nn.Dropout vs. F.dropout pyTorch
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
By using pyTorch there is two ways to dropout
torch.nn.Dropout
and torch.nn.F.Dropout
.
I struggle to see the difference between the use of them
- when to use what?
- Does it make a difference?
I don't see any performance difference when I switched them around.
neural-network pytorch dropout
add a comment |
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
By using pyTorch there is two ways to dropout
torch.nn.Dropout
and torch.nn.F.Dropout
.
I struggle to see the difference between the use of them
- when to use what?
- Does it make a difference?
I don't see any performance difference when I switched them around.
neural-network pytorch dropout
add a comment |
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
By using pyTorch there is two ways to dropout
torch.nn.Dropout
and torch.nn.F.Dropout
.
I struggle to see the difference between the use of them
- when to use what?
- Does it make a difference?
I don't see any performance difference when I switched them around.
neural-network pytorch dropout
By using pyTorch there is two ways to dropout
torch.nn.Dropout
and torch.nn.F.Dropout
.
I struggle to see the difference between the use of them
- when to use what?
- Does it make a difference?
I don't see any performance difference when I switched them around.
neural-network pytorch dropout
neural-network pytorch dropout
edited Nov 23 at 5:47
M. Doosti Lakhani
648317
648317
asked Nov 21 at 19:44
Jakob
517
517
add a comment |
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
up vote
1
down vote
accepted
The technical differences have already been shown in the other answer. However the main difference is that nn.Dropout
is a torch Module itself which bears some convenience:
A short example for illustration of some differences:
import torch
import torch.nn as nn
class Model1(nn.Module):
# Model 1 using functional dropout
def __init__(self, p=0.0):
super().__init__()
self.p = p
def forward(self, inputs):
return nn.functional.dropout(inputs, p=self.p, training=True)
class Model2(nn.Module):
# Model 2 using dropout module
def __init__(self, p=0.0):
super().__init__()
self.drop_layer = nn.Dropout(p=p)
def forward(self, inputs):
return self.drop_layer(inputs)
model1 = Model1(p=0.5) # functional dropout
model2 = Model2(p=0.5) # dropout module
# creating inputs
inputs = torch.rand(10)
# forwarding inputs in train mode
print('Normal (train) model:')
print('Model 1', model1(inputs))
print('Model 2', model2(inputs))
print()
# switching to eval mode
model1.eval()
model2.eval()
# forwarding inputs in evaluation mode
print('Evaluation mode:')
print('Model 1', model1(inputs))
print('Model 2', model2(inputs))
# show model summary
print('Print summary:')
print(model1)
print(model2)
Output:
Normal (train) model:
Model 1 tensor([ 1.5040, 0.0000, 0.0000, 0.8563, 0.0000, 0.0000, 1.5951,
0.0000, 0.0000, 0.0946])
Model 2 tensor([ 0.0000, 0.3713, 1.9303, 0.0000, 0.0000, 0.3574, 0.0000,
1.1273, 1.5818, 0.0946])
Evaluation mode:
Model 1 tensor([ 0.0000, 0.3713, 0.0000, 0.0000, 0.0000, 0.0000, 0.0000,
0.0000, 0.0000, 0.0000])
Model 2 tensor([ 0.7520, 0.1857, 0.9651, 0.4281, 0.7883, 0.1787, 0.7975,
0.5636, 0.7909, 0.0473])
Print summary:
Model1()
Model2(
(drop_layer): Dropout(p=0.5)
)
So which should I use?
Both are completely equivalent in terms of applying dropout and even though the differences in usage are not that big, there are some reasons to favour the nn.Dropout
over nn.functional.dropout
:
Dropout is designed to be only applied during training, so when doing predictions or evaluation of the model you want dropout to be turned off.
The dropout module nn.Dropout
conveniently handles this and shuts dropout off as soon as your model enters evaluation mode, while the functional dropout does not care about the evaluation / prediction mode.
Even though you can set functional dropout to training=False
to turn it off, it is still not such a convenient solution like with nn.Dropout
.
Also the drop rate is stored in the module, so you don't have to save it in an extra variable. In larger networks you might want to create different dropout layers with different drop rates - here nn.Dropout
may increase readability and can bear also some convenience when using the layers multiple times.
Finally, all modules which are assigned to your model are registered in your model. So you model class keeps track of them, that is why you can just turn off the dropout module by calling eval()
. When using the functional dropout your model is not aware of it, thus it won't appear in any summary.
1
Thank you for the "SO which should I use?" - that was the part I was missing! I normally just doF.dropout(x,training = self.training)
for handling the train/eval difference of it. So to summarize: its a matter of personal preferences?
– Jakob
yesterday
@Jakob Yes, exactly! -nn.Dropout
just intends to provide a slightly higher level API to the functional dropout that can be used in a layer style. However, there is no real difference in behaviour if you use it as you described.
