What Siamese Dreams are made of…

In my last post I wrote a high-level description of a One-Shot learning approach we developed for telecommunication network fault identification through traffic analysis. The One-Shot learning approach is implemented using a Siamese Deep Neural Network. In this post I will describe with more details how this can be achieved with the use of Keras and TensorFlow. As said in the previous post, this is early work and subject to a lot of change, but if it can help someone else alleviate some of the pain of building such a network, let it be!

The first step is probably to understand what is a Siamese Network and how it works. What we want out network to produce is a representation of the data we feed it e.g. a vector representing the input data like word embeddings, but for in this case telecom network traffic data. At the end of the day, this representation vector should have close distances for similar traffic and higher distance for dissimilar traffic. Hence, when the network is properly trained we can use those distances to determine which network traffic is the closest and thus the most representing. But how do we implement it?

For that, let’s look at the cute kitten image I have put on this and the previous post. The crème color cute one hiding at the bottom is Aristotle. The other crème color one is Peter Pan and the black one is Napoleon. Aristotle is our Anchor, the kitten we want to compare to. If another kitten is similar, let say Peter Pan, then the vector representing Peter Pan should be close in distance to the vector representing Aristotle. This is our Positive example. Similarly, when a kitten is different from Aristotle, let say Napoleon, we want the vector representing it being far in distance to Aristotle. This is our Negative example.

Simplifying things, training a deep neural network consist in predicting a result from a training example; finding out how far we are from the expected value using a loss function to find the error; and then correcting the weights of the deep neural network based on that error, so next time we are a bit closer. Here we do not know what is the expected value for our training examples, but we know that whatever that value is, it should be close in distance to the Anchor if we present the Positive example, and far in distance if we present the Negative example. Thus, we will build our loss function in that way. It receives python list of the representation of the Anchor, the Positive example and the Negative example through y_pred. Then it computes the distance between the Anchor and the Positive (AP), and the Anchor and the Negative (AN). As we said AP should get close to 0 while AP should get large. For this exercise, let set “large” to 0.2. So, we want AP=0 and AN=0.2 so we want AN – 0.2 = 0. Ideally, we want both of those to stand, hence we want to minimize the loss where loss = AP – (AN – 0.2). That being explained, below is the loss function we defined.

Now having a loss function to train a network with, we need a network to be defined. The network should receive as input our network traffic information and output a vector representation of it. I already mentioned the network before, so here is the function that creates it from Keras sequential model.

Now that we have that base model, we need to embed it within a Siamese “framework”. After all, that base network simply computes one vector representation for a specific network traffic data and the loss function we defined calls for three of those representation i.e. the anchor, the positive and the negative. So, what we will do is to define three inputs which will be evaluated through the SAME base network, hence the name of Siamese network. The output of that Siamese network it then simply concatenated in a list of vectors, which is what we are asking our loss function to evaluate on. Note that at this point we defines the input and output dimensions. The inputs will be in the shape of N_MINS minutes of network traffic characterization (60 minutes for now), where each minutes is characterized by n_feat features (the 130 or so features I mentioned in my previous post).

Everything is now in place to train the base model through the Siamese “framework” using our defined loss function. Note that the y values we pass to the fit method are dummies value since our loss function does not care for the real targets (which we do not know).

Now we could save the model (really, just the base model is needed here). But more importantly, we can use the base model to perform some evaluation of what would be the vector representation. For me, this was that part which was unclear from other tutorials. You simply should perform a predict on the base model and do not care anymore about the Siamese “framework”. You kind of throw it away.

For completeness sake, since what we want to do is to evaluate the “closest” vector representation to the trained faults we want to detect, we could create a method to identify the traffic case such as the following.

Assuming proper training from our Siamese network and our training data, we can use the above to create a database of the different traffic conditions we can identify in a specific network (as traffic patterns can change from network to network, but hopefully not the way to represent them). And identify the current traffic using the above created function.

Et voilà, you should now have all the pieces to properly use Aristotle, Peter Pan and Napoleon to train a Siamese Network, and then sadly throw them away when you do not need them anymore… This metaphor of Siamese cats is heartbrokenly getting closer and closer to reality… Nevertheless, I hope it can help you out there creating all sorts of Siamese Networks!

Advertisements

Do Telecom Networks Dreams of Siamese Memories?

In this post I will try to make understandable a Deep Neural Network I developed lately. We are still in early stages and a lot of improvements will need to get in, but the preliminary results are positive. I have been told I am not so great at explaining things high level, so a word of warning, some part may go deep technical! So, let start with the buzz words: what I will describe is a One-Shot Learning approach using a Siamese Deep Neural Network which characterize ongoing data traffic patterns in a telecom network to identify faults in real-time.

