independent for each trial.
                      $endgroup$
                      – Sycorax
                      4 hours ago
















                    0












                    $begingroup$

                    I too haven't understood their reasoning, I always assumed it was a typo or something...



                    The way I see it we if we have $n$ hidden units in a Neural Network with a single hidden layer and we apply dropout keeping $r$ of those, we'll have:



                    $$
                    fracn!r! cdot (n-r)!
                    $$



                    possible combinations (not $2^n$ as the authors state).




                    Example:



                    Assume a simple fully connected neural network with a single hidden layer with 4 neurons. This means the hidden layer will have 4 outputs $h_1, h_2, h_3, h_4$.



                    Now, you want to apply dropout to this layer with a 0.5 probability (i.e. half of the outputs will be dropped).



                    Since 2 out of the 4 outputs will be dropped, at each training iteration we'll have one of the following possibilities:



                    1. $h_1, h_2$

                    2. $h_1, h_3$

                    3. $h_1, h_4$

                    4. $h_2, h_3$

                    5. $h_2, h_4$

                    6. $h_3, h_4$

                    or by applying the formula:



                    $$
                    frac4!2! cdot (4-2)! = frac242 cdot 2 = 6
                    $$






                    share|cite|improve this answer









                    $endgroup$








                    • 3




                      $begingroup$
                      I do not think that most implementations of dropout work by saying: If there are 100 neurons, and the probability is 0.05, I have to disable exactly 5 neurons chosen at random. Instead each neuron is disabled with a probability of 0.05, independently of what happens with the rest. Hence, the cases where all or no neurons are disabled, while unlikely, are possible.
                      $endgroup$
                      – Daniel López
                      16 hours ago






                    • 1




                      $begingroup$
                      @DanielLópez: I think both you and Djib2011 (+1 both) are "factually correct" on this. The statement is clearly oversimplifying things. You also need to take into account that most the networks that this paper is concerned with, have thousands of neurons so certain it is kind of accepted that no layer will be totally switched off.
                      $endgroup$
                      – usεr11852
                      16 hours ago







                    • 2




                      $begingroup$
                      Agree, but I believe the above example is transmitting the idea that exactly $n cdot textprob$ units are disabled with dropout, where $textprob$ is the dropout probability. And this is not how dropout works.
                      $endgroup$
                      – Daniel López
                      16 hours ago











                    • $begingroup$
                      Well... LLN is our friend. :)
                      $endgroup$
                      – usεr11852
                      16 hours ago










                    • $begingroup$
                      The flaw with the reasoning presented here is that dropout sets weights to 0 with some fixed probability independently. This implies that the number of zero weights at each step has a binomial distribution, because dropout has the three defining characteristics of a binomial distribution 1 dichotomous outcomes (weights are on or off) 2 fixed number of trials (number of weights in the model doesn't change) 3 probability of success is fixed & independent for each trial.
                      $endgroup$
                      – Sycorax
                      4 hours ago














                    0












                    0








                    0





                    $begingroup$

                    I too haven't understood their reasoning, I always assumed it was a typo or something...



                    The way I see it we if we have $n$ hidden units in a Neural Network with a single hidden layer and we apply dropout keeping $r$ of those, we'll have:



                    $$
                    fracn!r! cdot (n-r)!
                    $$



                    possible combinations (not $2^n$ as the authors state).




                    Example:



                    Assume a simple fully connected neural network with a single hidden layer with 4 neurons. This means the hidden layer will have 4 outputs $h_1, h_2, h_3, h_4$.



                    Now, you want to apply dropout to this layer with a 0.5 probability (i.e. half of the outputs will be dropped).



                    Since 2 out of the 4 outputs will be dropped, at each training iteration we'll have one of the following possibilities:



                    1. $h_1, h_2$

                    2. $h_1, h_3$

                    3. $h_1, h_4$

                    4. $h_2, h_3$

                    5. $h_2, h_4$

                    6. $h_3, h_4$

                    or by applying the formula:



                    $$
                    frac4!2! cdot (4-2)! = frac242 cdot 2 = 6
                    $$






                    share|cite|improve this answer









                    $endgroup$



                    I too haven't understood their reasoning, I always assumed it was a typo or something...