– blue-phoenox
yesterday
add a comment |
up vote
3
down vote
If you look at the source code of nn.Dropout and Functional.Dropout, you can see Functional
is an interface and nn
module implement functions with respect to this interface.
Look at the implementations in nn
class:
from .. import functional as F
class Dropout(_DropoutNd):
def forward(self, input):
return F.dropout(input, self.p, self.training, self.inplace)
class Dropout2d(_DropoutNd):
def forward(self, input):
return F.dropout2d(input, self.p, self.training, self.inplace)
And so on.
Implementation of Functional
class:
def dropout(input, p=0.5, training=False, inplace=False):
return _functions.dropout.Dropout.apply(input, p, training, inplace)
def dropout2d(input, p=0.5, training=False, inplace=False):
return _functions.dropout.FeatureDropout.apply(input, p, training, inplace)
look at the example below to understand:
class Net(nn.Module):
def __init__(self):
super(Net, self).__init__()
self.conv1 = nn.Conv2d(1, 10, kernel_size=5)
self.conv2 = nn.Conv2d(10, 20, kernel_size=5)
self.conv2_drop = nn.Dropout2d()
self.fc1 = nn.Linear(320, 50)
self.fc2 = nn.Linear(50, 10)
def forward(self, x):
x = F.relu(F.max_pool2d(self.conv1(x), 2))
x = F.relu(F.max_pool2d(self.conv2_drop(self.conv2(x)), 2))
x = x.view(-1, 320)
x = F.relu(self.fc1(x))
x = F.dropout(x, training=self.training)
x = self.fc2(x)
return F.log_softmax(x)
There is a F.dropout
in forward()
function and a nn.Dropout
in __init__()
function. Now this is the explanation:
In PyTorch you define your Models as subclasses of torch.nn.Module.
In the init function, you are supposed to initialize the layers you want to use. Unlike keras, Pytorch goes more low level and you have to specify the sizes of your network so that everything matches.
In the forward method, you specify the connections of your layers. This means that you will use the layers you already initialized, in order to re-use the same layer for each forward pass of data you make.
torch.nn.Functional contains some useful functions like activation functions a convolution operations you can use. However, these are not full layers so if you want to specify a layer of any kind you should use torch.nn.Module.
You would use the torch.nn.Functional conv operations to define a custom layer for example with a convolution operation, but not to define a standard convolution layer.
But what should be used when? Does that make a difference?
– Jakob
Nov 22 at 21:24
And I highly recommend you to ask your questions aboutpytorch
in discuss.pytorch.org. I already joined and learned a lot by reading the questions and answers.
– M. Doosti Lakhani
Nov 22 at 21:35
1
But the dropout itself does not have any parameters/weights. So why would you add them as a layer? I kinda struggle to see when F.dropout(x) is superior to nn.Dropout (or vice versa). To me they do exactly the same. For instance: what are the difference (appart from one being a function and the other a module) of theF.droput(x)
andF.relu(F.max_pool2d(self.conv2_drop(self.conv2(x)), 2))
? Could you not replace the latter withF.relu(F.max_pool2d(F.dropout(self.conv2(x)), 2))
– Jakob
2 days ago
To edit above: Why would you add them in the initial function/use them that way?
– Jakob
2 days ago
You can see this post also: discuss.pytorch.org/t/…
– M. Doosti Lakhani
yesterday
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
1
down vote
accepted
The technical differences have already been shown in the other answer. However the main difference is that nn.Dropout
is a torch Module itself which bears some convenience:
A short example for illustration of some differences:
import torch
import torch.nn as nn
class Model1(nn.Module):
# Model 1 using functional dropout
def __init__(self, p=0.0):
super().__init__()
self.p = p
def forward(self, inputs):
return nn.functional.dropout(inputs, p=self.p, training=True)
class Model2(nn.Module):
# Model 2 using dropout module
def __init__(self, p=0.0):
super().__init__()
self.drop_layer = nn.Dropout(p=p)
def forward(self, inputs):
return self.drop_layer(inputs)
model1 = Model1(p=0.5) # functional dropout
model2 = Model2(p=0.5) # dropout module
# creating inputs
inputs = torch.rand(10)
# forwarding inputs in train mode
print('Normal (train) model:')
print('Model 1', model1(inputs))
print('Model 2', model2(inputs))
print()
# switching to eval mode
model1.eval()
model2.eval()
# forwarding inputs in evaluation mode
print('Evaluation mode:')
print('Model 1', model1(inputs))
print('Model 2', model2(inputs))
# show model summary
print('Print summary:')
print(model1)
print(model2)
Output:
Normal (train) model:
Model 1 tensor([ 1.5040, 0.0000, 0.0000, 0.8563, 0.0000, 0.0000, 1.5951,
0.0000, 0.0000, 0.0946])
Model 2 tensor([ 0.0000, 0.3713, 1.9303, 0.0000, 0.0000, 0.3574, 0.0000,
1.1273, 1.5818, 0.0946])
Evaluation mode:
Model 1 tensor([ 0.0000, 0.3713, 0.0000, 0.0000, 0.0000, 0.0000, 0.0000,
0.0000, 0.0000, 0.0000])
Model 2 tensor([ 0.7520, 0.1857, 0.9651, 0.4281, 0.7883, 0.1787, 0.7975,
0.5636, 0.7909, 0.0473])
Print summary:
Model1()
Model2(
(drop_layer): Dropout(p=0.5)
)
So which should I use?
