The Pupil Has Become the Master: Teacher-Student Model-Based Word Embedding Distillation with Ensemble Learning
•
1 j'aime•135 vues
Recent advances in deep learning have facilitated the demand of neural models for real applications. In practice, these applications often need to be deployed with limited resources while keeping high accuracy. This paper touches the core of neural models in NLP, word embeddings, and presents a new embedding distillation framework that remarkably reduces the dimension of word embeddings without compromising accuracy. A novel distillation ensemble approach is also proposed that trains a high-efficient student model using multiple teacher models. In our approach, the teacher models play roles only during training such that the student model operates on its own without getting supports from the teacher models during decoding, which makes it eighty times faster and lighter than other typical ensemble methods. All models are evaluated on seven document classification datasets and show significant advantage over the teacher models for most cases. Our analysis depicts insightful transformation of word embeddings from distillation and suggests a future direction to ensemble approaches using neural models.
Recommandé
Recommandé
Contenu connexe
Tendances
Tendances (20)
Similaire à The Pupil Has Become the Master: Teacher-Student Model-Based Word Embedding Distillation with Ensemble Learning
Similaire à The Pupil Has Become the Master: Teacher-Student Model-Based Word Embedding Distillation with Ensemble Learning (20)
Plus de Jinho Choi
Plus de Jinho Choi (20)
Dernier
Dernier (20)
The Pupil Has Become the Master: Teacher-Student Model-Based Word Embedding Distillation with Ensemble Learning
- 1. The Pupil Has Become the Master: Teacher-Student Model-Based Word Embedding Distillation with Ensemble Learning Bonggun Shin, Hao Yang and Jinho D. Choi IJCAI 2019
- 2. Typical NLP Models • Input: a sequence of tokens • Each token is transformed into a vector • Once vectorized, any neural network can be attached • Output: a class or a sequence (depends on the task) Embeddings CNN/LSTM Output Input
- 3. • The majority of model space is occupied by word embeddings • NLP model compression -> Embedding compression • Neural model compression methods • Weight pruning • Weight quantization • Lossless compression • Distillation Why is Compressing an Embedding Beneficial? Embeddings Output Input CNN/LSTM
- 4. Embedding Compression • V: the number of vocabulary • D: the size of an original embedding vector • D’: the size of a compressed embedding vector Embedding V D Compressed Embedding V D’
- 5. Embedding Encoding • Proposed by [Mou et al., 2016] - 8 times compression with performance loss • Not a teacher-student model - trains a single model with an encoding (projection) layer • Encoding (projection) layer: Pre-trained large embedding -> smaller embedding • Discards the large embedding at model deployment Embedding Encoding LOGIT SOFTMAX WORD INDEX NETWORK LARGE EMBEDDING GOLD SMALL EMB LOGIT SOFTMAX NETWORK SMALL EMB WORD INDEX TEACHER MODEL LOGIT SOFTMAX WORD INDEX LOGIT SOFTMAX WORD INDEX NETWORK LARGE EMBEDDING SMALL EMB Projection Projection Projection Model Deployment LOGIT SOFTMAX WORD INDEX NETWORK LARGE EMBEDDING GOLD SMALL EMB LOGIT SOFTMAX NETWORK SMALL EMB WORD INDEX TEACHER MODEL LOGIT SOFTMAX WORD INDEX L SO WOR NET LARGE E SMA Projection Projection Pro
- 6. We Propose • Embedding Distillation • Single teacher • Better performance with a 8-times smaller model size • Distillation Ensemble • Ten teachers • Better performance with a 80-times smaller model size
