What are the purposes of autoencoders? Planned maintenance scheduled April 17/18, 2019 at...

What is the musical term for a note that continously plays through a melody?

Letter Boxed validator

How can I fade player when goes inside or outside of the area?

Is 1 ppb equal to 1 μg/kg?

What is the longest distance a 13th-level monk can jump while attacking on the same turn?

Output the ŋarâþ crîþ alphabet song without using (m)any letters

"Seemed to had" is it correct?

What happens to sewage if there is no river near by?

What is this single-engine low-wing propeller plane?

Why is black pepper both grey and black?

3 doors, three guards, one stone

Is it true to say that an hosting provider's DNS server is what links the entire hosting environment to ICANN?

Is there a service that would inform me whenever a new direct route is scheduled from a given airport?

When -s is used with third person singular. What's its use in this context?

What causes the vertical darker bands in my photo?

Did Kevin spill real chili?

Do I really need recursive chmod to restrict access to a folder?

Doubts about chords

Stars Make Stars

Single word antonym of "flightless"

When to stop saving and start investing?

Using et al. for a last / senior author rather than for a first author

Gastric acid as a weapon

Is a manifold-with-boundary with given interior and non-empty boundary essentially unique?



What are the purposes of autoencoders?



Planned maintenance scheduled April 17/18, 2019 at 00:00UTC (8:00pm US/Eastern)
Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara
Unicorn Meta Zoo #1: Why another podcast?Neural networks and number theoryHow can I combine these two understandings of RBM (Restricted Boltzmann Machine)?Do Le et al. (2012) train all three autoencoder layers at a time, or just one?What are good parameters of an encoder?Sparsity constraint in a deep autoencoderBatch Normalization in Deep Autoencoders?Autoencoder why it is special for image decoding?AUTOENCODERS FOR CREDIT CARD FRUD DETECTIONHow to choose the dimensions of the encoding layer in autoencoders?Additive Attention in Convolutional Networks





.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty{ margin-bottom:0;
}







7












$begingroup$


Autoencoders are neural networks that learn a compressed representation of the input in order to later reconstruct it, so they can be used for dimensionality reduction. They are composed of an encoder and a decoder (which can be separate neural networks). Dimensionality reduction can be useful in order to deal with or attenuate the issues related to the curse of dimensionality, where data becomes sparse and it is more difficult to obtain "statistical significance". So, autoencoders (and algorithms like PCA) can be used to deal with the curse of dimensionality.



Why do we care about dimensionality reduction specifically using autoencoders? Why can't we simply use PCA, if the purpose is dimensionality reduction?



Why do we need to decompress the latent representation of the input if we just want to perform dimensionality reduction, or why do we need the decoder part in an autoencoder? What are the use cases? In general, why do we need to compress the input to later decompress it? Wouldn't it be better to just use the original input (to start with)?










share|improve this question









$endgroup$








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    See also the following question stats.stackexchange.com/q/82416/82135 on CrossValidated SE.
    $endgroup$
    – nbro
    Mar 23 at 16:02




















7












$begingroup$


Autoencoders are neural networks that learn a compressed representation of the input in order to later reconstruct it, so they can be used for dimensionality reduction. They are composed of an encoder and a decoder (which can be separate neural networks). Dimensionality reduction can be useful in order to deal with or attenuate the issues related to the curse of dimensionality, where data becomes sparse and it is more difficult to obtain "statistical significance". So, autoencoders (and algorithms like PCA) can be used to deal with the curse of dimensionality.



Why do we care about dimensionality reduction specifically using autoencoders? Why can't we simply use PCA, if the purpose is dimensionality reduction?