Both are completely equivalent in terms of applying dropout and even though the differences in usage are not that big, there are some reasons to favour the nn.Dropout
over nn.functional.dropout
:
Dropout is designed to be only applied during training, so when doing predictions or evaluation of the model you want dropout to be turned off.
The dropout module nn.Dropout
conveniently handles this and shuts dropout off as soon as your model enters evaluation mode, while the functional dropout does not care about the evaluation / prediction mode.
Even though you can set functional dropout to training=False
to turn it off, it is still not such a convenient solution like with nn.Dropout
.
Also the drop rate is stored in the module, so you don't have to save it in an extra variable. In larger networks you might want to create different dropout layers with different drop rates - here nn.Dropout
may increase readability and can bear also some convenience when using the layers multiple times.
Finally, all modules which are assigned to your model are registered in your model. So you model class keeps track of them, that is why you can just turn off the dropout module by calling eval()
. When using the functional dropout your model is not aware of it, thus it won't appear in any summary.
1
Thank you for the "SO which should I use?" - that was the part I was missing! I normally just doF.dropout(x,training = self.training)
for handling the train/eval difference of it. So to summarize: its a matter of personal preferences?
– Jakob
yesterday
@Jakob Yes, exactly! -nn.Dropout
just intends to provide a slightly higher level API to the functional dropout that can be used in a layer style. However, there is no real difference in behaviour if you use it as you described.
– blue-phoenox
yesterday
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
accepted
The technical differences have already been shown in the other answer. However the main difference is that nn.Dropout
is a torch Module itself which bears some convenience:
A short example for illustration of some differences:
import torch
import torch.nn as nn
class Model1(nn.Module):
# Model 1 using functional dropout
def __init__(self, p=0.0):
super().__init__()
self.p = p
def forward(self, inputs):
return nn.functional.dropout(inputs, p=self.p, training=True)
class Model2(nn.Module):
# Model 2 using dropout module
def __init__(self, p=0.0):
super().__init__()
self.drop_layer = nn.Dropout(p=p)
def forward(self, inputs):
return self.drop_layer(inputs)
model1 = Model1(p=0.5) # functional dropout
model2 = Model2(p=0.5) # dropout module
# creating inputs
inputs = torch.rand(10)
# forwarding inputs in train mode
print('Normal (train) model:')
print('Model 1', model1(inputs))
print('Model 2', model2(inputs))
print()
# switching to eval mode
model1.eval()
model2.eval()
# forwarding inputs in evaluation mode
print('Evaluation mode:')
print('Model 1', model1(inputs))
print('Model 2', model2(inputs))
# show model summary
print('Print summary:')
print(model1)
print(model2)
Output:
Normal (train) model:
Model 1 tensor([ 1.5040, 0.0000, 0.0000, 0.8563, 0.0000, 0.0000, 1.5951,
0.0000, 0.0000, 0.0946])
Model 2 tensor([ 0.0000, 0.3713, 1.9303, 0.0000, 0.0000, 0.3574, 0.0000,
1.1273, 1.5818, 0.0946])
Evaluation mode:
Model 1 tensor([ 0.0000, 0.3713, 0.0000, 0.0000, 0.0000, 0.0000, 0.0000,
0.0000, 0.0000, 0.0000])
Model 2 tensor([ 0.7520, 0.1857, 0.9651, 0.4281, 0.7883, 0.1787, 0.7975,
0.5636, 0.7909, 0.0473])
Print summary:
Model1()
Model2(
(drop_layer): Dropout(p=0.5)
)
So which should I use?
Both are completely equivalent in terms of applying dropout and even though the differences in usage are not that big, there are some reasons to favour the nn.Dropout
over nn.functional.dropout
:
Dropout is designed to be only applied during training, so when doing predictions or evaluation of the model you want dropout to be turned off.
The dropout module nn.Dropout
conveniently handles this and shuts dropout off as soon as your model enters evaluation mode, while the functional dropout does not care about the evaluation / prediction mode.
Even though you can set functional dropout to training=False
to turn it off, it is still not such a convenient solution like with nn.Dropout
.
Also the drop rate is stored in the module, so you don't have to save it in an extra variable. In larger networks you might want to create different dropout layers with different drop rates - here nn.Dropout
may increase readability and can bear also some convenience when using the layers multiple times.