- 7. Background Teacher Student Model • Teacher - (Dataset.X, Dataset.Y), Student - (Dataset.X, Teacher.Output) • Logit matching [Ba and Caruana, 2014] • Noisy logit matching [Sau and Balasubramanian, 2016] • Softmax tau matching [Hinton et al., 2014] GOLD STUDENT MODEL TEACHER MODEL LOGIT SOFTMAX LOGIT SOFTMAX WORD INDEX WORD INDEX NOISE STUDENT MODEL TEACHER MODEL LOGIT SOFTMAX LOGIT SOFTMAX WORD INDEX WORD INDEX STUDENT MODEL TEACHER MODEL LOGIT SOFTMAX LOGIT SOFTMAX WORD INDEX WORD INDEX GOLD STUDENT MODEL TEACHER MODEL LOGIT SOFTMAX LOGIT SOFTMAX WORD INDEX WORD INDEX NOISE STUDENT MODEL TEACHER MODEL LOGIT SOFTMAX LOGIT SOFTMAX WORD INDEX WORD INDEX STUDENT MODEL TEACHER MODEL LOGIT SOFTMAX LOGIT SOFTMAX WORD INDEX WORD INDEX GOLD STUDENT MODEL TEACHER MODEL LOGIT SOFTMAX LOGIT SOFTMAX WORD INDEX WORD INDEX NOISE STUDENT MODEL TEACHER MODEL LOGIT SOFTMAX LOGIT SOFTMAX WORD INDEX WORD INDEX STUDENT MODEL TEACHER MODEL LOGIT SOFTMAX LOGIT SOFTMAX WORD INDEX WORD INDEX
- 8. Dataset • Seven document classification tasks • Pre-trained word embeddings (Trained by Word2Vec [Mikolov et al., 2013]) • Sentiment analysis (SST-*, MR and CR) - Amazon review data (2.6M) • Others - Wikipedia + New York Times All models are evaluated on seven document classification datasets in Table 1. MR, SST-*, and CR are targeted at the task of sentiment analysis while Subj, TREC, and MPQA are targeted at the classifications of subjectivity, question types, and opinion polarity, respectively. About 10% of the training sets are split into development sets for SST-* and TREC, and about 10/20% of the provided resources are divided into de- velopment/evaluation sets for the other datasets, respectively. Dataset C TRN DEV TST MR [Pang and Lee, 2005] 2 7,684 990 1,988 SST-1 [Socher et al., 2013] 5 8,544 1,101 2,210 SST-2 [Socher et al., 2013] 2 6,920 872 1,821 Subj [Pang and Lee, 2004] 2 7,199 907 1,894 TREC [Li and Roth, 2002] 6 4,952 500 500 CR [Hu and Liu, 2004] 2 2,718 340 717 MPQA [Wiebe et al., 2005] 2 7,636 955 2,015 Table 1: Seven datasets used for our experiments. C: num- ber of classes, TRN/DEV/TST: number of instances in train- ing/development/evaluation set. 5.2 Word Embeddings For sentiment analysis, raw text from the Amazon Review dataset2 is used to train word embeddings, resulting 2.67M word vectors. For the other tasks, combined text from Wikipedia and the New York Times Annotated corpus3 are used, resulting 1.96M word vectors. For each group, two sets beddings. The the size of the l embedding lay which is the dim layered projecti various combina and deeper laye 5.4 Pre-trai An autoencode 400-dimension two-layered pro and the decode upper and lowe by using pre-tr are not reporte consistently see for the projectio 5.5 Embedd Six models are show the effect work: logit ma softmax tau m based embeddin els with the aut two layered pro
- 9. Embedding Distillation Model • Train a teacher using (X,Y) • Distill to a student with a projection to smaller embeddings using (X, Teacher.Logit) • Discard the large embedding at model deployment LOGIT SOFTMAX NETWORK SMALL EMB WORD INDEX TEACHER MODEL LOGIT SOFTMAX WORD INDEX LOGIT SOFTMAX WORD INDEX NETWORK LARGE EMBEDDING SMALL EMB Projection Model deployment LOGIT SOFTMAX WORD INDEX NETWORK LARGE EMBEDDING GOLD SMALL EMB LOGIT SOFTMAX NETWORK SMALL EMB WORD INDEX TEACHER MODEL LOGIT SOFTMAX WORD INDEX W LAR S Projection Projection
- 10. Embedding Distillation Result • Proposed models outperform ENC • Pre-training (PT) and 2-layered projection (2L) boost the performance • Differences among LM vs NLM vs STM are marginal
