How does mask_zero in Keras Embedding layer work?












4















I thought mask_zero=True will output 0's when the input value is 0, so the following layers could skip computation or something.



How does mask_zero works?



Example:



data_in = np.array([
[1, 2, 0, 0]
])
data_in.shape
>>> (1, 4)

# model
x = Input(shape=(4,))
e = Embedding(5, 5, mask_zero=True)(x)

m = Model(inputs=x, outputs=e)
p = m.predict(data_in)
print(p.shape)
print(p)


The actual output is: (the numbers are random)



(1, 4, 5)
[[[ 0.02499047 0.04617121 0.01586803 0.0338897 0.009652 ]
[ 0.04782704 -0.04035913 -0.0341589 0.03020919 -0.01157228]
[ 0.00451764 -0.01433611 0.02606953 0.00328832 0.02650392]
[ 0.00451764 -0.01433611 0.02606953 0.00328832 0.02650392]]]


However, I thought the output will be:



[[[ 0.02499047  0.04617121  0.01586803  0.0338897   0.009652  ]
[ 0.04782704 -0.04035913 -0.0341589 0.03020919 -0.01157228]
[ 0 0 0 0 0]
[ 0 0 0 0 0]]]









share|improve this question

























  • They're repeating the outputs of the last calculated steps. The documentation assures you that it's not "computing" them anymore. And since they're all the same for all the remaining steps, it's probably just a dummy repetition just to fill the shape of a numpy array.

    – Daniel Möller
    Nov 25 '17 at 13:15











  • Interested to know why these are non-zero. How are they computed?

    – GRS
    Nov 24 '18 at 16:10











  • If the answer resolved your issue, kindly accept it by clicking on the checkmark next to the answer to mark it as "answered" - see What should I do when someone answers my question?

    – today
    Dec 6 '18 at 12:56
















4















I thought mask_zero=True will output 0's when the input value is 0, so the following layers could skip computation or something.



How does mask_zero works?



Example:



data_in = np.array([
[1, 2, 0, 0]
])
data_in.shape
>>> (1, 4)

# model
x = Input(shape=(4,))
e = Embedding(5, 5, mask_zero=True)(x)

m = Model(inputs=x, outputs=e)
p = m.predict(data_in)
print(p.shape)
print(p)


The actual output is: (the numbers are random)



(1, 4, 5)
[[[ 0.02499047 0.04617121 0.01586803 0.0338897 0.009652 ]
[ 0.04782704 -0.04035913 -0.0341589 0.03020919 -0.01157228]
[ 0.00451764 -0.01433611 0.02606953 0.00328832 0.02650392]
[ 0.00451764 -0.01433611 0.02606953 0.00328832 0.02650392]]]


However, I thought the output will be:



[[[ 0.02499047  0.04617121  0.01586803  0.0338897   0.009652  ]
[ 0.04782704 -0.04035913 -0.0341589 0.03020919 -0.01157228]
[ 0 0 0 0 0]
[ 0 0 0 0 0]]]









share|improve this question

























  • They're repeating the outputs of the last calculated steps. The documentation assures you that it's not "computing" them anymore. And since they're all the same for all the remaining steps, it's probably just a dummy repetition just to fill the shape of a numpy array.

    – Daniel Möller
    Nov 25 '17 at 13:15











  • Interested to know why these are non-zero. How are they computed?

    – GRS
    Nov 24 '18 at 16:10











  • If the answer resolved your issue, kindly accept it by clicking on the checkmark next to the answer to mark it as "answered" - see What should I do when someone answers my question?

    – today
    Dec 6 '18 at 12:56














4












4








4








I thought mask_zero=True will output 0's when the input value is 0, so the following layers could skip computation or something.



How does mask_zero works?