Finally, all modules which are assigned to your model are registered in your model. So you model class keeps track of them, that is why you can just turn off the dropout module by calling eval()
. When using the functional dropout your model is not aware of it, thus it won't appear in any summary.
1
Thank you for the "SO which should I use?" - that was the part I was missing! I normally just doF.dropout(x,training = self.training)
for handling the train/eval difference of it. So to summarize: its a matter of personal preferences?
– Jakob
yesterday
@Jakob Yes, exactly! -nn.Dropout
just intends to provide a slightly higher level API to the functional dropout that can be used in a layer style. However, there is no real difference in behaviour if you use it as you described.
– blue-phoenox
yesterday
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
accepted
up vote
1
down vote
accepted
The technical differences have already been shown in the other answer. However the main difference is that nn.Dropout
is a torch Module itself which bears some convenience:
A short example for illustration of some differences:
import torch
import torch.nn as nn
class Model1(nn.Module):
# Model 1 using functional dropout
def __init__(self, p=0.0):
super().__init__()
self.p = p
def forward(self, inputs):
return nn.functional.dropout(inputs, p=self.p, training=True)
class Model2(nn.Module):
# Model 2 using dropout module
def __init__(self, p=0.0):
super().__init__()
self.drop_layer = nn.Dropout(p=p)
def forward(self, inputs):
return self.drop_layer(inputs)
model1 = Model1(p=0.5) # functional dropout
model2 = Model2(p=0.5) # dropout module
# creating inputs
inputs = torch.rand(10)
# forwarding inputs in train mode
print('Normal (train) model:')
print('Model 1', model1(inputs))
print('Model 2', model2(inputs))
print()
# switching to eval mode
model1.eval()
model2.eval()
# forwarding inputs in evaluation mode
print('Evaluation mode:')
print('Model 1', model1(inputs))
print('Model 2', model2(inputs))
# show model summary
print('Print summary:')
print(model1)
print(model2)
Output:
Normal (train) model:
Model 1 tensor([ 1.5040, 0.0000, 0.0000, 0.8563, 0.0000, 0.0000, 1.5951,
0.0000, 0.0000, 0.0946])
Model 2 tensor([ 0.0000, 0.3713, 1.9303, 0.0000, 0.0000, 0.3574, 0.0000,
1.1273, 1.5818, 0.0946])
Evaluation mode:
Model 1 tensor([ 0.0000, 0.3713, 0.0000, 0.0000, 0.0000, 0.0000, 0.0000,
0.0000, 0.0000, 0.0000])
Model 2 tensor([ 0.7520, 0.1857, 0.9651, 0.4281, 0.7883, 0.1787, 0.7975,
0.5636, 0.7909, 0.0473])
Print summary:
Model1()
Model2(
(drop_layer): Dropout(p=0.5)
)
So which should I use?
Both are completely equivalent in terms of applying dropout and even though the differences in usage are not that big, there are some reasons to favour the nn.Dropout
over nn.functional.dropout
:
Dropout is designed to be only applied during training, so when doing predictions or evaluation of the model you want dropout to be turned off.
The dropout module nn.Dropout
conveniently handles this and shuts dropout off as soon as your model enters evaluation mode, while the functional dropout does not care about the evaluation / prediction mode.
Even though you can set functional dropout to training=False
to turn it off, it is still not such a convenient solution like with nn.Dropout
.
Also the drop rate is stored in the module, so you don't have to save it in an extra variable. In larger networks you might want to create different dropout layers with different drop rates - here nn.Dropout
may increase readability and can bear also some convenience when using the layers multiple times.
Finally, all modules which are assigned to your model are registered in your model. So you model class keeps track of them, that is why you can just turn off the dropout module by calling eval()
. When using the functional dropout your model is not aware of it, thus it won't appear in any summary.