Why do we need to decompress the latent representation of the input if we just want to perform dimensionality reduction, or why do we need the decoder part in an autoencoder? What are the use cases? In general, why do we need to compress the input to later decompress it? Wouldn't it be better to just use the original input (to start with)?










share|improve this question









$endgroup$








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    See also the following question stats.stackexchange.com/q/82416/82135 on CrossValidated SE.
    $endgroup$
    – nbro
    Mar 23 at 16:02
















7












7








7


1



$begingroup$


Autoencoders are neural networks that learn a compressed representation of the input in order to later reconstruct it, so they can be used for dimensionality reduction. They are composed of an encoder and a decoder (which can be separate neural networks). Dimensionality reduction can be useful in order to deal with or attenuate the issues related to the curse of dimensionality, where data becomes sparse and it is more difficult to obtain "statistical significance". So, autoencoders (and algorithms like PCA) can be used to deal with the curse of dimensionality.



Why do we care about dimensionality reduction specifically using autoencoders? Why can't we simply use PCA, if the purpose is dimensionality reduction?



Why do we need to decompress the latent representation of the input if we just want to perform dimensionality reduction, or why do we need the decoder part in an autoencoder? What are the use cases? In general, why do we need to compress the input to later decompress it? Wouldn't it be better to just use the original input (to start with)?










share|improve this question









$endgroup$




Autoencoders are neural networks that learn a compressed representation of the input in order to later reconstruct it, so they can be used for dimensionality reduction. They are composed of an encoder and a decoder (which can be separate neural networks). Dimensionality reduction can be useful in order to deal with or attenuate the issues related to the curse of dimensionality, where data becomes sparse and it is more difficult to obtain "statistical significance". So, autoencoders (and algorithms like PCA) can be used to deal with the curse of dimensionality.



Why do we care about dimensionality reduction specifically using autoencoders? Why can't we simply use PCA, if the purpose is dimensionality reduction?



Why do we need to decompress the latent representation of the input if we just want to perform dimensionality reduction, or why do we need the decoder part in an autoencoder? What are the use cases? In general, why do we need to compress the input to later decompress it? Wouldn't it be better to just use the original input (to start with)?







machine-learning autoencoders dimensionality-reduction curse-of-dimensionality






share|improve this question













share|improve this question











share|improve this question




share|improve this question










asked Mar 23 at 15:53









nbronbro

2,3741726




2,3741726








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    See also the following question stats.stackexchange.com/q/82416/82135 on CrossValidated SE.
    $endgroup$
    – nbro
    Mar 23 at 16:02
















  • 1




    $begingroup$
    See also the following question stats.stackexchange.com/q/82416/82135 on CrossValidated SE.
    $endgroup$
    – nbro
    Mar 23 at 16:02










1




1




$begingroup$
See also the following question stats.stackexchange.com/q/82416/82135 on CrossValidated SE.
$endgroup$
– nbro
Mar 23 at 16:02






$begingroup$
See also the following question stats.stackexchange.com/q/82416/82135 on CrossValidated SE.
$endgroup$
– nbro
Mar 23 at 16:02












3 Answers
3






active

oldest

votes


















4












$begingroup$

PCA is a linear method that creates a transformation that is capable of changing the vectors projections (changing axis)



Since PCA looks for the direction of maximum variance it usually have high discriminativity BUT it does not guaranteed that the direction of most variance is the direction of most discriminativity.



LDA is a linear method that creates a transformation that is capable of finding the direction that is most relevant to decide if a vector belong to class A or B.



PCA and LDA have non-linear Kernel versions that might overcome their linear limitations.



Autoencoders can perform dimensionality reduction with other kinds of loss function, can be non-linear and might perform better than PCA and LDA for a lot of cases.



There is probably no best machine learning algorithm to do anything, sometimes Deep Learning and Neural Nets are overkill for simple problems and PCA and LDA might be tried before other, more complex, dimensionality reductions.






share|improve this answer









$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    What does LDA have to do with question?
    $endgroup$
    – nbro
    Mar 23 at 21:45










  • $begingroup$
    LDA can be used as dimensionality reduction. The original algorithm derives only one projection but you can use it to get lower ranking discriminative direction for more acurate modelling
    $endgroup$
    – Pedro Henrique Monforte
    Mar 23 at 21:46










  • $begingroup$
    PCA does not guarantee maximum variance either, since it is a greedy algorithm it only approximates the maximum.
    $endgroup$
    – Mathieu Bouville
    Mar 31 at 16:26










  • $begingroup$
    PCA has a closed solution, the main axis will always be de direction of maximum variance. It is not a greedy algorithm (but it can be implemented as one)
    $endgroup$
    – Pedro Henrique Monforte
    Mar 31 at 18:46





















4












$begingroup$

It is important to think about what sort of patterns in the data are being represented.