Example:



data_in = np.array([
[1, 2, 0, 0]
])
data_in.shape
>>> (1, 4)

# model
x = Input(shape=(4,))
e = Embedding(5, 5, mask_zero=True)(x)

m = Model(inputs=x, outputs=e)
p = m.predict(data_in)
print(p.shape)
print(p)


The actual output is: (the numbers are random)



(1, 4, 5)
[[[ 0.02499047 0.04617121 0.01586803 0.0338897 0.009652 ]
[ 0.04782704 -0.04035913 -0.0341589 0.03020919 -0.01157228]
[ 0.00451764 -0.01433611 0.02606953 0.00328832 0.02650392]
[ 0.00451764 -0.01433611 0.02606953 0.00328832 0.02650392]]]


However, I thought the output will be:



[[[ 0.02499047  0.04617121  0.01586803  0.0338897   0.009652  ]
[ 0.04782704 -0.04035913 -0.0341589 0.03020919 -0.01157228]
[ 0 0 0 0 0]
[ 0 0 0 0 0]]]









share|improve this question
















I thought mask_zero=True will output 0's when the input value is 0, so the following layers could skip computation or something.



How does mask_zero works?



Example:



data_in = np.array([
[1, 2, 0, 0]
])
data_in.shape
>>> (1, 4)

# model
x = Input(shape=(4,))
e = Embedding(5, 5, mask_zero=True)(x)

m = Model(inputs=x, outputs=e)
p = m.predict(data_in)
print(p.shape)
print(p)


The actual output is: (the numbers are random)



(1, 4, 5)
[[[ 0.02499047 0.04617121 0.01586803 0.0338897 0.009652 ]
[ 0.04782704 -0.04035913 -0.0341589 0.03020919 -0.01157228]
[ 0.00451764 -0.01433611 0.02606953 0.00328832 0.02650392]
[ 0.00451764 -0.01433611 0.02606953 0.00328832 0.02650392]]]


However, I thought the output will be:



[[[ 0.02499047  0.04617121  0.01586803  0.0338897   0.009652  ]
[ 0.04782704 -0.04035913 -0.0341589 0.03020919 -0.01157228]
[ 0 0 0 0 0]
[ 0 0 0 0 0]]]






python machine-learning keras word-embedding






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited Nov 25 '18 at 18:13









today

10.6k21536




10.6k21536










asked Nov 25 '17 at 11:03









crazytomcatcrazytomcat

9919




9919













  • They're repeating the outputs of the last calculated steps. The documentation assures you that it's not "computing" them anymore. And since they're all the same for all the remaining steps, it's probably just a dummy repetition just to fill the shape of a numpy array.

    – Daniel Möller
    Nov 25 '17 at 13:15











  • Interested to know why these are non-zero. How are they computed?

    – GRS
    Nov 24 '18 at 16:10











  • If the answer resolved your issue, kindly accept it by clicking on the checkmark next to the answer to mark it as "answered" - see What should I do when someone answers my question?

    – today
    Dec 6 '18 at 12:56



















  • They're repeating the outputs of the last calculated steps. The documentation assures you that it's not "computing" them anymore. And since they're all the same for all the remaining steps, it's probably just a dummy repetition just to fill the shape of a numpy array.

    – Daniel Möller
    Nov 25 '17 at 13:15











  • Interested to know why these are non-zero. How are they computed?

    – GRS
    Nov 24 '18 at 16:10











  • If the answer resolved your issue, kindly accept it by clicking on the checkmark next to the answer to mark it as "answered" - see What should I do when someone answers my question?

    – today
    Dec 6 '18 at 12:56

















They're repeating the outputs of the last calculated steps. The documentation assures you that it's not "computing" them anymore. And since they're all the same for all the remaining steps, it's probably just a dummy repetition just to fill the shape of a numpy array.

– Daniel Möller
Nov 25 '17 at 13:15





They're repeating the outputs of the last calculated steps. The documentation assures you that it's not "computing" them anymore. And since they're all the same for all the remaining steps, it's probably just a dummy repetition just to fill the shape of a numpy array.

– Daniel Möller
Nov 25 '17 at 13:15













Interested to know why these are non-zero. How are they computed?

– GRS
Nov 24 '18 at 16:10





Interested to know why these are non-zero. How are they computed?

– GRS
Nov 24 '18 at 16:10













If the answer resolved your issue, kindly accept it by clicking on the checkmark next to the answer to mark it as "answered" - see What should I do when someone answers my question?