Telecom network nodes (think piece of equipment) often suffer from recurring faults. There are things which are done by human operator, or traffic pattern exhibited by the users, or situations in adjacent nodes which can impact the performance of a specific node. Once degradation is identified, an analyst goes through the alarms raised by the equipment or the logs, figure out the issue and fix it. Some of those faults are recurring for a reason or another. Analysts probably gets better and better at identifying and fixing those, but still it takes some of their precious time. Would not it be nice if we could identify those automatically and then act to fix the problem? This is pretty much in line with the ONAP vision of a complete life-cycle management of a service. Let say it is a small part of the mechanism required to make that vision real.

The objective is to develop a Machine Learning trained analytic module for a specific set of Network Function Virtualization (NFV) components which can feed into the ONAP policy engine architecture. The analytic module monitors in real-time the NFV service levels and informs the policy engine about the NFV service status i.e. normal working status or degraded/failure mode and in such a case why it is failing.

Ideally, we want a trained analytic module which knows about a lot of different errors characteristics and can adapt as easily as possible to different network conditions i.e. nodes in different networks may be subject to different traffic patterns, but still be subjected to the same errors. In other terms, it would be nice to be able to deploy this module to supervise nodes deployed at different operators without having to retrain it completely…

For the purpose of this experiment we use as data traffic information collected by probes on the control plane traffic coming into/out of a specific node (P-CSCF (a Proxy Server) of an IP Multimedia Subsystem (IMS)). The probes are part of an Ericsson product, the Ericsson Expert Analytics and takes care of the collection and storage of the data from the NFV component. The P-CSCF is part of a test network we created for the experiment and is subject to a realistic traffic model simulated by network traffic generation servers.

The first step is to characterize statistically the traffic going through the P-CSCF and collected by the probes. In this step we create a set of about 130 statistical features based on 1 minute intervals describing the traffic. For example: Number of Registrations in a minute; Number of Session Initiations; Number of  operations presenting error codes and count of those error codes e.g. number of Registrations with return code 2xx, 3xx, … ; Average time required to complete operations; Standard Deviation of those times; etc.

A first choice is how long of a stream should be base our decision on? We decided to go with 1-hour intervals thus we use 60 consecutive examples of those 130 or so features vector for training and for predictions. We label our examples such that if for the whole period there is no error present it is “normal traffic”, or if we introduced an error during that 60 minutes period, thus the example exhibits in part a specific error then it is labelled as per this error.

To fulfil our need for easy adaptation of the trained analytic module we decided to go with One-Shot learning approach. Our hope is that we can train a Deep Neural Network which characterize the traffic it is presented with on a “small” vector (here we initially selected a vector of 10 values), akin to words embedding in Natural Language Processing (NLP). We also hope then that vector arithmetic properties observed in that field for translation purpose will hold e.g. king – man + woman = queen; paris – france + Poland = warsaw. If such property hold, deployment of the trained analytic module in a different environment will consist simply in observing a few examples of regular traffic and adjusting to the specific traffic pattern through arithmetic operations. But I am getting ahead of myself here!

To perform training according to One-Shot learning strategy we developed a base LSTM-based Deep Neural Network (DNN) which is trained in a Siamese Network framework akin what is done for Image Recognition. To do so we create triplets of Anchor-Positive-Negative of 60 minutes/130 features data. In other words, we select an anchor label e.g. normal traffic, or error X, we then select a second example of the same category and a third example from another label category. This triplet of examples becomes what we provide as examples to our Siamese framework to train our LSTM-based DNN. Our initial results were obtained with as little as 100k triplets thus we expect better results when we will train with more examples.

Our Siamese framework can be described as following: The three data points from a triplet are evaluated through the base LSTM-based DNN and our loss function see to minimize the distance between Anchor-Positive examples and maximize the distance between Anchor-Negative examples. The base LSTM-based DNN is highly inspired from my precious trial with time-series and consist in the following:

_________________________________________________________________
Layer (type)                 Output Shape              Param #  
=================================================================
batch_normalization_1 (Batch (None, 60, 132)           528      
_________________________________________________________________
lstm_1 (LSTM)                (None, 60, 512)           1320960  
_________________________________________________________________
lstm_2 (LSTM)                (None, 512)               2099200  
_________________________________________________________________
batch_normalization_2 (Batch (None, 512)               2048     
_________________________________________________________________
dense_1 (Dense)              (None, 512)               262656   
_________________________________________________________________
batch_normalization_3 (Batch (None, 512)               2048     
_________________________________________________________________
dense_2 (Dense)              (None, 10)                5130     
_________________________________________________________________
batch_normalization_4 (Batch (None, 10)                40        
=================================================================
Total params: 3,692,610
Trainable params: 3,690,278
Non-trainable params: 2,332
_________________________________________________________________

Once the base LSTM-based DNN is trained, we can compute the vector representation of each of the traffic case we are interested in e.g. Normal Traffic, Error X traffic, … and store them.