- 11. LOGIT SOFTMAX WORD INDEX NETWORK LARGE EMBEDDING SMALL EMB Projection TEACHER MODEL LOGIT SOFTMAX WORD INDEX R. LOGIT Model deployment LOGIT SOFTMAX WORD INDEX NETWORK LARGE EMBEDDING GOLD SMALL EMB LOGIT SOFTMAX NETWORK SMALL EMB WORD INDEX TEACHER MODEL LOGIT SOFTMAX WORD INDEX Projection Projection Distillation Ensemble Model • Train multiple (for example, 10) teachers • Calculate representing logits for each input dataset X • Distill to a student with a projection to smaller embeddings using (X, Representing.Logit) • Discard the large embedding at model deployment
- 12. Representing Logit 0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1 C1 C2 C3 0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1 C1 C2 C3 0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1 C1 C2 C3 Teacher1 Teacher2 Teacher3 0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1 C1 C2 C3 RAE 0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1 C1 C2 C3 RDE Routing by Agreement Ensemble: Put more weights on majority opinions Routing by Disagreement Ensemble: Put more weights on minority opinions
- 13. Distillation Ensemble Result • Teachers: 5 CNN-based and 5 LSTM-based models • RDE significantly outperforms the teachers, if the dataset is sufficiently large • Enough data samples -> The more chance to explore different insights from minor opinions. 0.780 0.790 0.800 Teacher RAE RDE MR 0.470 0.480 0.490 0.500 Teacher RAE RDE SST-1 0.850 0.860 0.870 Teacher RAE RDE SST-2 0.920 0.925 0.930 0.935 Teacher RAE RDE Subj 0.885 0.890 0.895 0.900 0.905 Teacher RAE RDE MPQA 5 while n iterations do 6 c softmax(w) 7 zrep = PT t=1 ct · zt 8 s squash(zrep ) 9 if not last iteration then 10 for t 2 {1, . . . , T} do 11 wt wt + kxt · s 12 return zrep 5 Experiments 5.1 Datasets All models are evaluated on seven document classification datasets in Table 1. MR, SST-*, and CR are targeted at the task of sentiment analysis while Subj, TREC, and MPQA are targeted at the classifications of subjectivity, question types, and opinion polarity, respectively. About 10% of the training sets are split into development sets for SST-* and TREC, and about 10/20% of the provided resources are divided into de- velopment/evaluation sets for the other datasets, respectively. Dataset C TRN DEV TST MR [Pang and Lee, 2005] 2 7,684 990 1,988 SST-1 [Socher et al., 2013] 5 8,544 1,101 2,210 SST-2 [Socher et al., 2013] 2 6,920 872 1,821 Subj [Pang and Lee, 2004] 2 7,199 907 1,894 TREC [Li and Roth, 2002] 6 4,952 500 500 CR [Hu and Liu, 2004] 2 2,718 340 717 MPQA [Wiebe et al., 2005] 2 7,636 955 2,015 Table 1: Seven datasets used for our experiments. C: num- ber of classes, TRN/DEV/TST: number of instances in train- ing/development/evaluation set. 5.2 Word Embeddings For sentiment analysis, raw text from the Amazon Review dataset2 is used to train word embeddings, resulting 2.67M word vectors. For the other tasks, combined text from Wikipedia and the New York Times Annotated corpus3 are models ad dent mode the the pro teacher m last outpu which bec 0.2 is appl For both C same mod this limite remarkabl Each st layers. Th hidden lay knowledg beddings. the size of embeddin which is th layered pr various co and deepe 5.4 Pre An autoen 400-dimen two-layere and the d upper and by using p are not re consistent for the pro 5.5 Em Six mode show the work: log softmax t based emb els with th 0.900 0.910 0.920 0.930 0.940 Teacher RAE RDE TREC 0.810 0.820 0.830 0.840 0.850 Teacher RAE RDE CR
- 14. Discussion • Outperforms the previous distillation model • Gives compatible accuracy to the teacher models with x8 and x80 smaller embeddings • Our distillation ensemble approach consistently shows more robust results when the size of training data is sufficiently large