The technical differences have already been shown in the other answer. However the main difference is that nn.Dropout
is a torch Module itself which bears some convenience:
A short example for illustration of some differences:
import torch
import torch.nn as nn
class Model1(nn.Module):
# Model 1 using functional dropout
def __init__(self, p=0.0):
super().__init__()
self.p = p
def forward(self, inputs):
return nn.functional.dropout(inputs, p=self.p, training=True)
class Model2(nn.Module):
# Model 2 using dropout module
def __init__(self, p=0.0):
super().__init__()
self.drop_layer = nn.Dropout(p=p)
def forward(self, inputs):
return self.drop_layer(inputs)
model1 = Model1(p=0.5) # functional dropout
model2 = Model2(p=0.5) # dropout module
# creating inputs
inputs = torch.rand(10)
# forwarding inputs in train mode
print('Normal (train) model:')
print('Model 1', model1(inputs))
print('Model 2', model2(inputs))
print()
# switching to eval mode
model1.eval()
model2.eval()
# forwarding inputs in evaluation mode
print('Evaluation mode:')
print('Model 1', model1(inputs))
print('Model 2', model2(inputs))
# show model summary
print('Print summary:')
print(model1)
print(model2)
Output:
Normal (train) model:
Model 1 tensor([ 1.5040, 0.0000, 0.0000, 0.8563, 0.0000, 0.0000, 1.5951,
0.0000, 0.0000, 0.0946])
Model 2 tensor([ 0.0000, 0.3713, 1.9303, 0.0000, 0.0000, 0.3574, 0.0000,
1.1273, 1.5818, 0.0946])
Evaluation mode:
Model 1 tensor([ 0.0000, 0.3713, 0.0000, 0.0000, 0.0000, 0.0000, 0.0000,
0.0000, 0.0000, 0.0000])
Model 2 tensor([ 0.7520, 0.1857, 0.9651, 0.4281, 0.7883, 0.1787, 0.7975,
0.5636, 0.7909, 0.0473])
Print summary:
Model1()
Model2(
(drop_layer): Dropout(p=0.5)
)
So which should I use?
Both are completely equivalent in terms of applying dropout and even though the differences in usage are not that big, there are some reasons to favour the nn.Dropout
over nn.functional.dropout
:
Dropout is designed to be only applied during training, so when doing predictions or evaluation of the model you want dropout to be turned off.
The dropout module nn.Dropout
conveniently handles this and shuts dropout off as soon as your model enters evaluation mode, while the functional dropout does not care about the evaluation / prediction mode.
Even though you can set functional dropout to training=False
to turn it off, it is still not such a convenient solution like with nn.Dropout
.
Also the drop rate is stored in the module, so you don't have to save it in an extra variable. In larger networks you might want to create different dropout layers with different drop rates - here nn.Dropout
may increase readability and can bear also some convenience when using the layers multiple times.
Finally, all modules which are assigned to your model are registered in your model. So you model class keeps track of them, that is why you can just turn off the dropout module by calling eval()
. When using the functional dropout your model is not aware of it, thus it won't appear in any summary.
edited 2 days ago
answered 2 days ago
blue-phoenox
3,27181439
3,27181439
1
Thank you for the "SO which should I use?" - that was the part I was missing! I normally just doF.dropout(x,training = self.training)
for handling the train/eval difference of it. So to summarize: its a matter of personal preferences?
– Jakob
yesterday
@Jakob Yes, exactly! -nn.Dropout
just intends to provide a slightly higher level API to the functional dropout that can be used in a layer style. However, there is no real difference in behaviour if you use it as you described.
– blue-phoenox
yesterday
add a comment |
1
Thank you for the "SO which should I use?" - that was the part I was missing! I normally just doF.dropout(x,training = self.training)
for handling the train/eval difference of it. So to summarize: its a matter of personal preferences?
– Jakob
yesterday
@Jakob Yes, exactly! -nn.Dropout
just intends to provide a slightly higher level API to the functional dropout that can be used in a layer style. However, there is no real difference in behaviour if you use it as you described.
– blue-phoenox
yesterday
1
1
Thank you for the "SO which should I use?" - that was the part I was missing! I normally just do
F.dropout(x,training = self.training)
for handling the train/eval difference of it. So to summarize: its a matter of personal preferences?– Jakob
yesterday
Thank you for the "SO which should I use?" - that was the part I was missing! I normally just do
F.dropout(x,training = self.training)
for handling the train/eval difference of it. So to summarize: its a matter of personal preferences?– Jakob
yesterday
@Jakob Yes, exactly! -
nn.Dropout
just intends to provide a slightly higher level API to the functional dropout that can be used in a layer style. However, there is no real difference in behaviour if you use it as you described.– blue-phoenox
yesterday
@Jakob Yes, exactly! -
nn.Dropout
just intends to provide a slightly higher level API to the functional dropout that can be used in a layer style. However, there is no real difference in behaviour if you use it as you described.– blue-phoenox
yesterday
add a comment |
up vote
3
down vote
If you look at the source code of nn.Dropout and Functional.Dropout, you can see Functional
is an interface and nn
module implement functions with respect to this interface.
Look at the implementations in nn
class:
from .. import functional as F
class Dropout(_DropoutNd):
def forward(self, input):
return F.dropout(input, self.p, self.training, self.inplace)
class Dropout2d(_DropoutNd):
def forward(self, input):
return F.dropout2d(input, self.p, self.training, self.inplace)
And so on.