– today
Dec 6 '18 at 12:56





If the answer resolved your issue, kindly accept it by clicking on the checkmark next to the answer to mark it as "answered" - see What should I do when someone answers my question?

– today
Dec 6 '18 at 12:56












1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes


















3





+50









Actually, setting mask_zero=True for the Embedding layer does not result in returning a zero vector. Rather, the behavior of the Embedding layer would not change and it would return the embedding vector with index zero. You can confirm this by checking the Embedding layer weights (i.e. in the example you mentioned it would be m.layers[0].get_weights()). Instead, it would affect the behavior of the following layers such as RNN layers.



If you inspect the source code of Embedding layer you would see a method called compute_mask:



def compute_mask(self, inputs, mask=None):
if not self.mask_zero:
return None
output_mask = K.not_equal(inputs, 0)
return output_mask


This output mask will be passed, as the mask argument, to the following layers which support masking. This has been implemented in the __call__ method of base layer, Layer:



# Handle mask propagation.
previous_mask = _collect_previous_mask(inputs)
user_kwargs = copy.copy(kwargs)
if not is_all_none(previous_mask):
# The previous layer generated a mask.
if has_arg(self.call, 'mask'):
if 'mask' not in kwargs:
# If mask is explicitly passed to __call__,
# we should override the default mask.
kwargs['mask'] = previous_mask


And this makes the following layers to ignore (i.e. does not consider in their computations) this inputs steps. Here is a minimal example:



data_in = np.array([
[1, 0, 2, 0]
])

x = Input(shape=(4,))
e = Embedding(5, 5, mask_zero=True)(x)
rnn = LSTM(3, return_sequences=True)(e)

m = Model(inputs=x, outputs=rnn)
m.predict(data_in)

array([[[-0.00084503, -0.00413611, 0.00049972],
[-0.00084503, -0.00413611, 0.00049972],
[-0.00144554, -0.00115775, -0.00293898],
[-0.00144554, -0.00115775, -0.00293898]]], dtype=float32)


As you can see the outputs of the LSTM layer for the second and forth timesteps are the same as the output of first and third timesteps, respectively. This means that those timesteps have been masked.



Update: The mask will also be considered when computing the loss since the loss functions are internally augmented to support masking using weighted_masked_objective:



def weighted_masked_objective(fn):
"""Adds support for masking and sample-weighting to an objective function.
It transforms an objective function `fn(y_true, y_pred)`
into a sample-weighted, cost-masked objective function
`fn(y_true, y_pred, weights, mask)`.
# Arguments
fn: The objective function to wrap,
with signature `fn(y_true, y_pred)`.
# Returns
A function with signature `fn(y_true, y_pred, weights, mask)`.
"""


when compiling the model:



weighted_losses = [weighted_masked_objective(fn) for fn in loss_functions]


You can verify this using the following example:



data_in = np.array([[1, 2, 0, 0]])
data_out = np.arange(12).reshape(1,4,3)

x = Input(shape=(4,))
e = Embedding(5, 5, mask_zero=True)(x)
d = Dense(3)(e)

m = Model(inputs=x, outputs=d)
m.compile(loss='mse', optimizer='adam')
preds = m.predict(data_in)
loss = m.evaluate(data_in, data_out, verbose=0)
print(preds)
print('Computed Loss:', loss)

[[[ 0.009682 0.02505393 -0.00632722]
[ 0.01756451 0.05928303 0.0153951 ]
[-0.00146054 -0.02064196 -0.04356086]
[-0.00146054 -0.02064196 -0.04356086]]]
Computed Loss: 9.041069030761719

# verify that only the first two outputs
# have been considered in the computation of loss
print(np.square(preds[0,0:2] - data_out[0,0:2]).mean())

9.041070036475277





share|improve this answer


























  • Thank you, so what happens at the evaluation of the model. Does it mean we need to shift our output vector by 1? binary classification i.e. when y in 0,1. Or assuming the loss is computed with the mask, how do we actually evaluate such generator at the end? When we run predictions, we still get an output y, for which we need to manually fit the mask? For example, if we pad sequences to length 100, the y is always 100, but the real sequences are of variable length. How do we get model.predict() to return these variable lengths?

