Neural fashion switch with keen execution and Keras

0/5 No votes

Report this app



How would your summer season vacation’s photographs look had Edvard Munch painted them? (Maybe it’s higher to not know). Let’s take a extra comforting instance: How would a pleasant, summarly river panorama look if painted by Katsushika Hokusai?

Fashion switch on photographs just isn’t new, however received a lift when Gatys, Ecker, and Bethge(Gatys, Ecker, and Bethge 2015) confirmed find out how to efficiently do it with deep studying. The primary thought is easy: Create a hybrid that may be a tradeoff between the content material picture we need to manipulate, and a fashion picture we need to imitate, by optimizing for maximal resemblance to each on the identical time.

In case you’ve learn the chapter on neural fashion switch from Deep Studying with R, chances are you’ll acknowledge among the code snippets that observe. Nonetheless, there is a crucial distinction: This submit makes use of TensorFlow Keen Execution, permitting for an crucial approach of coding that makes it simple to map ideas to code. Identical to earlier posts on keen execution on this weblog, this can be a port of a Google Colaboratory pocket book that performs the identical process in Python.

As typical, please be sure to have the required package deal variations put in. And no want to repeat the snippets – you’ll discover the entire code among the many Keras examples.


The code on this submit depends upon the newest variations of a number of of the TensorFlow R packages. You’ll be able to set up these packages as follows:

c(128, 128, 3)

content_path <- "isar.jpg"

content_image <-  image_load(content_path, target_size = img_shape[1:2])
content_image %>% 
  image_to_array() %>%
  `/`(., 255) %>%
  as.raster() %>%

And right here’s the fashion mannequin, Hokusai’s The Nice Wave off Kanagawa, which you’ll be able to obtain from Wikimedia Commons:

style_path <- "The_Great_Wave_off_Kanagawa.jpg"

style_image <-  image_load(content_path, target_size = img_shape[1:2])
style_image %>% 
  image_to_array() %>%
  `/`(., 255) %>%
  as.raster() %>%

We create a wrapper that hundreds and preprocesses the enter photographs for us. As we might be working with VGG19, a community that has been educated on ImageNet, we have to rework our enter photographs in the identical approach that was used coaching it. Later, we’ll apply the inverse transformation to our mixture picture earlier than displaying it.

load_and_preprocess_image <- operate(path) {
  img <- image_load(path, target_size = img_shape[1:2]) %>%
    image_to_array() %>%
    k_expand_dims(axis = 1) %>%

deprocess_image <- operate(x) {
  x <- x[1, , ,]
  # Take away zero-center by imply pixel
  x[, , 1] <- x[, , 1] + 103.939
  x[, , 2] <- x[, , 2] + 116.779
  x[, , 3] <- x[, , 3] + 123.68
  # 'BGR'->'RGB'
  x <- x[, , c(3, 2, 1)]
  x[x > 255] <- 255
  x[x < 0] <- 0
  x[] <- as.integer(x) / 255

Setting the scene

We’re going to use a neural community, however we received’t be coaching it. Neural fashion switch is a bit unusual in that we don’t optimize the community’s weights, however again propagate the loss to the enter layer (the picture), to be able to transfer it within the desired path.

We might be keen on two sorts of outputs from the community, comparable to our two targets. Firstly, we need to maintain the mix picture just like the content material picture, on a excessive degree. In a convnet, higher layers map to extra holistic ideas, so we’re choosing a layer excessive up within the graph to check outputs from the supply and the mix.

Secondly, the generated picture ought to “appear like” the fashion picture. Fashion corresponds to decrease degree options like texture, shapes, strokes… So to check the mix in opposition to the fashion instance, we select a set of decrease degree conv blocks for comparability and mixture the outcomes.

content_layers <- c("block5_conv2")
style_layers <- c("block1_conv1",

num_content_layers <- size(content_layers)
num_style_layers <- size(style_layers)

get_model <- operate() {
  vgg <- application_vgg19(include_top = FALSE, weights = "imagenet")
  vgg$trainable <- FALSE
  style_outputs <- map(style_layers, operate(layer) vgg$get_layer(layer)$output)
  content_outputs <- map(content_layers, operate(layer) vgg$get_layer(layer)$output)
  model_outputs <- c(style_outputs, content_outputs)
  keras_model(vgg$enter, model_outputs)


When optimizing the enter picture, we are going to contemplate three varieties of losses. Firstly, the content material loss: How totally different is the mix picture from the supply? Right here, we’re utilizing the sum of the squared errors for comparability.

content_loss <- operate(content_image, goal) {
  k_sum(k_square(goal - content_image))

Our second concern is having the kinds match as intently as attainable. Fashion is often operationalized because the Gram matrix of flattened characteristic maps in a layer. We thus assume that fashion is said to how maps in a layer correlate with different.