Suppose that you have a dataset of greyscale images, such that every image is a uniform intensity. As a human brain you'd realise that every element in this dataset can be described in terms of a single numeric parameter, which is that intensity value. This is something that PCA would work fine for, because each of the dimensions (we can think of each pixel as a different dimension) is perfectly linearly correlated.



Suppose instead that you have a dataset of black and white 128x128px bitmap images of centred circles. As a human brain you'd quickly realise that every element in this dataset can be fully described by a single numeric parameter, which is the radius of the circle. That is a very impressive level of reduction from 16384 binary dimensions, and perhaps more importantly it's a semantically meaningful property of the data. However, PCA probably won't be able to find that pattern.



Your question was "Why can't we simply use PCA, if the purpose is dimensionality reduction?" The simple answer is that PCA is the simplest tool for dimensionality reduction, but it can miss a lot of relationships that more powerful techniques such as autoencoders might find.






share|improve this answer









$endgroup$





















    2












    $begingroup$

    A use case of autoencoders (in particular, of the decoder or generative model of the autoencoder) is to denoise the input. This type of autoencoders, called denoising autoencoders, take a partially corrupted input and they attempt to reconstruct the corresponding uncorrupted input. There are several applications of this model. For example, if you had a corrupted image, you could potentially recover the uncorrupted one using a denoising autoencoder.



    Autoencoders and PCA are related:




    an autoencoder with a single fully-connected hidden layer, a linear activation function and a squared error cost function trains weights that span the same subspace as the one spanned by the principal component loading vectors, but that they are not identical to the loading vectors.




    For more info, have a look at the paper From Principal Subspaces to Principal Components with Linear Autoencoders (2018), by Elad Plaut. See also this answer, which also explains the relation between PCA and autoencoders.






    share|improve this answer











    $endgroup$














      Your Answer








      StackExchange.ready(function() {
      var channelOptions = {
      tags: "".split(" "),
      id: "658"
      };
      initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

      StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
      // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
      if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
      StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
      createEditor();
      });
      }
      else {
      createEditor();
      }
      });

      function createEditor() {
      StackExchange.prepareEditor({
      heartbeatType: 'answer',
      autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
      convertImagesToLinks: false,
      noModals: true,
      showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
      reputationToPostImages: null,
      bindNavPrevention: true,
      postfix: "",
      imageUploader: {
      brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
      contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
      allowUrls: true
      },
      noCode: true, onDemand: true,
      discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
      ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
      });


      }
      });














      draft saved

      draft discarded


















      StackExchange.ready(
      function () {
      StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fai.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f11405%2fwhat-are-the-purposes-of-autoencoders%23new-answer', 'question_page');
      }
      );

      Post as a guest















      Required, but never shown

























      3 Answers
      3






      active

      oldest

      votes








      3 Answers
      3






      active

      oldest

      votes









      active

      oldest

      votes






      active

      oldest

      votes









      4












      $begingroup$

      PCA is a linear method that creates a transformation that is capable of changing the vectors projections (changing axis)



      Since PCA looks for the direction of maximum variance it usually have high discriminativity BUT it does not guaranteed that the direction of most variance is the direction of most discriminativity.



      LDA is a linear method that creates a transformation that is capable of finding the direction that is most relevant to decide if a vector belong to class A or B.



      PCA and LDA have non-linear Kernel versions that might overcome their linear limitations.



      Autoencoders can perform dimensionality reduction with other kinds of loss function, can be non-linear and might perform better than PCA and LDA for a lot of cases.