    – GRS
    Nov 25 '18 at 20:28











  • So what I'm trying to say, when I pass this output to the Dense layer, which doesn't support masking, it will still calculate some loss for the 1st and 3rd indeces in your example. And compare it with y 0s. How does one implement such Dense layers?

    – GRS
    Nov 25 '18 at 20:58











  • @GRS The loss will be computed according the mask as well. I have updated my answer. Please take a look.

    – today
    Nov 25 '18 at 21:19











Your Answer






StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function () {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function () {
StackExchange.snippets.init();
});
});
}, "code-snippets");

StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "1"
};
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: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
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
});


}
});














draft saved

draft discarded


















StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f47485216%2fhow-does-mask-zero-in-keras-embedding-layer-work%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown

























1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes








1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes









3





+50









Actually, setting mask_zero=True for the Embedding layer does not result in returning a zero vector. Rather, the behavior of the Embedding layer would not change and it would return the embedding vector with index zero. You can confirm this by checking the Embedding layer weights (i.e. in the example you mentioned it would be m.layers[0].get_weights()). Instead, it would affect the behavior of the following layers such as RNN layers.



If you inspect the source code of Embedding layer you would see a method called compute_mask:



def compute_mask(self, inputs, mask=None):
if not self.mask_zero:
return None
output_mask = K.not_equal(inputs, 0)
return output_mask


This output mask will be passed, as the mask argument, to the following layers which support masking. This has been implemented in the __call__ method of base layer, Layer:



# Handle mask propagation.
previous_mask = _collect_previous_mask(inputs)
user_kwargs = copy.copy(kwargs)
if not is_all_none(previous_mask):
# The previous layer generated a mask.
if has_arg(self.call, 'mask'):
if 'mask' not in kwargs:
# If mask is explicitly passed to __call__,
# we should override the default mask.
kwargs['mask'] = previous_mask


And this makes the following layers to ignore (i.e. does not consider in their computations) this inputs steps. Here is a minimal example:



data_in = np.array([
[1, 0, 2, 0]
])

x = Input(shape=(4,))
e = Embedding(5, 5, mask_zero=True)(x)
rnn = LSTM(3, return_sequences=True)(e)

m = Model(inputs=x, outputs=rnn)
m.predict(data_in)

array([[[-0.00084503, -0.00413611, 0.00049972],
[-0.00084503, -0.00413611, 0.00049972],
[-0.00144554, -0.00115775, -0.00293898],
[-0.00144554, -0.00115775, -0.00293898]]], dtype=float32)


As you can see the outputs of the LSTM layer for the second and forth timesteps are the same as the output of first and third timesteps, respectively. This means that those timesteps have been masked.



Update: The mask will also be considered when computing the loss since the loss functions are internally augmented to support masking using weighted_masked_objective:



def weighted_masked_objective(fn):
"""Adds support for masking and sample-weighting to an objective function.
It transforms an objective function `fn(y_true, y_pred)`
into a sample-weighted, cost-masked objective function
`fn(y_true, y_pred, weights, mask)`.
# Arguments
fn: The objective function to wrap,
with signature `fn(y_true, y_pred)`.
# Returns
A function with signature `fn(y_true, y_pred, weights, mask)`.
"""


when compiling the model:



weighted_losses = [weighted_masked_objective(fn) for fn in loss_functions]


You can verify this using the following example:



data_in = np.array([[1, 2, 0, 0]])
data_out = np.arange(12).reshape(1,4,3)

x = Input(shape=(4,))
e = Embedding(5, 5, mask_zero=True)(x)
d = Dense(3)(e)

m = Model(inputs=x, outputs=d)
m.compile(loss='mse', optimizer='adam')
preds = m.predict(data_in)
loss = m.evaluate(data_in, data_out, verbose=0)
print(preds)
print('Computed Loss:', loss)

[[[ 0.009682 0.02505393 -0.00632722]
[ 0.01756451 0.05928303 0.0153951 ]
[-0.00146054 -0.02064196 -0.04356086]
[-0.00146054 -0.02064196 -0.04356086]]]
Computed Loss: 9.041069030761719

# verify that only the first two outputs
# have been considered in the computation of loss
print(np.square(preds[0,0:2] - data_out[0,0:2]).mean())

9.041070036475277





share|improve this answer


























  • Thank you, so what happens at the evaluation of the model. Does it mean we need to shift our output vector by 1? binary classification i.e. when y in 0,1. Or assuming the loss is computed with the mask, how do we actually evaluate such generator at the end? When we run predictions, we still get an output y, for which we need to manually fit the mask? For example, if we pad sequences to length 100, the y is always 100, but the real sequences are of variable length. How do we get model.predict() to return these variable lengths?