Implementation of Functional
class:
def dropout(input, p=0.5, training=False, inplace=False):
return _functions.dropout.Dropout.apply(input, p, training, inplace)
def dropout2d(input, p=0.5, training=False, inplace=False):
return _functions.dropout.FeatureDropout.apply(input, p, training, inplace)
look at the example below to understand:
class Net(nn.Module):
def __init__(self):
super(Net, self).__init__()
self.conv1 = nn.Conv2d(1, 10, kernel_size=5)
self.conv2 = nn.Conv2d(10, 20, kernel_size=5)
self.conv2_drop = nn.Dropout2d()
self.fc1 = nn.Linear(320, 50)
self.fc2 = nn.Linear(50, 10)
def forward(self, x):
x = F.relu(F.max_pool2d(self.conv1(x), 2))
x = F.relu(F.max_pool2d(self.conv2_drop(self.conv2(x)), 2))
x = x.view(-1, 320)
x = F.relu(self.fc1(x))
x = F.dropout(x, training=self.training)
x = self.fc2(x)
return F.log_softmax(x)
There is a F.dropout
in forward()
function and a nn.Dropout
in __init__()
function. Now this is the explanation:
In PyTorch you define your Models as subclasses of torch.nn.Module.
In the init function, you are supposed to initialize the layers you want to use. Unlike keras, Pytorch goes more low level and you have to specify the sizes of your network so that everything matches.
In the forward method, you specify the connections of your layers. This means that you will use the layers you already initialized, in order to re-use the same layer for each forward pass of data you make.
torch.nn.Functional contains some useful functions like activation functions a convolution operations you can use. However, these are not full layers so if you want to specify a layer of any kind you should use torch.nn.Module.
You would use the torch.nn.Functional conv operations to define a custom layer for example with a convolution operation, but not to define a standard convolution layer.
But what should be used when? Does that make a difference?
– Jakob
Nov 22 at 21:24
And I highly recommend you to ask your questions aboutpytorch
in discuss.pytorch.org. I already joined and learned a lot by reading the questions and answers.
– M. Doosti Lakhani
Nov 22 at 21:35
1
But the dropout itself does not have any parameters/weights. So why would you add them as a layer? I kinda struggle to see when F.dropout(x) is superior to nn.Dropout (or vice versa). To me they do exactly the same. For instance: what are the difference (appart from one being a function and the other a module) of theF.droput(x)
andF.relu(F.max_pool2d(self.conv2_drop(self.conv2(x)), 2))
? Could you not replace the latter withF.relu(F.max_pool2d(F.dropout(self.conv2(x)), 2))
– Jakob
2 days ago
To edit above: Why would you add them in the initial function/use them that way?
– Jakob
2 days ago
You can see this post also: discuss.pytorch.org/t/…
– M. Doosti Lakhani
yesterday
add a comment |
up vote
3
down vote
If you look at the source code of nn.Dropout and Functional.Dropout, you can see Functional
is an interface and nn
module implement functions with respect to this interface.
Look at the implementations in nn
class:
from .. import functional as F
class Dropout(_DropoutNd):
def forward(self, input):
return F.dropout(input, self.p, self.training, self.inplace)
class Dropout2d(_DropoutNd):
def forward(self, input):
return F.dropout2d(input, self.p, self.training, self.inplace)
And so on.
Implementation of Functional
class:
def dropout(input, p=0.5, training=False, inplace=False):
return _functions.dropout.Dropout.apply(input, p, training, inplace)
def dropout2d(input, p=0.5, training=False, inplace=False):
return _functions.dropout.FeatureDropout.apply(input, p, training, inplace)
look at the example below to understand:
class Net(nn.Module):
def __init__(self):
super(Net, self).__init__()
self.conv1 = nn.Conv2d(1, 10, kernel_size=5)
self.conv2 = nn.Conv2d(10, 20, kernel_size=5)
self.conv2_drop = nn.Dropout2d()
self.fc1 = nn.Linear(320, 50)
self.fc2 = nn.Linear(50, 10)
def forward(self, x):
x = F.relu(F.max_pool2d(self.conv1(x), 2))
x = F.relu(F.max_pool2d(self.conv2_drop(self.conv2(x)), 2))
x = x.view(-1, 320)
x = F.relu(self.fc1(x))
x = F.dropout(x, training=self.training)
x = self.fc2(x)
return F.log_softmax(x)
There is a F.dropout
in forward()
function and a nn.Dropout
in __init__()
function. Now this is the explanation:
In PyTorch you define your Models as subclasses of torch.nn.Module.
In the init function, you are supposed to initialize the layers you want to use. Unlike keras, Pytorch goes more low level and you have to specify the sizes of your network so that everything matches.
In the forward method, you specify the connections of your layers. This means that you will use the layers you already initialized, in order to re-use the same layer for each forward pass of data you make.
torch.nn.Functional contains some useful functions like activation functions a convolution operations you can use. However, these are not full layers so if you want to specify a layer of any kind you should use torch.nn.Module.
You would use the torch.nn.Functional conv operations to define a custom layer for example with a convolution operation, but not to define a standard convolution layer.
But what should be used when? Does that make a difference?