      There is probably no best machine learning algorithm to do anything, sometimes Deep Learning and Neural Nets are overkill for simple problems and PCA and LDA might be tried before other, more complex, dimensionality reductions.






      share|improve this answer









      $endgroup$













      • $begingroup$
        What does LDA have to do with question?
        $endgroup$
        – nbro
        Mar 23 at 21:45










      • $begingroup$
        LDA can be used as dimensionality reduction. The original algorithm derives only one projection but you can use it to get lower ranking discriminative direction for more acurate modelling
        $endgroup$
        – Pedro Henrique Monforte
        Mar 23 at 21:46










      • $begingroup$
        PCA does not guarantee maximum variance either, since it is a greedy algorithm it only approximates the maximum.
        $endgroup$
        – Mathieu Bouville
        Mar 31 at 16:26










      • $begingroup$
        PCA has a closed solution, the main axis will always be de direction of maximum variance. It is not a greedy algorithm (but it can be implemented as one)
        $endgroup$
        – Pedro Henrique Monforte
        Mar 31 at 18:46


















      4












      $begingroup$

      PCA is a linear method that creates a transformation that is capable of changing the vectors projections (changing axis)



      Since PCA looks for the direction of maximum variance it usually have high discriminativity BUT it does not guaranteed that the direction of most variance is the direction of most discriminativity.



      LDA is a linear method that creates a transformation that is capable of finding the direction that is most relevant to decide if a vector belong to class A or B.



      PCA and LDA have non-linear Kernel versions that might overcome their linear limitations.



      Autoencoders can perform dimensionality reduction with other kinds of loss function, can be non-linear and might perform better than PCA and LDA for a lot of cases.



      There is probably no best machine learning algorithm to do anything, sometimes Deep Learning and Neural Nets are overkill for simple problems and PCA and LDA might be tried before other, more complex, dimensionality reductions.






      share|improve this answer









      $endgroup$













      • $begingroup$
        What does LDA have to do with question?
        $endgroup$
        – nbro
        Mar 23 at 21:45










      • $begingroup$
        LDA can be used as dimensionality reduction. The original algorithm derives only one projection but you can use it to get lower ranking discriminative direction for more acurate modelling
        $endgroup$
        – Pedro Henrique Monforte
        Mar 23 at 21:46










      • $begingroup$
        PCA does not guarantee maximum variance either, since it is a greedy algorithm it only approximates the maximum.
        $endgroup$
        – Mathieu Bouville
        Mar 31 at 16:26










      • $begingroup$
        PCA has a closed solution, the main axis will always be de direction of maximum variance. It is not a greedy algorithm (but it can be implemented as one)
        $endgroup$
        – Pedro Henrique Monforte
        Mar 31 at 18:46
















      4












      4








      4





      $begingroup$

      PCA is a linear method that creates a transformation that is capable of changing the vectors projections (changing axis)



      Since PCA looks for the direction of maximum variance it usually have high discriminativity BUT it does not guaranteed that the direction of most variance is the direction of most discriminativity.



      LDA is a linear method that creates a transformation that is capable of finding the direction that is most relevant to decide if a vector belong to class A or B.



      PCA and LDA have non-linear Kernel versions that might overcome their linear limitations.



      Autoencoders can perform dimensionality reduction with other kinds of loss function, can be non-linear and might perform better than PCA and LDA for a lot of cases.



      There is probably no best machine learning algorithm to do anything, sometimes Deep Learning and Neural Nets are overkill for simple problems and PCA and LDA might be tried before other, more complex, dimensionality reductions.






      share|improve this answer









      $endgroup$



      PCA is a linear method that creates a transformation that is capable of changing the vectors projections (changing axis)



      Since PCA looks for the direction of maximum variance it usually have high discriminativity BUT it does not guaranteed that the direction of most variance is the direction of most discriminativity.



      LDA is a linear method that creates a transformation that is capable of finding the direction that is most relevant to decide if a vector belong to class A or B.



      PCA and LDA have non-linear Kernel versions that might overcome their linear limitations.



      Autoencoders can perform dimensionality reduction with other kinds of loss function, can be non-linear and might perform better than PCA and LDA for a lot of cases.



