بسم الله الرحمن الرحیم
پیاده سازی رسمی سیمپل نت در کفی 2016

Lets Keep it simple, Using simple architectures to outperform deeper and more complex architectures (2016).

This repository contains the architectures, Models, logs, etc pertaining to the SimpleNet Paper (Lets keep it simple: Using simple architectures to outperform deeper architectures ) : https://arxiv.org/abs/1608.06037

SimpleNet-V1 outperforms deeper and heavier architectures such as AlexNet, VGGNet,ResNet,GoogleNet,etc in a series of benchmark datasets, such as CIFAR10/100, MNIST, SVHN. It also achievs a higher accuracy (currently 72.03/90.32) in imagenet, more than VGGNet, ResNet, MobileNet, AlexNet, NIN, Squeezenet, etc with only 5.7M parameters. It also achieves 74.23/91.748) with 9m version.
Slimer versions of the architecture work very decently against more complex architectures such as ResNet, WRN and MobileNet as well.

Citation

If you find SimpleNet useful in your research, please consider citing:

@article{hasanpour2016lets,
  title={Lets keep it simple, Using simple architectures to outperform deeper and more complex architectures},
  author={Hasanpour, Seyyed Hossein and Rouhani, Mohammad and Fayyaz, Mohsen and Sabokrou, Mohammad},
  journal={arXiv preprint arXiv:1608.06037},
  year={2016}
}

(Check the successor of this architecture at Towards Principled Design of Deep Convolutional Networks: Introducing SimpNet)
 

Other Implementations :

Official Pytorch implementation
 
 

Results Overview :

ImageNet result below was achieved using the Pytorch implementation

Dataset	Accuracy
ImageNet-top1 (9m)	74.23
ImageNet-top1 (5m)	72.03
Cifar10	95.51
CIFAR100*	78.37
MNIST	99.75
SVHN	98.21

• Achieved using Pytorch implementation

ImageNet Result:

SimpleNet outperforms much deeper and larger architectures on the ImageNet dataset:

Model	Params	Top1	Top5
AlexNet	60M	57.2	80.3
SqeezeNet	1.2M	58.18	80.62
VGGNet16	138M	71.59	90.38
VGGNet16_BN	138M	73.36	91.52
VGGNet19	143M	72.38	90.88
VGGNet19_BN	143M	74.22	91.84
GoogleNet	6.6M	69.78	89.53
WResNet18	11.7M	69.60	89.07
ResNet18	11.7M	69.76	89.08
ResNet34	21.8M	73.31	91.42
SimpleNet_small_050	1.5M	61.67	83.49
SimpleNet_small_075	3.2M	68.51	88.15
SimpleNet_5m	5.7M	72.03	90.32
SimpleNet_9m	9.5M	74.23	91.75

Extended ImageNet Result:

Model	#Params	ImageNet	ImageNet-Real-Labels
simplenetv1_9m_m2(36.3 MB)	9.5m	74.23 / 91.748	81.22 / 94.756
simplenetv1_5m_m2(22 MB)	5.7m	72.03 / 90.324	79.328/ 93.714
simplenetv1_small_m2_075(12.6 MB)	3m	68.506/ 88.15	76.283/ 92.02
simplenetv1_small_m2_05(5.78 MB)	1.5m	61.67 / 83.488	69.31 / 88.195

SimpleNet performs very decently, it outperforms VGGNet, variants of ResNet and MobileNets(1-3)
and is pretty fast as well! and its all using plain old CNN!.
To view the full benchmark results visit the benchmark page.
To view more results checkout the the Pytorch implementation page

Top CIFAR10/100 results:

Method	#Params	CIFAR10	CIFAR100
VGGNet(16L) /Enhanced	138m	91.4 / 92.45	-
ResNet-110L / 1202L *	1.7/10.2m	93.57 / 92.07	74.84/72.18
SD-110L / 1202L	1.7/10.2m	94.77 / 95.09	75.42 / -
WRN-(16/8)/(28/10)	11/36m	95.19 / 95.83	77.11/79.5
Highway Network	N/A	92.40	67.76
FitNet	1M	91.61	64.96
FMP* (1 tests)	12M	95.50	73.61
Max-out(k=2)	6M	90.62	65.46
Network in Network	1M	91.19	64.32
DSN	1M	92.03	65.43
Max-out NIN	-	93.25	71.14
LSUV	N/A	94.16	N/A
SimpleNet-Arch 1(۞)	5.48M	94.75	-
SimpleNet-Arch 2 (۩)	5.48M	95.51	78.37

*Note that the Fractional max pooling[13] uses deeper architectures and also uses extreme data augmentation.۞ means No zero-padding or normalization with dropout and ۩ means Standard data-augmentation- with dropout. To our knowledge, our architecture has the state of the art result, without aforementioned data-augmentations.