    – GRS
    Nov 25 '18 at 20:28











  • So what I'm trying to say, when I pass this output to the Dense layer, which doesn't support masking, it will still calculate some loss for the 1st and 3rd indeces in your example. And compare it with y 0s. How does one implement such Dense layers?

    – GRS
    Nov 25 '18 at 20:58











  • @GRS The loss will be computed according the mask as well. I have updated my answer. Please take a look.

    – today
    Nov 25 '18 at 21:19
















3





+50









Actually, setting mask_zero=True for the Embedding layer does not result in returning a zero vector. Rather, the behavior of the Embedding layer would not change and it would return the embedding vector with index zero. You can confirm this by checking the Embedding layer weights (i.e. in the example you mentioned it would be m.layers[0].get_weights()). Instead, it would affect the behavior of the following layers such as RNN layers.



If you inspect the source code of Embedding layer you would see a method called compute_mask:



def compute_mask(self, inputs, mask=None):
if not self.mask_zero:
return None
output_mask = K.not_equal(inputs, 0)
return output_mask


This output mask will be passed, as the mask argument, to the following layers which support masking. This has been implemented in the __call__ method of base layer, Layer:



# Handle mask propagation.
previous_mask = _collect_previous_mask(inputs)
user_kwargs = copy.copy(kwargs)
if not is_all_none(previous_mask):
# The previous layer generated a mask.
if has_arg(self.call, 'mask'):
if 'mask' not in kwargs:
# If mask is explicitly passed to __call__,
# we should override the default mask.
kwargs['mask'] = previous_mask


And this makes the following layers to ignore (i.e. does not consider in their computations) this inputs steps. Here is a minimal example:



data_in = np.array([
[1, 0, 2, 0]
])

x = Input(shape=(4,))
e = Embedding(5, 5, mask_zero=True)(x)
rnn = LSTM(3, return_sequences=True)(e)

m = Model(inputs=x, outputs=rnn)
m.predict(data_in)

array([[[-0.00084503, -0.00413611, 0.00049972],
[-0.00084503, -0.00413611, 0.00049972],
[-0.00144554, -0.00115775, -0.00293898],
[-0.00144554, -0.00115775, -0.00293898]]], dtype=float32)


As you can see the outputs of the LSTM layer for the second and forth timesteps are the same as the output of first and third timesteps, respectively. This means that those timesteps have been masked.



Update: The mask will also be considered when computing the loss since the loss functions are internally augmented to support masking using weighted_masked_objective:



def weighted_masked_objective(fn):
"""Adds support for masking and sample-weighting to an objective function.
It transforms an objective function `fn(y_true, y_pred)`
into a sample-weighted, cost-masked objective function
`fn(y_true, y_pred, weights, mask)`.
# Arguments
fn: The objective function to wrap,
with signature `fn(y_true, y_pred)`.
# Returns
A function with signature `fn(y_true, y_pred, weights, mask)`.
"""


when compiling the model:



weighted_losses = [weighted_masked_objective(fn) for fn in loss_functions]


You can verify this using the following example:



data_in = np.array([[1, 2, 0, 0]])
data_out = np.arange(12).reshape(1,4,3)

x = Input(shape=(4,))
e = Embedding(5, 5, mask_zero=True)(x)
d = Dense(3)(e)

m = Model(inputs=x, outputs=d)
m.compile(loss='mse', optimizer='adam')
preds = m.predict(data_in)
loss = m.evaluate(data_in, data_out, verbose=0)
print(preds)
print('Computed Loss:', loss)