When we want to evaluate real-time the status of the node, we pick the last hour of traffic data and compute its vector representation through the trained base LSTM-based DNN. The closest match from the stored vector representation of the traffic cases and the current traffic is our predicted current traffic state.

At this point in time we only data collected for one specific error, where a link between the P-CSCF and the Home Subscriber Server (HSS) is down. Below diagram shows our predictions on a previously unseen validation set i.e. not used for training.

siameseresults.png
Siamese LSTM-based Deep Neural Network traffic condition prediction on real-time traffic.

As we can see there is quite a few small false predictions along the way, but when the real error is presented to the trained model it can identify it correctly.

Our next steps will be to collect data for other errors and train our model accordingly. As I said in the beginning this is quite early results but promising nonetheless. So keep tuned-in for more in the new year!

 

The Fallacious Simplicity of Deep Learning: zat is ze question?

This post is the fifth and last in a series of posts about the “Fallacious Simplicity of Deep Learning”. I have seen too many comments from non-practitioner who thinks Machine Learning (ML) and Deep Learning (DL) are easy. That any computer programmer following a few hours of training should be able to tackle any problem because after all there are plenty of libraries nowadays… (or other such excuses). This series of posts is adapted from a presentation I will give at the Ericsson Business Area Digital Services technology day on December 5th. So, for my Ericsson fellows, if you happen to be in Kista that day, don’t hesitate to come see it!

In the last posts, we’ve seen that the first complexity lay around the size of the machine learning and deep learning community. There are not enough skilled and knowledgeable peoples in the field. The second complexity lay in the fact that the technology is relatively new, thus the frameworks are quickly evolving and requires software stacks that range from all the way down to the specialized hardware we use. The third complexity was all about hyper-parameter setting, a skill specific to machine learning and that you will need to acquire. The fourth complexity dealt with data, how to obtain it, how to clean it, how to tame it.

The next challenge we will look at is ze question. When we start a new machine learning project, we might have a question we want to answer. Through data exploration we might find that this question cannot be answered directly with the data we have. Maybe we figure the question is not that interesting after all. It all boils down to fast feedback. You need to explore your data, try to answer a question and see where it leads. Then it is time for discussion with the stakeholders, is it what they are looking for? Does it bring value?

There is different type of questions machine learning can answer, but it is not unlimited. Do we want to sort things in similar buckets, do we want to predict such and such value, do we want to find examples that are abnormal? In order for a machine learning exercise to be successful, you need a really specific question to answer: Is this subscriber an IoT device or a Human? Then you need proper data. Using the Canadian census data to try to answer to figure out if a mobile phone subscriber is a Human or a Machine might not work! But with the proper data we could start to explore if there is a model between some data, for example IP addresses visited, time of those visits, etc. and the fact the subscriber is a Machine or a Human.

Often the question will evolve with time, through discussion. You need to be ready for that evolution, for that change. You might have to bring in new data, new methods, new algorithms. It is all about searching and researching, trials and errors, finding new paths. Getting access to the data might be the biggest difficulty, but finding the right question is certainly the second.

The fifth complexity: finding the right question.

Through this series I have detailed five complexities to deep learning (and machine learning in general). There are many more. The machine learning “process” is not like software development. In general, it requires a lot more exploration and researching than regular software development. It requires an higher level of “artistic flair” than you would need to write a regular software application. There are other things that differentiate machine learning from software development, but I think those are the five first and biggest complexity one can face when developing a machine learning model:

  • First you need access to data, and that might not be trivial. You will also need to clean that data and ensure you have a consistent flow.
  • Second you will need to find the right question. This may require many iterations and might require new data sources as well.
  • Third, the results may look simple, but the code itself does not show everything that is hidden behind the curtain. A lot has to do with hyper-parameter setting and tweaking and there is no cookbook for this. The APIs do not tell you what values will give good results.
  • Fourth, machine learning requires specific competence. Some of those competences have to do with software development, but some other are quite different. It is a relatively new domain and the community size is still smaller than others in software development. Moreover, this is a highly in demand skill set and hard to find in the wild.
  • Finally, this is a quickly evolving domain which range from specialized hardware to specialized software stacks. In software development peoples are accustomed to quickly evolving environment, but the pace and breath at which it goes in machine learning might well be unprecedented.

