I am trying to develop stochastic gradient descent, but I don't know if it is 100% correct.
- The cost generated by my stochastic gradient descent algorithm is sometimes very far from the one generated by FMINUC or Batch gradient descent.
- while batch gradient descent cost converge when I set a learning rate alpha of 0.2, I am forced to set a learning rate alpha of 0.0001 for my stochastic implementation for it not to diverge. Is this normal?
Here are some results I obtained with a training set of 10,000 elements and num_iter = 100 or 500
FMINUC :
Iteration #100 | Cost: 5.147056e-001
BACTH GRADIENT DESCENT 500 ITER
Iteration #500 - Cost = 5.535241e-001
STOCHASTIC GRADIENT DESCENT 100 ITER
Iteration #100 - Cost = 5.683117e-001 % First time I launched
Iteration #100 - Cost = 7.047196e-001 % Second time I launched
Gradient descent implementation for logistic regression
J_history = zeros(num_iters, 1);
for iter = 1:num_iters
[J, gradJ] = lrCostFunction(theta, X, y, lambda);
theta = theta - alpha * gradJ;
J_history(iter) = J;
fprintf('Iteration #%d - Cost = %d... \r\n',iter, J_history(iter));
end
Stochastic gradient descent implementation for logistic regression
% number of training examples
m = length(y);
% STEP1 : we shuffle the data
data = [y, X];
data = data(randperm(size(data,1)),:);
y = data(:,1);
X = data(:,2:end);
for iter = 1:num_iters
for i = 1:m
x = X(i,:); % Select one example
[J, gradJ] = lrCostFunction(theta, x, y(i,:), lambda);
theta = theta - alpha * gradJ;
end
J_history(iter) = J;
fprintf('Iteration #%d - Cost = %d... \r\n',iter, J);
end
For reference, here is the logistic regression cost function used in my example
function [J, grad] = lrCostFunction(theta, X, y, lambda)
m = length(y); % number of training examples
% We calculate J
hypothesis = sigmoid(X*theta);
costFun = (-y.*log(hypothesis) - (1-y).*log(1-hypothesis));
J = (1/m) * sum(costFun) + (lambda/(2*m))*sum(theta(2:length(theta)).^2);
% We calculate grad using the partial derivatives
beta = (hypothesis-y);
grad = (1/m)*(X'*beta);
temp = theta;
temp(1) = 0; % because we don't add anything for j = 0
grad = grad + (lambda/m)*temp;
grad = grad(:);
end
This is pretty much ok. If you are worried about choosing the appropriate learning rate alpha
, you should think about applying a line search method.
Line search is a method which chooses an optimal learning rate for gradient descent at every iteration, which is better than using fixed learning rate throughout the whole optimization process. Optimal value for learning rate alpha
is one which locally (from current theta
in the direction of the negative gradient) minimizes cost function.
At each iteration of the gradient descent, start from the learning rate alpha = 0
and gradually increase alpha
by the fixed step deltaAlpha = 0.01
, for example. Recalculate parameters theta
and evaluate the cost function. Since the cost function is convex, by increasing alpha
(that is, by moving in the direction of negative gradient) cost function will first start decreasing and then (at some moment) increasing. At that moment stop the line search and take the last alpha
before cost function started increasing. Now update the parameters theta
with that alpha
. In case that the cost function never starts increasing, stop at alpha = 1
.
Note: For big regularization factors (lambda = 100
, lambda = 1000
) it is possible that deltaAlpha
is too big and that gradient descent diverges. If that is the case, decrease deltaAlpha
10 times (deltaAlpha = 0.001
, deltaAlpha = 0.0001
) until you get to the appropriate deltaAlpha
for which gradient descent converges.
Also, you should think about using some terminating condition other than the number of iterations, e.g. when difference between cost functions in two subsequent iterations becomes small enough (less than some epsilon
).
There is a reason for small value of the learning rate. Briefly, when the learning rates decrease with an appropriate rate, and subject to relatively mild assumptions, stochastic gradient descent converges almost surely to a global minimum when the objective function is convex or pseudoconvex, and otherwise converges almost surely to a local minimum. This is in fact a consequence of the Robbins-Siegmund theorem.
Robbins, Herbert; Siegmund, David O. (1971). "A convergence theorem for non negative almost supermartingales and some applications". In Rustagi, Jagdish S. Optimizing Methods in Statistics. Academic Press
The learning rate is always between 0 to 1. If you set the learning rate very high then it follows the desired to a lesser extent, because of skipping. So take a small learning rate even though it takes more time. The output result will be more convincing.
来源:https://stackoverflow.com/questions/21352101/is-my-implementation-of-stochastic-gradient-descent-correct