[[[ 0.009682 0.02505393 -0.00632722]
[ 0.01756451 0.05928303 0.0153951 ]
[-0.00146054 -0.02064196 -0.04356086]
[-0.00146054 -0.02064196 -0.04356086]]]
Computed Loss: 9.041069030761719

# verify that only the first two outputs
# have been considered in the computation of loss
print(np.square(preds[0,0:2] - data_out[0,0:2]).mean())

9.041070036475277





share|improve this answer


























  • Thank you, so what happens at the evaluation of the model. Does it mean we need to shift our output vector by 1? binary classification i.e. when y in 0,1. Or assuming the loss is computed with the mask, how do we actually evaluate such generator at the end? When we run predictions, we still get an output y, for which we need to manually fit the mask? For example, if we pad sequences to length 100, the y is always 100, but the real sequences are of variable length. How do we get model.predict() to return these variable lengths?

    – GRS
    Nov 25 '18 at 20:28











  • So what I'm trying to say, when I pass this output to the Dense layer, which doesn't support masking, it will still calculate some loss for the 1st and 3rd indeces in your example. And compare it with y 0s. How does one implement such Dense layers?

    – GRS
    Nov 25 '18 at 20:58











  • @GRS The loss will be computed according the mask as well. I have updated my answer. Please take a look.

    – today
    Nov 25 '18 at 21:19














3





+50







3





+50



3




+50





Actually, setting mask_zero=True for the Embedding layer does not result in returning a zero vector. Rather, the behavior of the Embedding layer would not change and it would return the embedding vector with index zero. You can confirm this by checking the Embedding layer weights (i.e. in the example you mentioned it would be m.layers[0].get_weights()). Instead, it would affect the behavior of the following layers such as RNN layers.



If you inspect the source code of Embedding layer you would see a method called compute_mask:



def compute_mask(self, inputs, mask=None):
if not self.mask_zero:
return None
output_mask = K.not_equal(inputs, 0)
return output_mask


This output mask will be passed, as the mask argument, to the following layers which support masking. This has been implemented in the __call__ method of base layer, Layer:



# Handle mask propagation.
previous_mask = _collect_previous_mask(inputs)
user_kwargs = copy.copy(kwargs)
if not is_all_none(previous_mask):
# The previous layer generated a mask.
if has_arg(self.call, 'mask'):
if 'mask' not in kwargs:
# If mask is explicitly passed to __call__,
# we should override the default mask.
kwargs['mask'] = previous_mask


And this makes the following layers to ignore (i.e. does not consider in their computations) this inputs steps. Here is a minimal example:



data_in = np.array([
[1, 0, 2, 0]
])

x = Input(shape=(4,))
e = Embedding(5, 5, mask_zero=True)(x)
rnn = LSTM(3, return_sequences=True)(e)

m = Model(inputs=x, outputs=rnn)
m.predict(data_in)

array([[[-0.00084503, -0.00413611, 0.00049972],
[-0.00084503, -0.00413611, 0.00049972],
[-0.00144554, -0.00115775, -0.00293898],
[-0.00144554, -0.00115775, -0.00293898]]], dtype=float32)


As you can see the outputs of the LSTM layer for the second and forth timesteps are the same as the output of first and third timesteps, respectively. This means that those timesteps have been masked.



Update: The mask will also be considered when computing the loss since the loss functions are internally augmented to support masking using weighted_masked_objective:



def weighted_masked_objective(fn):
"""Adds support for masking and sample-weighting to an objective function.
It transforms an objective function `fn(y_true, y_pred)`
into a sample-weighted, cost-masked objective function
`fn(y_true, y_pred, weights, mask)`.
# Arguments
fn: The objective function to wrap,
with signature `fn(y_true, y_pred)`.
# Returns
A function with signature `fn(y_true, y_pred, weights, mask)`.
"""


when compiling the model:



weighted_losses = [weighted_masked_objective(fn) for fn in loss_functions]