I hope this series could give you a better appreciation of the complexities of deep learning and machine learning. It may look easy when you look at the results and the code that supports it, but there is a lot of things you are not given to see! Artificial Intelligence field will continue to grow in the coming years and will enter in way more aspect of your daily lives. This will require peoples trained in deep learning, machine learning and data science as this is not simply the usage of yet another software library.


Originally published at medium.com/@TheLoneNut on November 28, 2017.

IMA MAG AGE

A small pause in my series on the complexities of Deep Learning (or in general Machine Learning). Today I will try to give an honest review of the latest course I followed: “Convolutional Neural Networks” on Coursera by Andrew Ng.

I first followed the “Machine Learning” course from Andrew Ng in 2014. I really liked his pace of delivery and the way he builds up the knowledge to bring you up to speed. So, when his new nano degree on Deep Learning has been released in August of this year, I was one of the first to jump on it and I swiftly completed the three available courses. A couple of weeks back, the fourth out of five courses was released. I immediately went on the “Convolutional Neural Networks” course to continue my journey.

The course is well structured, as expected and given at a proper pace. The content is split on four weeks. The first week builds the foundations of Convolutional Neural Networks (CNN) and explains how those convolutions are computed, the mechanics. It explains its foundations in computer vision, then will detail the convolution with the padding, the stride and the pooling layers (max pooling, average pooling).

The second week looks at a few “classic” CNNs and explains how the architecture was built by adding new concepts on top of the previously existing ones. It then goes on explaining ResNets (a concept which can apply to other networks than only CNNs) and then build toward Inception Networks (yes, Inception as in the movie)

Third week introduces two new practical concepts, object localization and object detection. Figuring out where in a picture an object is, and secondly how many objects we can detect in a picture and where they each are. It nicely shows how bounding box predictions are made and evaluated followed by the use of Anchor boxes.

Finally, in the fourth week you will learn some of the coolest and funniest things about CNNs: face recognition and neural style transfer. Some important concepts introduced there are the one shot learning (another of those things which can apply to other networks than CNNs) and Siamese networks.

All in all, this is a good course. There are some glitches along the way. Some of the videos are not as polished as they could be i.e. some “bloopers” needs removal and a few errors which needs correction on the slides, but very minor. My biggest gripes is about the programming assignments. First, they are not self-contained. They right from the start refer to the introduction to Tensorflow made in the 3rd week of the second course of the nano degree: “Improving deep neural networks”. This makes things a little bit awkward when you do not use Tensorflow day to day (usually I’m fine with Keras) and there is 2–3 months in between the courses…

Second, the assignments are a bit less instructed than the other courses in the nano degree i.e. you will need to spend more time figuring out small bits of programming where not are not as much taken by the hand as in previous courses. This is not so much a problem as a statement, however it becomes a problem when combined with the problematic Coursera assignment submission engine (well, honestly, I do not know if it is Coursera fault or the course fault, but the result is the same). Sometimes it will refuse to correctly grade your assignment for things which are not even errors, or will introduce artificial boundaries without telling you those are there… I hope those get resolved soon, as it will not deter early adopters as myself, but will most probably discourage more than one in the future.

Lastly the jupyter kernels used on the site are troublesome. Server availability seems sketchy at times. You will often lose your work even if you saved it (you should save/export to your local machine regularly to alleviate those issues). In short, it is still a far way from the Kaggle kernels handling. The same issues have been reported by a colleague of mine following another Coursera course, so this is not unique to the CNN course. Also as the access to Coursera is now subscription based, you will lose access to your kernels if you do not renew your subscription after the course. Hence if you do not want to lose your work (as it is as much a reference as the course video themselves) you will have to store them locally on your machine or preferred cloud storage.

All that being said, it is an excellent course and taught me many things which I did not knew before, so an overall 4/5! But be ready for the glitches especially in the programming assignments. I especially enjoyed the one shot learning which I intend to apply to one of my deep neural network problem at work (not CNN related) and the neural style transfer. In that last programming exercise you complete the code of a neural style transfer algorithm. With a little push from my good friend Marc-Olivier, I went a little bit further and implemented a multi-style transfer algorithm. Here are my youngest kids with different level of style transfer from Edvard MunchPablo PicassoVincent Van Gogh and Georges Braque.

ZackAbby4Styles
My youngest kids with style transferred left to right, top to bottom: Edvard Munch, Pablo Picasso, Vincent Van Gogh and Georges Braques.

Originally published at medium.com/@TheLoneNut on November 22, 2017.