MNIST results:

Method	Error rate
DropConnect**	0.21%
Multi-column DNN for Image Classification**	0.23%
APAC**	0.23%
Generalizing Pooling Functions in CNN**	0.29%
Fractional Max-Pooling**	0.32%
Batch-normalized Max-out NIN	0.24%
Max-out network (k=2)	0.45%
Network In Network	0.45%
Deeply Supervised Network	0.39%
RCNN-96	0.31%
SimpleNet *	0.25%

*Note that we didn’t intend on achieving the state of the art performance here as we are using a single optimization policy without fine-tuning hyper parameters or data-augmentation for a specific task, and still we nearly achieved state-of-the-art on MNIST. **Results achieved using an ensemble or extreme data-augmentation

Top SVHN results:

Method	Error rate
Network in Network	2.35
Deeply Supervised Net	1.92
ResNet (reported by (2016))	2.01
ResNet with Stochastic Depth	1.75
Wide ResNet	1.64
SimpleNet	1.79

Table 6-Slimmed version Results on Different Datasets

Model	Ours	Maxout	DSN	ALLCNN	dasNet	ResNet(32)	WRN	NIN
#Param	310K	460K	6M	1M	1.3M	6M	475K	600K
CIFAR10	91.98	92.33	90.62	92.03	92.75	90.78	91.6	93.15
CIFAR100	64.68	66.82	65.46	65.43	66.29	66.22	67.37	69.11

Other datasets	Our result
MNIST(310K)*	99.72
SVHN(310K)*	97.63

*Since we presented their results in their respective sections, we avoided mentioning the results here again.

Cifar10 extended results:

Method	Accuracy	#Params
VGGNet(16L)	91.4	138m
VGGNET(Enhanced-16L)*	92.45	138m
ResNet-110*	93.57	1.7m
ResNet-1202	92.07	10.2m
Stochastic depth-110L	94.77	1.7m
Stochastic depth-1202L	95.09	10.2m
Wide Residual Net	95.19	11m
Wide Residual Net	95.83	36m
Highway Network	92.40	-
FitNet	91.61	1M
SqueezNet-(tested by us)	79.58	1.3M
ALLCNN	92.75	-
Fractional Max-pooling* (1 tests)	95.50	12M
Max-out(k=2)	90.62	6M
Network in Network	91.19	1M
Deeply Supervised Network	92.03	1M
Batch normalized Max-out NIN	93.25	-
All you need is a good init (LSUV)	94.16	-
Generalizing Pooling Functions in CNN	93.95	-
Spatially-Sparse CNNs	93.72	-
	93.63	-
Recurrent CNN for Object Recognition	92.91	-
RCNN-160	92.91	-
SimpleNet-Arch1	94.75	5.4m
SimpleNet-Arch1 using data augmentation	95.51	5.4m

CIFAR100 Extended results:

Method	Accuracy
GoogleNet with ELU*	75.72
Spatially-sparse CNNs	75.7
Fractional Max-Pooling(12M)	73.61
Scalable Bayesian Optimization Using DNNs	72.60
All you need is a good init	72.34
Batch-normalized Max-out NIN(k=5)	71.14
Network in Network	64.32
Deeply Supervised Network	65.43
ResNet-110L	74.84
ResNet-1202L	72.18
WRN	77.11/79.5
Highway	67.76
FitNet	64.96
SimpleNet	78.37

** Achieved using several data-augmentation tricks

Flops and Parameter Comparison: [tab:Flops_appndx]

Model	MACC	COMP	ADD	DIV	Activations	Params	SIZE(MB)
SimpleNet	1.9G	1.82M	1.5M	1.5M	6.38M	6.4M	24.4
SqueezeNet	861.34M	9.67M	226K	1.51M	12.58M	1.25M	4.7
Inception v4*	12.27G	21.87M	53.42M	15.09M	72.56M	42.71M	163
Inception v3*	5.72G	16.53M	25.94M	8.97M	41.33M	23.83M	91
Incep-Resv2*	13.18G	31.57M	38.81M	25.06M	117.8M	55.97M	214
ResNet-152	11.3G	22.33M	35.27M	22.03M	100.11M	60.19M	230
ResNet-50	3.87G	10.89M	16.21M	10.59M	46.72M	25.56M	97.70
AlexNet	7.27G	17.69M	4.78M	9.55M	20.81M	60.97M	217.00
GoogleNet	16.04G	161.07M	8.83M	16.64M	102.19M	7M	40
NIN	11.06G	28.93M	380K	20K	38.79M	7.6M	29
VGG16	154.7G	196.85M	10K	10K	288.03M	138.36M	512.2

Flops and Parameter Comparison of Models trained on ImageNet

*Inception v3, v4 did not have any Caffe model, so we reported their size related information from MXNet and Tensorflow respectively. Inception-ResNet-V2 would take 60 days of training with 2 Titan X to achieve the reported accuracy. Statistics are obtained using http://dgschwend.github.io/netscope

1# Data-augmentation method used by stochastic depth paper: https://github.com/Pastromhaug/caffe-stochastic-depth.

2# https://github.com/dmlc/mxnet-model-gallery/blob/master/imagenet-1k-inception-v3.md

3# https://github.com/tensorflow/models/tree/master/slim

4# https://github.com/revilokeb/inception\_resnetv2\_caffe

Side Note:

This was based on my Master's thesis titled "Object classification using Deep Convolutional neural networks" back in 1394/2015.

Citation

If you find SimpleNet useful in your research, please consider citing:

@article{hasanpour2016lets,
  title={Lets keep it simple, Using simple architectures to outperform deeper and more complex architectures},
  author={Hasanpour, Seyyed Hossein and Rouhani, Mohammad and Fayyaz, Mohsen and Sabokrou, Mohammad},
  journal={arXiv preprint arXiv:1608.06037},
  year={2016}
}