We subsequently compute the Gram matrices of the layers we’re keen on (outlined above), for the supply picture in addition to the optimization candidate, and examine them, once more utilizing the sum of squared errors.

gram_matrix <- operate(x) {
  options <- k_batch_flatten(k_permute_dimensions(x, c(3, 1, 2)))
  gram <- k_dot(options, k_transpose(options))

style_loss <- operate(gram_target, mixture) {
  gram_comb <- gram_matrix(mixture)
  k_sum(k_square(gram_target - gram_comb)) /
    (4 * (img_shape[3] ^ 2) * (img_shape[1] * img_shape[2]) ^ 2)

Thirdly, we don’t need the mix picture to look overly pixelated, thus we’re including in a regularization part, the entire variation within the picture:

total_variation_loss <- operate(picture) {
  y_ij  <- picture[1:(img_shape[1] - 1L), 1:(img_shape[2] - 1L),]
  y_i1j <- picture[2:(img_shape[1]), 1:(img_shape[2] - 1L),]
  y_ij1 <- picture[1:(img_shape[1] - 1L), 2:(img_shape[2]),]
  a <- k_square(y_ij - y_i1j)
  b <- k_square(y_ij - y_ij1)
  k_sum(k_pow(a + b, 1.25))

The difficult factor is find out how to mix these losses. We’ve reached acceptable outcomes with the next weightings, however be at liberty to mess around as you see match:

content_weight <- 100
style_weight <- 0.8
total_variation_weight <- 0.01

Get mannequin outputs for the content material and elegance photographs

We want the mannequin’s output for the content material and elegance photographs, however right here it suffices to do that simply as soon as. We concatenate each photographs alongside the batch dimension, go that enter to the mannequin, and get again an inventory of outputs, the place each factor of the listing is a 4-d tensor. For the fashion picture, we’re within the fashion outputs at batch place 1, whereas for the content material picture, we want the content material output at batch place 2.

Within the beneath feedback, please observe that the sizes of dimensions 2 and three will differ if you happen to’re loading photographs at a unique measurement.

get_feature_representations <-
  operate(mannequin, content_path, style_path) {
    # dim == (1, 128, 128, 3)
    style_image <-
      load_and_process_image(style_path) %>% k_cast("float32")
    # dim == (1, 128, 128, 3)
    content_image <-
      load_and_process_image(content_path) %>% k_cast("float32")
    # dim == (2, 128, 128, 3)
    stack_images <- k_concatenate(listing(style_image, content_image), axis = 1)
    # size(model_outputs) == 6
    # dim(model_outputs[[1]]) = (2, 128, 128, 64)
    # dim(model_outputs[[6]]) = (2, 8, 8, 512)
    model_outputs <- mannequin(stack_images)
    style_features <- 
      model_outputs[1:num_style_layers] %>%
      map(operate(batch) batch[1, , , ])
    content_features <- 
      model_outputs[(num_style_layers + 1):(num_style_layers + num_content_layers)] %>%
      map(operate(batch) batch[2, , , ])
    listing(style_features, content_features)

Computing the losses

On each iteration, we have to go the mix picture by way of the mannequin, receive the fashion and content material outputs, and compute the losses. Once more, the code is extensively commented with tensor sizes for straightforward verification, however please understand that the precise numbers presuppose you’re working with 128×128 photographs.

compute_loss <-
  operate(mannequin, loss_weights, init_image, gram_style_features, content_features) {
    c(style_weight, content_weight) %<-% loss_weights
    model_outputs <- mannequin(init_image)
    style_output_features <- model_outputs[1:num_style_layers]
    content_output_features <-
      model_outputs[(num_style_layers + 1):(num_style_layers + num_content_layers)]
    # fashion loss
    weight_per_style_layer <- 1 / num_style_layers
    style_score <- 0
    # dim(style_zip[[5]][[1]]) == (512, 512)
    style_zip <- transpose(listing(gram_style_features, style_output_features))
    for (l in 1:size(style_zip)) {
      # for l == 1:
      # dim(target_style) == (64, 64)
      # dim(comb_style) == (1, 128, 128, 64)
      c(target_style, comb_style) %<-% style_zip[[l]]
      style_score <- style_score + weight_per_style_layer * 
        style_loss(target_style, comb_style[1, , , ])
    # content material loss
    weight_per_content_layer <- 1 / num_content_layers
    content_score <- 0
    content_zip <- transpose(listing(content_features, content_output_features))
    for (l in 1:size(content_zip)) {
      # dim(comb_content) ==  (1, 8, 8, 512)
      # dim(target_content) == (8, 8, 512)
      c(target_content, comb_content) %<-% content_zip[[l]]
      content_score <- content_score + weight_per_content_layer *
        content_loss(comb_content[1, , , ], target_content)
    # whole variation loss
    variation_loss <- total_variation_loss(init_image[1, , ,])
    style_score <- style_score * style_weight
    content_score <- content_score * content_weight
    variation_score <- variation_loss * total_variation_weight
    loss <- style_score + content_score + variation_score
    listing(loss, style_score, content_score, variation_score)

