What will happen when I use batch normalization but set batch_size = 1
?
Because I am using 3D medical images as training dataset, the batch size can only be
variance will be 0
No, it won't; BatchNormalization
computes statistics only with respect to a single axis (usually the channels axis, =-1
(last) by default); every other axis is collapsed, i.e. summed over for averaging; details below.
More importantly, however, unless you can explicitly justify it, I advise against using BatchNormalization
with batch_size=1
; there are strong theoretical reasons against it, and multiple publications have shown BN performance degrade for batch_size
under 32, and severely for <=8. In a nutshell, batch statistics "averaged" over a single sample vary greatly sample-to-sample (high variance), and BN mechanisms don't work as intended.
Small mini-batch alternatives: Batch Renormalization -- Layer Normalization -- Weight Normalization
Implementation details: from source code:
reduction_axes = list(range(len(input_shape)))
del reduction_axes[self.axis]
Eventually, tf.nn.monents is called with axes=reduction_axes
, which performs a reduce_sum
to compute variance
. Then, in the TensorFlow backend, mean
and variance
are passed to tf.nn.batch_normalization to return train- or inference-normalized inputs.
In other words, if your input is (batch_size, height, width, depth, channels)
, or (1, height, width, depth, channels)
, then BN will run calculations over the 1
, height
, width
, and depth
dimensions.
Can variance ever be zero? - yes, if every single datapoint for any given channel
slice (along every dimension) is the same. But this should be near-impossible for real data.
Other answers: first one is misleading:
a small rational number is added (
1e-19
) to the variance
This doesn't happen in computing variance, but it is added to variance when normalizing; nonetheless, it is rarely necessary, as variance
is far from zero. Also, the epsilon term is actually defaulted to 1e-3
by Keras; it serves roles in regularizing, beyond mere avoiding zero-division.
Update: I failed to address an important piece of intuition with suspecting variance to be 0; indeed, the batch statistics variance is zero, since there is only one statistic - but the "statistic" itself concerns the mean & variance of the channel + spatial dimensions. In other words, the variance of the mean & variance is zero, but the mean & variance themselves aren't.