                    The way I see it we if we have $n$ hidden units in a Neural Network with a single hidden layer and we apply dropout keeping $r$ of those, we'll have:



                    $$
                    fracn!r! cdot (n-r)!
                    $$



                    possible combinations (not $2^n$ as the authors state).




                    Example:



                    Assume a simple fully connected neural network with a single hidden layer with 4 neurons. This means the hidden layer will have 4 outputs $h_1, h_2, h_3, h_4$.



                    Now, you want to apply dropout to this layer with a 0.5 probability (i.e. half of the outputs will be dropped).



                    Since 2 out of the 4 outputs will be dropped, at each training iteration we'll have one of the following possibilities:



                    1. $h_1, h_2$

                    2. $h_1, h_3$

                    3. $h_1, h_4$

                    4. $h_2, h_3$

                    5. $h_2, h_4$

                    6. $h_3, h_4$

                    or by applying the formula:



                    $$
                    frac4!2! cdot (4-2)! = frac242 cdot 2 = 6
                    $$







                    share|cite|improve this answer












                    share|cite|improve this answer



                    share|cite|improve this answer










                    answered 16 hours ago









                    Djib2011Djib2011

                    2,58931125




                    2,58931125







                    • 3




                      $begingroup$
                      I do not think that most implementations of dropout work by saying: If there are 100 neurons, and the probability is 0.05, I have to disable exactly 5 neurons chosen at random. Instead each neuron is disabled with a probability of 0.05, independently of what happens with the rest. Hence, the cases where all or no neurons are disabled, while unlikely, are possible.
                      $endgroup$
                      – Daniel López
                      16 hours ago






                    • 1




                      $begingroup$
                      @DanielLópez: I think both you and Djib2011 (+1 both) are "factually correct" on this. The statement is clearly oversimplifying things. You also need to take into account that most the networks that this paper is concerned with, have thousands of neurons so certain it is kind of accepted that no layer will be totally switched off.
                      $endgroup$
                      – usεr11852
                      16 hours ago







                    • 2




                      $begingroup$
                      Agree, but I believe the above example is transmitting the idea that exactly $n cdot textprob$ units are disabled with dropout, where $textprob$ is the dropout probability. And this is not how dropout works.
                      $endgroup$
                      – Daniel López
                      16 hours ago











                    • $begingroup$
                      Well... LLN is our friend. :)
                      $endgroup$
                      – usεr11852
                      16 hours ago










                    • $begingroup$
                      The flaw with the reasoning presented here is that dropout sets weights to 0 with some fixed probability independently. This implies that the number of zero weights at each step has a binomial distribution, because dropout has the three defining characteristics of a binomial distribution 1 dichotomous outcomes (weights are on or off) 2 fixed number of trials (number of weights in the model doesn't change) 3 probability of success is fixed & independent for each trial.
                      $endgroup$
                      – Sycorax
                      4 hours ago













                    • 3




                      $begingroup$
                      I do not think that most implementations of dropout work by saying: If there are 100 neurons, and the probability is 0.05, I have to disable exactly 5 neurons chosen at random. Instead each neuron is disabled with a probability of 0.05, independently of what happens with the rest. Hence, the cases where all or no neurons are disabled, while unlikely, are possible.
                      $endgroup$
                      – Daniel López
                      16 hours ago






                    • 1




                      $begingroup$
                      @DanielLópez: I think both you and Djib2011 (+1 both) are "factually correct" on this. The statement is clearly oversimplifying things. You also need to take into account that most the networks that this paper is concerned with, have thousands of neurons so certain it is kind of accepted that no layer will be totally switched off.
                      $endgroup$
                      – usεr11852
                      16 hours ago







                    • 2




                      $begingroup$
                      Agree, but I believe the above example is transmitting the idea that exactly $n cdot textprob$ units are disabled with dropout, where $textprob$ is the dropout probability. And this is not how dropout works.
                      $endgroup$
                      – Daniel López
                      16 hours ago











                    • $begingroup$
                      Well... LLN is our friend. :)
                      $endgroup$
                      – usεr11852
                      16 hours ago










                    • $begingroup$
                      The flaw with the reasoning presented here is that dropout sets weights to 0 with some fixed probability independently. This implies that the number of zero weights at each step has a binomial distribution, because dropout has the three defining characteristics of a binomial distribution 1 dichotomous outcomes (weights are on or off) 2 fixed number of trials (number of weights in the model doesn't change) 3 probability of success is fixed & independent for each trial.
                      $endgroup$
                      – Sycorax
                      4 hours ago