Computing the gradients

As quickly as we’ve the losses, acquiring the gradients of the general loss with respect to the enter picture is only a matter of calling tape$gradient on the GradientTape. Notice that the nested name to compute_loss, and thus the decision of the mannequin on our mixture picture, occurs contained in the GradientTape context.

compute_grads <- 
  operate(mannequin, loss_weights, init_image, gram_style_features, content_features) {
    with(tf$GradientTape() %as% tape, {
      scores <-
    total_loss <- scores[[1]]
    listing(tape$gradient(total_loss, init_image), scores)

Coaching section

Now it’s time to coach! Whereas the pure continuation of this sentence would have been “… the mannequin,” the mannequin we’re coaching right here just isn’t VGG19 (that one we’re simply utilizing as a instrument), however a minimal setup of simply:

  • a Variable that holds our to-be-optimized picture
  • the loss capabilities we outlined above
  • an optimizer that can apply the calculated gradients to the picture variable (tf$practice$AdamOptimizer)

Under, we get the fashion options (of the fashion picture) and the content material characteristic (of the content material picture) simply as soon as, then iterate over the optimization course of, saving the output each 100 iterations.

In distinction to the unique article and the Deep Studying with R ebook, however following the Google pocket book as an alternative, we’re not utilizing L-BFGS for optimization, however Adam, as our aim right here is to offer a concise introduction to keen execution. Nonetheless, you may plug in one other optimization technique if you happen to wished, changing optimizer$apply_gradients(listing(tuple(grads, init_image))) by an algorithm of your selection (and naturally, assigning the results of the optimization to the Variable holding the picture).

run_style_transfer <- operate(content_path, style_path) {
  mannequin <- get_model()
  stroll(mannequin$layers, operate(layer) layer$trainable = FALSE)
  c(style_features, content_features) %<-% 
    get_feature_representations(mannequin, content_path, style_path)
  # dim(gram_style_features[[1]]) == (64, 64)
  gram_style_features <- map(style_features, operate(characteristic) gram_matrix(characteristic))
  init_image <- load_and_process_image(content_path)
  init_image <- tf$contrib$keen$Variable(init_image, dtype = "float32")
  optimizer <- tf$practice$AdamOptimizer(learning_rate = 1,
                                      beta1 = 0.99,
                                      epsilon = 1e-1)
  c(best_loss, best_image) %<-% listing(Inf, NULL)
  loss_weights <- listing(style_weight, content_weight)
  start_time <- Sys.time()
  global_start <- Sys.time()
  norm_means <- c(103.939, 116.779, 123.68)
  min_vals <- -norm_means
  max_vals <- 255 - norm_means
  for (i in seq_len(num_iterations)) {
    # dim(grads) == (1, 128, 128, 3)
    c(grads, all_losses) %<-% compute_grads(mannequin,
    c(loss, style_score, content_score, variation_score) %<-% all_losses
    optimizer$apply_gradients(listing(tuple(grads, init_image)))
    clipped <- tf$clip_by_value(init_image, min_vals, max_vals)
    end_time <- Sys.time()
    if (k_cast_to_floatx(loss) < best_loss) {
      best_loss <- k_cast_to_floatx(loss)
      best_image <- init_image
    if (i %% 50 == 0) {
      glue("Iteration: {i}") %>% print()
        "Whole loss: {k_cast_to_floatx(loss)},
        fashion loss: {k_cast_to_floatx(style_score)},
        content material loss: {k_cast_to_floatx(content_score)},
        whole variation loss: {k_cast_to_floatx(variation_score)},
        time for 1 iteration: {(Sys.time() - start_time) %>% spherical(2)}"
      ) %>% print()
      if (i %% 100 == 0) {
        png(paste0("style_epoch_", i, ".png"))
        plot_image <- best_image$numpy()
        plot_image <- deprocess_image(plot_image)
        plot(as.raster(plot_image), essential = glue("Iteration {i}"))
  glue("Whole time: {Sys.time() - global_start} seconds") %>% print()
  listing(best_image, best_loss)

Able to run

Now, we’re prepared to begin the method:

c(best_image, best_loss) %<-% run_style_transfer(content_path, style_path)

In our case, outcomes didn’t change a lot after ~ iteration 1000, and that is how our river panorama was trying:

… positively extra inviting than had it been painted by Edvard Munch!


With neural fashion switch, some fiddling round could also be wanted till you get the outcome you need. However as our instance reveals, this doesn’t imply the code must be difficult. Moreover to being simple to know, keen execution additionally allows you to add debugging output, and step by way of the code line-by-line to examine on tensor shapes. Till subsequent time in our keen execution collection!

Gatys, Leon A., Alexander S. Ecker, and Matthias Bethge. 2015. “A Neural Algorithm of Inventive Fashion.” CoRR abs/1508.06576.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.