      There is probably no best machine learning algorithm to do anything, sometimes Deep Learning and Neural Nets are overkill for simple problems and PCA and LDA might be tried before other, more complex, dimensionality reductions.







      share|improve this answer












      share|improve this answer



      share|improve this answer










      answered Mar 23 at 21:29









      Pedro Henrique MonfortePedro Henrique Monforte

      1915




      1915












      • $begingroup$
        What does LDA have to do with question?
        $endgroup$
        – nbro
        Mar 23 at 21:45










      • $begingroup$
        LDA can be used as dimensionality reduction. The original algorithm derives only one projection but you can use it to get lower ranking discriminative direction for more acurate modelling
        $endgroup$
        – Pedro Henrique Monforte
        Mar 23 at 21:46










      • $begingroup$
        PCA does not guarantee maximum variance either, since it is a greedy algorithm it only approximates the maximum.
        $endgroup$
        – Mathieu Bouville
        Mar 31 at 16:26










      • $begingroup$
        PCA has a closed solution, the main axis will always be de direction of maximum variance. It is not a greedy algorithm (but it can be implemented as one)
        $endgroup$
        – Pedro Henrique Monforte
        Mar 31 at 18:46




















      • $begingroup$
        What does LDA have to do with question?
        $endgroup$
        – nbro
        Mar 23 at 21:45










      • $begingroup$
        LDA can be used as dimensionality reduction. The original algorithm derives only one projection but you can use it to get lower ranking discriminative direction for more acurate modelling
        $endgroup$
        – Pedro Henrique Monforte
        Mar 23 at 21:46










      • $begingroup$
        PCA does not guarantee maximum variance either, since it is a greedy algorithm it only approximates the maximum.
        $endgroup$
        – Mathieu Bouville
        Mar 31 at 16:26










      • $begingroup$
        PCA has a closed solution, the main axis will always be de direction of maximum variance. It is not a greedy algorithm (but it can be implemented as one)
        $endgroup$
        – Pedro Henrique Monforte
        Mar 31 at 18:46


















      $begingroup$
      What does LDA have to do with question?
      $endgroup$
      – nbro
      Mar 23 at 21:45




      $begingroup$
      What does LDA have to do with question?
      $endgroup$
      – nbro
      Mar 23 at 21:45












      $begingroup$
      LDA can be used as dimensionality reduction. The original algorithm derives only one projection but you can use it to get lower ranking discriminative direction for more acurate modelling
      $endgroup$
      – Pedro Henrique Monforte
      Mar 23 at 21:46




      $begingroup$
      LDA can be used as dimensionality reduction. The original algorithm derives only one projection but you can use it to get lower ranking discriminative direction for more acurate modelling
      $endgroup$
      – Pedro Henrique Monforte
      Mar 23 at 21:46












      $begingroup$
      PCA does not guarantee maximum variance either, since it is a greedy algorithm it only approximates the maximum.
      $endgroup$
      – Mathieu Bouville
      Mar 31 at 16:26




      $begingroup$
      PCA does not guarantee maximum variance either, since it is a greedy algorithm it only approximates the maximum.
      $endgroup$
      – Mathieu Bouville
      Mar 31 at 16:26












      $begingroup$
      PCA has a closed solution, the main axis will always be de direction of maximum variance. It is not a greedy algorithm (but it can be implemented as one)
      $endgroup$
      – Pedro Henrique Monforte
      Mar 31 at 18:46






      $begingroup$
      PCA has a closed solution, the main axis will always be de direction of maximum variance. It is not a greedy algorithm (but it can be implemented as one)
      $endgroup$
      – Pedro Henrique Monforte
      Mar 31 at 18:46















      4












      $begingroup$

      It is important to think about what sort of patterns in the data are being represented.



      Suppose that you have a dataset of greyscale images, such that every image is a uniform intensity. As a human brain you'd realise that every element in this dataset can be described in terms of a single numeric parameter, which is that intensity value. This is something that PCA would work fine for, because each of the dimensions (we can think of each pixel as a different dimension) is perfectly linearly correlated.