                    3




                    3




                    $begingroup$
                    I do not think that most implementations of dropout work by saying: If there are 100 neurons, and the probability is 0.05, I have to disable exactly 5 neurons chosen at random. Instead each neuron is disabled with a probability of 0.05, independently of what happens with the rest. Hence, the cases where all or no neurons are disabled, while unlikely, are possible.
                    $endgroup$
                    – Daniel López
                    16 hours ago




                    $begingroup$
                    I do not think that most implementations of dropout work by saying: If there are 100 neurons, and the probability is 0.05, I have to disable exactly 5 neurons chosen at random. Instead each neuron is disabled with a probability of 0.05, independently of what happens with the rest. Hence, the cases where all or no neurons are disabled, while unlikely, are possible.
                    $endgroup$
                    – Daniel López
                    16 hours ago




                    1




                    1




                    $begingroup$
                    @DanielLópez: I think both you and Djib2011 (+1 both) are "factually correct" on this. The statement is clearly oversimplifying things. You also need to take into account that most the networks that this paper is concerned with, have thousands of neurons so certain it is kind of accepted that no layer will be totally switched off.
                    $endgroup$
                    – usεr11852
                    16 hours ago





                    $begingroup$
                    @DanielLópez: I think both you and Djib2011 (+1 both) are "factually correct" on this. The statement is clearly oversimplifying things. You also need to take into account that most the networks that this paper is concerned with, have thousands of neurons so certain it is kind of accepted that no layer will be totally switched off.
                    $endgroup$
                    – usεr11852
                    16 hours ago





                    2




                    2




                    $begingroup$
                    Agree, but I believe the above example is transmitting the idea that exactly $n cdot textprob$ units are disabled with dropout, where $textprob$ is the dropout probability. And this is not how dropout works.
                    $endgroup$
                    – Daniel López
                    16 hours ago





                    $begingroup$
                    Agree, but I believe the above example is transmitting the idea that exactly $n cdot textprob$ units are disabled with dropout, where $textprob$ is the dropout probability. And this is not how dropout works.
                    $endgroup$
                    – Daniel López
                    16 hours ago













                    $begingroup$
                    Well... LLN is our friend. :)
                    $endgroup$
                    – usεr11852
                    16 hours ago




                    $begingroup$
                    Well... LLN is our friend. :)
                    $endgroup$
                    – usεr11852
                    16 hours ago












                    $begingroup$
                    The flaw with the reasoning presented here is that dropout sets weights to 0 with some fixed probability independently. This implies that the number of zero weights at each step has a binomial distribution, because dropout has the three defining characteristics of a binomial distribution 1 dichotomous outcomes (weights are on or off) 2 fixed number of trials (number of weights in the model doesn't change) 3 probability of success is fixed & independent for each trial.
                    $endgroup$
                    – Sycorax
                    4 hours ago





                    $begingroup$
                    The flaw with the reasoning presented here is that dropout sets weights to 0 with some fixed probability independently. This implies that the number of zero weights at each step has a binomial distribution, because dropout has the three defining characteristics of a binomial distribution 1 dichotomous outcomes (weights are on or off) 2 fixed number of trials (number of weights in the model doesn't change) 3 probability of success is fixed & independent for each trial.
                    $endgroup$
                    – Sycorax
                    4 hours ago











                    ashirwad is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.









                    draft saved

                    draft discarded


















                    ashirwad is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.












                    ashirwad is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.











                    ashirwad is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.














                    Thanks for contributing an answer to Cross Validated!


                    • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                    But avoid


                    • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                    • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

                    Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


                    To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                    draft saved


                    draft discarded














                    StackExchange.ready(
                    function ()
                    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstats.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f398114%2fcreating-thinned-models-in-during-dropout-process%23new-answer', 'question_page');

                    );

                    Post as a guest















                    Required, but never shown





















































                    Required, but never shown














                    Required, but never shown












                    Required, but never shown







                    Required, but never shown

































                    Required, but never shown














                    Required, but never shown












                    Required, but never shown







                    Required, but never shown







                    Popular posts from this blog

                    Sum ergo cogito? 1 nng

                    419 nièngy_Soadمي 19bal1.5o_g

                    Queiggey Chernihivv 9NnOo i Zw X QqKk LpB