Finbarr Timbers

Pointer Networks

Link to paper [arXiv], [code].

Overview

Pointer networks are a new neural architecture that learns pointers to positions in an input sequence. This is new because existing techniques need to have a fixed number of target classes, which isn't generally applicable— consider the Travelling Salesman Problem, in which the number of classes is equal to the number of inputs. An additional example would be sorting a variably sized sequence.

Pointer networks uses "attention as a pointer to select a member of the input." What's remarkable is that the learnt models generalize beyond the maximum lengths that they were trained on, with (IMO) decent results. This is really useful because there has been a lot of work done on making it easy & fast to serve deep neural network predictions, using e.g. Tensorflow Serving. Existing solutions to the combinatorial optimization problems discussed here are slow and expensive, and as a result, to produce results that are anything close to real time, you need to use heuristic models, which are inaccurate as well. The heuristics are typically hand-tuned, just like computer vision features were 5 years ago— it's reasonable to assume that a deep net can learn better heuristics, which will open up combinatorial optimization and make it practical for a much wider array of applications.

Introduction

RNNs are the most common way of approximating functions operating on sequences, and have had a lot of success doing so. Historically, these have operated on fixed input/output sizes, but there has been recent work (such as seq2seq) that have extended RNNs to operate on arbitrarily sized inputs and outputs. However, these seq2seq models have still required the output to be of a fixed size— consider a neural translation model, where the input and output are a series of sentences. It is impossible for the model to output predictions that involve words that the model is not aware of, which is a problem that arises quite often (consider names, for instance).

The authors introduce a new architecture, which they call Pointer Networks, that represents variable length dictionaries using a softmax probability distribution as a "pointer". They then use the architecture in a supervised learning setting to learn the solutions to a series of geometric algorithmic problems; they then test the model on versions of the problems that the model hasn't seen.

Models

The model is similar to a sequence-to-sequence model in that it models the conditional probability of an output sequence given the input sequence. Once conditional probabilities have been learned, the model uses the trained parameters to select the output sequence with the highest probability.Note that this is non-trivial (to put it lightly). Given $N$ possible inputs, there are $N!$ different output sequences. As such, the model uses a beam search procedure to find the best possible sequence given a beam size. See below for a discussion of beam search.

As such, the model has a linear computational complexity. This is much better than the exact algorithms for the problems solved here, which typically have much higher complexity (e.g. the TSP has an exact algorithm that runs in O($N^2 2^n$)).

A vanilla seq-to-seq models makes predictions based on the fixed state of the network after receiving all of the input, which restricts the amount of information passing through the model. This has been extended by attention; effectively, we represent the state of the encoder & decoder layers by $(e_i){i \in {1, \ldots, n}}$ and $(d_i){i \in 1, \ldots, m(\mathcal{P})}$. Attention adds an "attention" vector that is calculated as

\begin{align} u_j^i &= v^T \tanh(W_1 e_j + W_2 d_i), &j \in (1, \ldots, n)
a_j^i &= \text{softmax}(u_j^i), &j \in (1, \ldots, n)
d_i' = \sum \limits_{j = 1}^n a_j^i e_j \end{align
}

this can be thought of as a version of $d_i$ that has been scaled to draw attention to the most relevant parts, according to the attention layer. $d_i$ and $d_i'$ are concatenated and used as the hidden states from which predictions are made. Adding attention increases the complexity of the model during inference to $O(n^2)$. Note that in attention, there is a softmax distribution over a fixed size output; to remove this constraint, the authors remove the last step that creates the attention vector, and instead define $p(C_i | C_1, \ldots, C_{i-1}, \mathcal{P})$ as being equal to $\text{softmax}(u^i)$.

Beam search is a heuristic search algorithm that operates on a graph. It is a variant of breadth-first search that builds a tree of all possible sequences based on the current tree using breadth-first search. However, instead of storing all states, as in a traditional breadth-first search, it only stores a predetermined number, $\beta$, of best states at each level (we call $\beta$ the beam width). With infinite beam width, beam search is identical to breadth-first search. Beam search is thus not guaranteed to be optimal (and one can easily find any number of examples where beam search finds a sub-optimal output).

Results

The authors use the same hyperparameters for every model, which indicates that there's a lot of potential to improve performance for specific tasks. They trained the model on 1M training examples. The authors find that they can get close to optimal results on data that the model's been trained on (e.g. when the model has been trained on TSP with 5-20 cities, they get results that have accuracies >98%— more than enough for most applications.

When they extend this to a cycle of length 50, the accuracy decreases, being 30% less accurate than the heuristic models. What's interesting is that the computational complexity for the Pointer Network is at least as good as the heuristic algorithms, and given all of the tooling surrounding deep networks, the model should be extremely easy to put into production.

Conclusions

The results are good enough to put into production, as it shoul dbe possible to use this for real-time predictions. However, I would be interested to see how a reinforcement learning approach can improve the accuracy of the model (which we'll look at in the next paper I read: Neural combinatorial optimization with reinforcement learning).