      Suppose instead that you have a dataset of black and white 128x128px bitmap images of centred circles. As a human brain you'd quickly realise that every element in this dataset can be fully described by a single numeric parameter, which is the radius of the circle. That is a very impressive level of reduction from 16384 binary dimensions, and perhaps more importantly it's a semantically meaningful property of the data. However, PCA probably won't be able to find that pattern.



      Your question was "Why can't we simply use PCA, if the purpose is dimensionality reduction?" The simple answer is that PCA is the simplest tool for dimensionality reduction, but it can miss a lot of relationships that more powerful techniques such as autoencoders might find.






      share|improve this answer









      $endgroup$


















        4












        $begingroup$

        It is important to think about what sort of patterns in the data are being represented.



        Suppose that you have a dataset of greyscale images, such that every image is a uniform intensity. As a human brain you'd realise that every element in this dataset can be described in terms of a single numeric parameter, which is that intensity value. This is something that PCA would work fine for, because each of the dimensions (we can think of each pixel as a different dimension) is perfectly linearly correlated.



        Suppose instead that you have a dataset of black and white 128x128px bitmap images of centred circles. As a human brain you'd quickly realise that every element in this dataset can be fully described by a single numeric parameter, which is the radius of the circle. That is a very impressive level of reduction from 16384 binary dimensions, and perhaps more importantly it's a semantically meaningful property of the data. However, PCA probably won't be able to find that pattern.



        Your question was "Why can't we simply use PCA, if the purpose is dimensionality reduction?" The simple answer is that PCA is the simplest tool for dimensionality reduction, but it can miss a lot of relationships that more powerful techniques such as autoencoders might find.






        share|improve this answer









        $endgroup$
















          4












          4








          4





          $begingroup$

          It is important to think about what sort of patterns in the data are being represented.



          Suppose that you have a dataset of greyscale images, such that every image is a uniform intensity. As a human brain you'd realise that every element in this dataset can be described in terms of a single numeric parameter, which is that intensity value. This is something that PCA would work fine for, because each of the dimensions (we can think of each pixel as a different dimension) is perfectly linearly correlated.



          Suppose instead that you have a dataset of black and white 128x128px bitmap images of centred circles. As a human brain you'd quickly realise that every element in this dataset can be fully described by a single numeric parameter, which is the radius of the circle. That is a very impressive level of reduction from 16384 binary dimensions, and perhaps more importantly it's a semantically meaningful property of the data. However, PCA probably won't be able to find that pattern.



          Your question was "Why can't we simply use PCA, if the purpose is dimensionality reduction?" The simple answer is that PCA is the simplest tool for dimensionality reduction, but it can miss a lot of relationships that more powerful techniques such as autoencoders might find.






          share|improve this answer









          $endgroup$



          It is important to think about what sort of patterns in the data are being represented.



          Suppose that you have a dataset of greyscale images, such that every image is a uniform intensity. As a human brain you'd realise that every element in this dataset can be described in terms of a single numeric parameter, which is that intensity value. This is something that PCA would work fine for, because each of the dimensions (we can think of each pixel as a different dimension) is perfectly linearly correlated.



          Suppose instead that you have a dataset of black and white 128x128px bitmap images of centred circles. As a human brain you'd quickly realise that every element in this dataset can be fully described by a single numeric parameter, which is the radius of the circle. That is a very impressive level of reduction from 16384 binary dimensions, and perhaps more importantly it's a semantically meaningful property of the data. However, PCA probably won't be able to find that pattern.



          Your question was "Why can't we simply use PCA, if the purpose is dimensionality reduction?" The simple answer is that PCA is the simplest tool for dimensionality reduction, but it can miss a lot of relationships that more powerful techniques such as autoencoders might find.







          share|improve this answer












          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer










          answered Mar 24 at 0:26









          JosiahJosiah

          1412




          1412























              2












              $begingroup$

              A use case of autoencoders (in particular, of the decoder or generative model of the autoencoder) is to denoise the input. This type of autoencoders, called denoising autoencoders, take a partially corrupted input and they attempt to reconstruct the corresponding uncorrupted input. There are several applications of this model. For example, if you had a corrupted image, you could potentially recover the uncorrupted one using a denoising autoencoder.