– Jakob
Nov 22 at 21:24
And I highly recommend you to ask your questions aboutpytorch
in discuss.pytorch.org. I already joined and learned a lot by reading the questions and answers.
– M. Doosti Lakhani
Nov 22 at 21:35
1
But the dropout itself does not have any parameters/weights. So why would you add them as a layer? I kinda struggle to see when F.dropout(x) is superior to nn.Dropout (or vice versa). To me they do exactly the same. For instance: what are the difference (appart from one being a function and the other a module) of theF.droput(x)
andF.relu(F.max_pool2d(self.conv2_drop(self.conv2(x)), 2))
? Could you not replace the latter withF.relu(F.max_pool2d(F.dropout(self.conv2(x)), 2))
– Jakob
2 days ago
To edit above: Why would you add them in the initial function/use them that way?
– Jakob
2 days ago
You can see this post also: discuss.pytorch.org/t/…
– M. Doosti Lakhani
yesterday
add a comment |
up vote
3
down vote
up vote
3
down vote
If you look at the source code of nn.Dropout and Functional.Dropout, you can see Functional
is an interface and nn
module implement functions with respect to this interface.
Look at the implementations in nn
class:
from .. import functional as F
class Dropout(_DropoutNd):
def forward(self, input):
return F.dropout(input, self.p, self.training, self.inplace)
class Dropout2d(_DropoutNd):
def forward(self, input):
return F.dropout2d(input, self.p, self.training, self.inplace)
And so on.
Implementation of Functional
class:
def dropout(input, p=0.5, training=False, inplace=False):
return _functions.dropout.Dropout.apply(input, p, training, inplace)
def dropout2d(input, p=0.5, training=False, inplace=False):
return _functions.dropout.FeatureDropout.apply(input, p, training, inplace)
look at the example below to understand:
class Net(nn.Module):
def __init__(self):
super(Net, self).__init__()
self.conv1 = nn.Conv2d(1, 10, kernel_size=5)
self.conv2 = nn.Conv2d(10, 20, kernel_size=5)
self.conv2_drop = nn.Dropout2d()
self.fc1 = nn.Linear(320, 50)
self.fc2 = nn.Linear(50, 10)
def forward(self, x):
x = F.relu(F.max_pool2d(self.conv1(x), 2))
x = F.relu(F.max_pool2d(self.conv2_drop(self.conv2(x)), 2))
x = x.view(-1, 320)
x = F.relu(self.fc1(x))
x = F.dropout(x, training=self.training)
x = self.fc2(x)
return F.log_softmax(x)
There is a F.dropout
in forward()
function and a nn.Dropout
in __init__()
function. Now this is the explanation:
In PyTorch you define your Models as subclasses of torch.nn.Module.
In the init function, you are supposed to initialize the layers you want to use. Unlike keras, Pytorch goes more low level and you have to specify the sizes of your network so that everything matches.
In the forward method, you specify the connections of your layers. This means that you will use the layers you already initialized, in order to re-use the same layer for each forward pass of data you make.
torch.nn.Functional contains some useful functions like activation functions a convolution operations you can use. However, these are not full layers so if you want to specify a layer of any kind you should use torch.nn.Module.
You would use the torch.nn.Functional conv operations to define a custom layer for example with a convolution operation, but not to define a standard convolution layer.
If you look at the source code of nn.Dropout and Functional.Dropout, you can see Functional
is an interface and nn
module implement functions with respect to this interface.
Look at the implementations in nn
class:
from .. import functional as F
class Dropout(_DropoutNd):
def forward(self, input):
return F.dropout(input, self.p, self.training, self.inplace)
class Dropout2d(_DropoutNd):
def forward(self, input):
return F.dropout2d(input, self.p, self.training, self.inplace)
And so on.
Implementation of Functional
class:
def dropout(input, p=0.5, training=False, inplace=False):
return _functions.dropout.Dropout.apply(input, p, training, inplace)
def dropout2d(input, p=0.5, training=False, inplace=False):
return _functions.dropout.FeatureDropout.apply(input, p, training, inplace)
look at the example below to understand:
class Net(nn.Module):
def __init__(self):
super(Net, self).__init__()
self.conv1 = nn.Conv2d(1, 10, kernel_size=5)
self.conv2 = nn.Conv2d(10, 20, kernel_size=5)
self.conv2_drop = nn.Dropout2d()
self.fc1 = nn.Linear(320, 50)
self.fc2 = nn.Linear(50, 10)
def forward(self, x):
x = F.relu(F.max_pool2d(self.conv1(x), 2))
x = F.relu(F.max_pool2d(self.conv2_drop(self.conv2(x)), 2))
x = x.view(-1, 320)
x = F.relu(self.fc1(x))
x = F.dropout(x, training=self.training)
x = self.fc2(x)
return F.log_softmax(x)
There is a F.dropout
in forward()
function and a nn.Dropout
in __init__()
function. Now this is the explanation:
In PyTorch you define your Models as subclasses of torch.nn.Module.
