Application of Multi Layer Perceptron (MLP) for Shower Size Prediction

Transcription

1 Chapter 3 Application of Multi Layer Perceptron (MLP) for Shower Size Prediction 3.1 Basic considerations of the ANN Artificial Neural Network (ANN)s are non- parametric prediction tools that can be used for a host of pattern classification problems [Haykin 2003] including face recognition. The application of the ANN considers two aspects. A MLP is constituted for this work with one hidden layer and input and output layers. The choice of the length of the hidden layers has been fixed by not following any definite reasoning but by using trial and error method. For this case several sizes of the hidden layer have been considered. Table 3.1 shows the performance obtained during training by varying the size of the hidden layer. The case where the size of the hidden layer taken to be 1.5 times to that of the input layer is found to be computationally efficient (Table 3.1). Its MSE convergence rate and learning ability are found to be superior to the rest of the cases. Hence, the size of the hidden layer of the ANNs Table 3.1: Performance variation after 1000 epochs during training of a MLP with variation of size of the hidden layer Case Size of hidden MSE Precision layer (x input layer) Attained attained in % x x x x x x

2 50 Chapter 3. Application of Multi Layer Perceptron (MLP) for Shower Size Prediction Table 3.2: Effect on average MSE convergence after 1000 epochs with variation of activation functions at input, hidden and output layers Case Input Hidden Output MSE x layer Layer Layer log-sigmoid log-sigmoid log-sigmoid tan-sigmoid tan-sigmoid tan-sigmoid tan-sigmoid log-sigmoid tan-sigmoid log-sigmoid tan-sigmoid log-sigmoid log-sigmoid log-sigmoid tan-sigmoid log-sigmoid tan-sigmoid log-sigmoid 1.19 considered is 1.5 times to that of the input layer. The selection of the activation functions of the input, hidden and output layers plays an important role in the performance of the system. A common practice is to use a similar type of activation function in all layers. But certain combinations and alterations of activation function types carried out during training is expected to provide a way to attain better performance. Hence, in this work two types of MLP configurations are considered- the first type constituted by a set of similar activation functions in all layers and the other with a varied combination of activation functions in different layers. Both these two configurations are trained with gradient descend with variable learning rate and momentum back propagation (GDMALBP) algorithm as a measure of training performance standardization (Table 3.2). The outcome of the MLP blocks varies depending upon the number of training sessions and the data used. MSE convergence and prediction precision are used to ascertain the performance of the MLP blocks. The Table 3.2 shows some results derived during training. The cases 3 and 4 provide the best MSE convergence but case 3 gives better processing speed. hence, the combination as shown in case 3 of Table 3.2 is taken as the standard form of configuration of the ANNs Multi Layered Perceptron Based Learning The fundamental unit of the ANN is the McCulloch-Pitts Neuron (1943). The MLP is the product of several researchers: Frank Rosenblatt (1958), H. D. Block (1962) and M. L. Minsky with S. A. Papart (1988). Backpropagation, the training algorithm, was discovered independently by several researchers (Rumelhart et. al.(1986) and also McClelland and

3 3.1. Basic considerations of the ANN 51 Figure 3.1: Multi Layer Perceptron Rumelhart (1988)). A simple perceptron which is a single McCulloch-Pitts neuron trained by the perceptron algorithm is given as: O x = g(([w].[x] + b) (3.1) where [x] is the input vector, [w] is the associated weight vector, b is a bias value and g(x) is the activation function. Such a setup, namely the perceptron will be able to classify only linearly separable data. A MLP, in contrast, consists of several layers of neurons. The equation for output in a MLP with one hidden layer is given as: O x = N β i g[w] i.[x] + b i (3.2) i=1 where β i is the weight value between the i th hidden neuron. Such a setup maybe depicted as in Figure 3.1. The process of adjusting the weights and biases of a perceptron or MLP is known as training. The perceptron algorithm (for training simple perceptrons consists of comparing the output of the perceptron with an associated target value. The most common training algorithm for MLPs is error backpropagation. This algorithm entails a back propagation of the error correction through each neuron in the network.

4 52 Chapter 3. Application of Multi Layer Perceptron (MLP) for Shower Size Prediction Application of Error Back Propagation for MLP training The MLP is trained using (error) Back Propagation (BP) depending upon which the connecting weights between the layers are updated. The details of the training process is provided in Section 2.2. One cycle through the complete training set forms one epoch. The training process is repeated till MSE meets the performance criteria. While repeating the above, the number of epoch elapsed is counted. A few methods used for MLP training includes: (i) Gradient Descent(GDBP), (ii) Gradient Descent with Momentum BP (GDMBP), (iii) Gradient Descent with Adaptive Learning Rate BP (GDALRBP) and (iv) Gradient Descent with Adaptive Learning Rate and Momentum BP (GDALMBP). 3.2 Application of ANN for shower size prediction Showers were generated according to a modified Nishimura Kamata Greisen (NKG) Lateral Distribution Function [Hanna 1991] with primary energy in the range to ev and Moliere radius of 70 m. Their cores were evenly distributed within a circle of radius 50 m centered on the middle of the array. This restriction was adopted to avoid edge effect. A conceptual model of the core and detector locations used for the work are depicted in Figure 3.2. The high energy showers between to ev are simulated and density values calculated. The required shower sizes are generated from the trained MLP Evaluation of the training process The results derived for the four training methods are used to determine the most suitable method for training the ANN. Table 3.3 shows some of the results derived during training from which it is seen that a three layered ANN trained with traingdm provides the best success rate within epochs. This set-up is taken for testing and subsequent prediction of shower size.

5 3.2. Application of ANN for shower size prediction 53 Table 3.3: Results derived during training- ANN trained with traingd, traingdm, traingdx and traingda SL Num Epochs Success rate % Processing in % Time traingd traingdm traingdx traingda

6 54 Chapter 3. Application of Multi Layer Perceptron (MLP) for Shower Size Prediction Figure 3.2: Conceptual set-up used for simulation of density functions of EAS Experimental results and discussion At the end of the training the selected MLP configuration is used to carry out the prediction for a range of density values generated for the purpose. The results derived by the trained ANN after training it for about epochs are depicted in Figure 3.3. A χ 2 -distribution between expected and ANN predicted showers sizes with variation of training sessions is shown in Figure 3.4. Similarly the success-rates derived with increase in ANN training sessions is shown in Figure 3.5 The results thus derived establish the usefulness of the ANN in predicting the shower sizes for the range considered for the work. 3.3 Conclusion With the size of the hidden layer as 1.5 times that of the input layer, it is found that a three-layered ANN trained with traingdm provides the best success rate within epochs. This setup is taken for testing and subsequent prediction of shower size. The success rate derived establishes the ability of the ANN to handle a task like shower size prediction. The work can also be extended to predict the coordinates of the

7 3.3. Conclusion 55 Figure 3.3: Expected versus ANN generated results upto epochs

8 56 Chapter 3. Application of Multi Layer Perceptron (MLP) for Shower Size Prediction Figure 3.4: χ 2 -(between expected and ANN predicted showers sizes) distribution with ANN training sessions Figure 3.5: Variation of success rates achieved in shower size prediction with ANN training sessions

9 3.3. Conclusion 57 core using experimental density which is presented in the next chapter.