              Autoencoders and PCA are related:




              an autoencoder with a single fully-connected hidden layer, a linear activation function and a squared error cost function trains weights that span the same subspace as the one spanned by the principal component loading vectors, but that they are not identical to the loading vectors.




              For more info, have a look at the paper From Principal Subspaces to Principal Components with Linear Autoencoders (2018), by Elad Plaut. See also this answer, which also explains the relation between PCA and autoencoders.






              share|improve this answer











              $endgroup$


















                2












                $begingroup$

                A use case of autoencoders (in particular, of the decoder or generative model of the autoencoder) is to denoise the input. This type of autoencoders, called denoising autoencoders, take a partially corrupted input and they attempt to reconstruct the corresponding uncorrupted input. There are several applications of this model. For example, if you had a corrupted image, you could potentially recover the uncorrupted one using a denoising autoencoder.



                Autoencoders and PCA are related:




                an autoencoder with a single fully-connected hidden layer, a linear activation function and a squared error cost function trains weights that span the same subspace as the one spanned by the principal component loading vectors, but that they are not identical to the loading vectors.




                For more info, have a look at the paper From Principal Subspaces to Principal Components with Linear Autoencoders (2018), by Elad Plaut. See also this answer, which also explains the relation between PCA and autoencoders.






                share|improve this answer











                $endgroup$
















                  2












                  2








                  2





                  $begingroup$

                  A use case of autoencoders (in particular, of the decoder or generative model of the autoencoder) is to denoise the input. This type of autoencoders, called denoising autoencoders, take a partially corrupted input and they attempt to reconstruct the corresponding uncorrupted input. There are several applications of this model. For example, if you had a corrupted image, you could potentially recover the uncorrupted one using a denoising autoencoder.



                  Autoencoders and PCA are related:




                  an autoencoder with a single fully-connected hidden layer, a linear activation function and a squared error cost function trains weights that span the same subspace as the one spanned by the principal component loading vectors, but that they are not identical to the loading vectors.




                  For more info, have a look at the paper From Principal Subspaces to Principal Components with Linear Autoencoders (2018), by Elad Plaut. See also this answer, which also explains the relation between PCA and autoencoders.






                  share|improve this answer











                  $endgroup$



                  A use case of autoencoders (in particular, of the decoder or generative model of the autoencoder) is to denoise the input. This type of autoencoders, called denoising autoencoders, take a partially corrupted input and they attempt to reconstruct the corresponding uncorrupted input. There are several applications of this model. For example, if you had a corrupted image, you could potentially recover the uncorrupted one using a denoising autoencoder.



                  Autoencoders and PCA are related:




                  an autoencoder with a single fully-connected hidden layer, a linear activation function and a squared error cost function trains weights that span the same subspace as the one spanned by the principal component loading vectors, but that they are not identical to the loading vectors.




                  For more info, have a look at the paper From Principal Subspaces to Principal Components with Linear Autoencoders (2018), by Elad Plaut. See also this answer, which also explains the relation between PCA and autoencoders.







                  share|improve this answer














                  share|improve this answer



                  share|improve this answer








                  edited Mar 23 at 15:59

























                  answered Mar 23 at 15:53









                  nbronbro

                  2,3741726




                  2,3741726






























                      draft saved

                      draft discarded




















































                      Thanks for contributing an answer to Artificial Intelligence Stack Exchange!


                      • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                      But avoid



                      • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                      • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


                      Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


                      To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                      draft saved


                      draft discarded














                      StackExchange.ready(
                      function () {
                      StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fai.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f11405%2fwhat-are-the-purposes-of-autoencoders%23new-answer', 'question_page');
                      }
                      );

                      Post as a guest















                      Required, but never shown





















































                      Required, but never shown














                      Required, but never shown












                      Required, but never shown







                      Required, but never shown

































                      Required, but never shown














                      Required, but never shown












                      Required, but never shown







                      Required, but never shown