The Autoencoding Variational Autoencoder

Does a Variational AutoEncoder (VAE) consistently encode typical samples generated from its decoder? This paper shows that the perhaps surprising answer to this question is `No'; a (nominally trained) VAE does not necessarily amortize inference for typical samples that it is capable of generating. We study the implications of this behaviour on the learned representations and also the consequences of fixing it by introducing a notion of self consistency. Our approach hinges on an alternative construction of the variational approximation distribution to the true posterior of an extended VAE model with a Markov chain alternating between the encoder and the decoder. The method can be used to train a VAE model from scratch or given an already trained VAE, it can be run as a post processing step in an entirely self supervised way without access to the original training data. Our experimental analysis reveals that encoders trained with our self-consistency approach lead to representations that are robust (insensitive) to perturbations in the input introduced by adversarial attacks. We provide experimental results on the ColorMnist and CelebA benchmark datasets that quantify the properties of the learned representations and compare the approach with a baseline that is specifically trained for the desired property.

[1]  Sam T. Roweis,et al.  EM Algorithms for PCA and SPCA , 1997, NIPS.

[2]  Maneesh Kumar Singh,et al.  Disentangling Factors of Variation with Cycle-Consistent Variational Auto-Encoders , 2018, ECCV.

[3]  Olivier Bachem,et al.  Recent Advances in Autoencoder-Based Representation Learning , 2018, ArXiv.

[4]  Sepp Hochreiter,et al.  GANs Trained by a Two Time-Scale Update Rule Converge to a Local Nash Equilibrium , 2017, NIPS.

[5]  Joan Bruna,et al.  Intriguing properties of neural networks , 2013, ICLR.

[6]  Michael E. Tipping,et al.  Probabilistic Principal Component Analysis , 1999 .

[7]  Yoshua Bengio,et al.  What regularized auto-encoders learn from the data-generating distribution , 2012, J. Mach. Learn. Res..

[8]  Guillaume Desjardins,et al.  Understanding disentangling in β-VAE , 2018, ArXiv.

[9]  Stefano Ermon,et al.  InfoVAE: Balancing Learning and Inference in Variational Autoencoders , 2019, AAAI.

[10]  Daan Wierstra,et al.  Stochastic Backpropagation and Approximate Inference in Deep Generative Models , 2014, ICML.

[11]  Max Welling,et al.  Auto-Encoding Variational Bayes , 2013, ICLR.

[12]  Geoffrey E. Hinton,et al.  ImageNet classification with deep convolutional neural networks , 2012, Commun. ACM.

[13]  Oriol Vinyals,et al.  Representation Learning with Contrastive Predictive Coding , 2018, ArXiv.

[14]  Stefano Soatto,et al.  Emergence of Invariance and Disentanglement in Deep Representations , 2017, 2018 Information Theory and Applications Workshop (ITA).

[15]  Bernhard Schölkopf,et al.  Challenging Common Assumptions in the Unsupervised Learning of Disentangled Representations , 2018, ICML.

[16]  Ming-Wei Chang,et al.  BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understanding , 2019, NAACL.

[17]  Yoshua Bengio,et al.  Deep Learning of Representations for Unsupervised and Transfer Learning , 2011, ICML Unsupervised and Transfer Learning.

[18]  Pushmeet Kohli,et al.  Adversarially Robust Representations with Smooth Encoders , 2020, ICLR.

[19]  Klamer Schutte,et al.  The Functional Neural Process , 2019, NeurIPS.

[20]  Nicholas Ruozzi,et al.  Correlated Variational Auto-Encoders , 2019, ICML.

[21]  Geoffrey E. Hinton,et al.  A Simple Framework for Contrastive Learning of Visual Representations , 2020, ICML.