In the init function, you are supposed to initialize the layers you want to use. Unlike keras, Pytorch goes more low level and you have to specify the sizes of your network so that everything matches.
In the forward method, you specify the connections of your layers. This means that you will use the layers you already initialized, in order to re-use the same layer for each forward pass of data you make.
torch.nn.Functional contains some useful functions like activation functions a convolution operations you can use. However, these are not full layers so if you want to specify a layer of any kind you should use torch.nn.Module.
You would use the torch.nn.Functional conv operations to define a custom layer for example with a convolution operation, but not to define a standard convolution layer.
edited Nov 22 at 21:33
answered Nov 21 at 20:32
M. Doosti Lakhani
648317
648317
But what should be used when? Does that make a difference?
– Jakob
Nov 22 at 21:24
And I highly recommend you to ask your questions aboutpytorch
in discuss.pytorch.org. I already joined and learned a lot by reading the questions and answers.
– M. Doosti Lakhani
Nov 22 at 21:35
1
But the dropout itself does not have any parameters/weights. So why would you add them as a layer? I kinda struggle to see when F.dropout(x) is superior to nn.Dropout (or vice versa). To me they do exactly the same. For instance: what are the difference (appart from one being a function and the other a module) of theF.droput(x)
andF.relu(F.max_pool2d(self.conv2_drop(self.conv2(x)), 2))
? Could you not replace the latter withF.relu(F.max_pool2d(F.dropout(self.conv2(x)), 2))
– Jakob
2 days ago
To edit above: Why would you add them in the initial function/use them that way?
– Jakob
2 days ago
You can see this post also: discuss.pytorch.org/t/…
– M. Doosti Lakhani
yesterday
add a comment |
But what should be used when? Does that make a difference?
– Jakob
Nov 22 at 21:24
And I highly recommend you to ask your questions aboutpytorch
in discuss.pytorch.org. I already joined and learned a lot by reading the questions and answers.
– M. Doosti Lakhani
Nov 22 at 21:35
1
But the dropout itself does not have any parameters/weights. So why would you add them as a layer? I kinda struggle to see when F.dropout(x) is superior to nn.Dropout (or vice versa). To me they do exactly the same. For instance: what are the difference (appart from one being a function and the other a module) of theF.droput(x)
andF.relu(F.max_pool2d(self.conv2_drop(self.conv2(x)), 2))
? Could you not replace the latter withF.relu(F.max_pool2d(F.dropout(self.conv2(x)), 2))
– Jakob
2 days ago
To edit above: Why would you add them in the initial function/use them that way?
– Jakob
2 days ago
You can see this post also: discuss.pytorch.org/t/…
– M. Doosti Lakhani
yesterday
But what should be used when? Does that make a difference?
– Jakob
Nov 22 at 21:24
But what should be used when? Does that make a difference?
– Jakob
Nov 22 at 21:24
And I highly recommend you to ask your questions about
pytorch
in discuss.pytorch.org. I already joined and learned a lot by reading the questions and answers.– M. Doosti Lakhani
Nov 22 at 21:35
And I highly recommend you to ask your questions about
pytorch
in discuss.pytorch.org. I already joined and learned a lot by reading the questions and answers.– M. Doosti Lakhani
Nov 22 at 21:35
1
1
But the dropout itself does not have any parameters/weights. So why would you add them as a layer? I kinda struggle to see when F.dropout(x) is superior to nn.Dropout (or vice versa). To me they do exactly the same. For instance: what are the difference (appart from one being a function and the other a module) of the
F.droput(x)
and F.relu(F.max_pool2d(self.conv2_drop(self.conv2(x)), 2))
? Could you not replace the latter with F.relu(F.max_pool2d(F.dropout(self.conv2(x)), 2))
– Jakob
2 days ago
But the dropout itself does not have any parameters/weights. So why would you add them as a layer? I kinda struggle to see when F.dropout(x) is superior to nn.Dropout (or vice versa). To me they do exactly the same. For instance: what are the difference (appart from one being a function and the other a module) of the
F.droput(x)
and F.relu(F.max_pool2d(self.conv2_drop(self.conv2(x)), 2))
? Could you not replace the latter with F.relu(F.max_pool2d(F.dropout(self.conv2(x)), 2))
– Jakob
2 days ago
To edit above: Why would you add them in the initial function/use them that way?
– Jakob
2 days ago
To edit above: Why would you add them in the initial function/use them that way?
– Jakob
2 days ago
You can see this post also: discuss.pytorch.org/t/…
– M. Doosti Lakhani
yesterday
You can see this post also: discuss.pytorch.org/t/…
– M. Doosti Lakhani
yesterday
add a comment |
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f53419474%2fnn-dropout-vs-f-dropout-pytorch%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
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