You can verify this using the following example:



data_in = np.array([[1, 2, 0, 0]])
data_out = np.arange(12).reshape(1,4,3)

x = Input(shape=(4,))
e = Embedding(5, 5, mask_zero=True)(x)
d = Dense(3)(e)

m = Model(inputs=x, outputs=d)
m.compile(loss='mse', optimizer='adam')
preds = m.predict(data_in)
loss = m.evaluate(data_in, data_out, verbose=0)
print(preds)
print('Computed Loss:', loss)

[[[ 0.009682 0.02505393 -0.00632722]
[ 0.01756451 0.05928303 0.0153951 ]
[-0.00146054 -0.02064196 -0.04356086]
[-0.00146054 -0.02064196 -0.04356086]]]
Computed Loss: 9.041069030761719

# verify that only the first two outputs
# have been considered in the computation of loss
print(np.square(preds[0,0:2] - data_out[0,0:2]).mean())

9.041070036475277





share|improve this answer















Actually, setting mask_zero=True for the Embedding layer does not result in returning a zero vector. Rather, the behavior of the Embedding layer would not change and it would return the embedding vector with index zero. You can confirm this by checking the Embedding layer weights (i.e. in the example you mentioned it would be m.layers[0].get_weights()). Instead, it would affect the behavior of the following layers such as RNN layers.



If you inspect the source code of Embedding layer you would see a method called compute_mask:



def compute_mask(self, inputs, mask=None):
if not self.mask_zero:
return None
output_mask = K.not_equal(inputs, 0)
return output_mask


This output mask will be passed, as the mask argument, to the following layers which support masking. This has been implemented in the __call__ method of base layer, Layer:



# Handle mask propagation.
previous_mask = _collect_previous_mask(inputs)
user_kwargs = copy.copy(kwargs)
if not is_all_none(previous_mask):
# The previous layer generated a mask.
if has_arg(self.call, 'mask'):
if 'mask' not in kwargs:
# If mask is explicitly passed to __call__,
# we should override the default mask.
kwargs['mask'] = previous_mask


And this makes the following layers to ignore (i.e. does not consider in their computations) this inputs steps. Here is a minimal example:



data_in = np.array([
[1, 0, 2, 0]
])

x = Input(shape=(4,))
e = Embedding(5, 5, mask_zero=True)(x)
rnn = LSTM(3, return_sequences=True)(e)

m = Model(inputs=x, outputs=rnn)
m.predict(data_in)

array([[[-0.00084503, -0.00413611, 0.00049972],
[-0.00084503, -0.00413611, 0.00049972],
[-0.00144554, -0.00115775, -0.00293898],
[-0.00144554, -0.00115775, -0.00293898]]], dtype=float32)


As you can see the outputs of the LSTM layer for the second and forth timesteps are the same as the output of first and third timesteps, respectively. This means that those timesteps have been masked.



Update: The mask will also be considered when computing the loss since the loss functions are internally augmented to support masking using weighted_masked_objective:



def weighted_masked_objective(fn):
"""Adds support for masking and sample-weighting to an objective function.
It transforms an objective function `fn(y_true, y_pred)`
into a sample-weighted, cost-masked objective function
`fn(y_true, y_pred, weights, mask)`.
# Arguments
fn: The objective function to wrap,
with signature `fn(y_true, y_pred)`.
# Returns
A function with signature `fn(y_true, y_pred, weights, mask)`.
"""


when compiling the model:



weighted_losses = [weighted_masked_objective(fn) for fn in loss_functions]


You can verify this using the following example:



data_in = np.array([[1, 2, 0, 0]])
data_out = np.arange(12).reshape(1,4,3)

x = Input(shape=(4,))
e = Embedding(5, 5, mask_zero=True)(x)
d = Dense(3)(e)

m = Model(inputs=x, outputs=d)
m.compile(loss='mse', optimizer='adam')
preds = m.predict(data_in)
loss = m.evaluate(data_in, data_out, verbose=0)
print(preds)
print('Computed Loss:', loss)

[[[ 0.009682 0.02505393 -0.00632722]
[ 0.01756451 0.05928303 0.0153951 ]
[-0.00146054 -0.02064196 -0.04356086]
[-0.00146054 -0.02064196 -0.04356086]]]
Computed Loss: 9.041069030761719

# verify that only the first two outputs
# have been considered in the computation of loss
print(np.square(preds[0,0:2] - data_out[0,0:2]).mean())

9.041070036475277






share|improve this answer














share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer








edited Nov 25 '18 at 21:19

























answered Nov 25 '18 at 18:11









todaytoday

10.6k21536




10.6k21536













  • Thank you, so what happens at the evaluation of the model. Does it mean we need to shift our output vector by 1? binary classification i.e. when y in 0,1. Or assuming the loss is computed with the mask, how do we actually evaluate such generator at the end? When we run predictions, we still get an output y, for which we need to manually fit the mask? For example, if we pad sequences to length 100, the y is always 100, but the real sequences are of variable length. How do we get model.predict() to return these variable lengths?

    – GRS
    Nov 25 '18 at 20:28











  • So what I'm trying to say, when I pass this output to the Dense layer, which doesn't support masking, it will still calculate some loss for the 1st and 3rd indeces in your example. And compare it with y 0s. How does one implement such Dense layers?

    – GRS
    Nov 25 '18 at 20:58











  • @GRS The loss will be computed according the mask as well. I have updated my answer. Please take a look.

    – today
    Nov 25 '18 at 21:19



















  • Thank you, so what happens at the evaluation of the model. Does it mean we need to shift our output vector by 1? binary classification i.e. when y in 0,1. Or assuming the loss is computed with the mask, how do we actually evaluate such generator at the end? When we run predictions, we still get an output y, for which we need to manually fit the mask? For example, if we pad sequences to length 100, the y is always 100, but the real sequences are of variable length. How do we get model.predict() to return these variable lengths?

    – GRS
    Nov 25 '18 at 20:28











  • So what I'm trying to say, when I pass this output to the Dense layer, which doesn't support masking, it will still calculate some loss for the 1st and 3rd indeces in your example. And compare it with y 0s. How does one implement such Dense layers?

    – GRS
    Nov 25 '18 at 20:58











  • @GRS The loss will be computed according the mask as well. I have updated my answer. Please take a look.

    – today
    Nov 25 '18 at 21:19

















Thank you, so what happens at the evaluation of the model. Does it mean we need to shift our output vector by 1? binary classification i.e. when y in 0,1. Or assuming the loss is computed with the mask, how do we actually evaluate such generator at the end? When we run predictions, we still get an output y, for which we need to manually fit the mask? For example, if we pad sequences to length 100, the y is always 100, but the real sequences are of variable length. How do we get model.predict() to return these variable lengths?

– GRS
Nov 25 '18 at 20:28





Thank you, so what happens at the evaluation of the model. Does it mean we need to shift our output vector by 1? binary classification i.e. when y in 0,1. Or assuming the loss is computed with the mask, how do we actually evaluate such generator at the end? When we run predictions, we still get an output y, for which we need to manually fit the mask? For example, if we pad sequences to length 100, the y is always 100, but the real sequences are of variable length. How do we get model.predict() to return these variable lengths?

– GRS
Nov 25 '18 at 20:28













So what I'm trying to say, when I pass this output to the Dense layer, which doesn't support masking, it will still calculate some loss for the 1st and 3rd indeces in your example. And compare it with y 0s. How does one implement such Dense layers?

– GRS
Nov 25 '18 at 20:58





So what I'm trying to say, when I pass this output to the Dense layer, which doesn't support masking, it will still calculate some loss for the 1st and 3rd indeces in your example. And compare it with y 0s. How does one implement such Dense layers?

– GRS
Nov 25 '18 at 20:58













@GRS The loss will be computed according the mask as well. I have updated my answer. Please take a look.

– today
Nov 25 '18 at 21:19





@GRS The loss will be computed according the mask as well. I have updated my answer. Please take a look.

– today
Nov 25 '18 at 21:19


















draft saved

draft discarded




















































Thanks for contributing an answer to Stack Overflow!


  • 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.


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%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f47485216%2fhow-does-mask-zero-in-keras-embedding-layer-work%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

Basket-ball féminin

Different font size/position of beamer's navigation symbols template's content depending on regular/plain...

I want to find a topological embedding $f : X rightarrow Y$ and $g: Y rightarrow X$, yet $X$ is not...