text: Domain adaptation techniques address the problem of reducing the sensitivity of machine learning methods to the so-called domain shift, namely the difference between source (training) and target (test) data distributions. In particular, unsupervised domain adaptation assumes no labels are available in the target domain. To this end, aligning second order statistics (covariances) of target and source domains have proven to be an effective approach ti fill the gap between the domains. However, covariance matrices do not form a subspace of the Euclidean space, but live in a Riemannian manifold with non-positive curvature, making the usual Euclidean metric suboptimal to measure distances. In this paper, we extend the idea of training a neural network with a constraint on the covariances of the hidden layer features, by rigorously accounting for the curved structure of the manifold of symmetric positive definite matrices. The resulting loss function exploits a theoretically sound geodesic distance on such manifold. Results show indeed the suboptimal nature of the Euclidean distance. This makes us able to perform better than previous approaches on the standard Office dataset, a benchmark for domain adaptation techniques.
  @cite_14: Deep neural networks (DNN) have shown unprecedented success in various computer vision applications such as image classification and object detection. However, it is still a common annoyance during the training phase, that one has to prepare at least thousands of labeled images to fine-tune a network to a specific domain. Recent study ( 2015) shows that a DNN has strong dependency towards the training dataset, and the learned features cannot be easily transferred to a different but relevant task without fine-tuning. In this paper, we propose a simple yet powerful remedy, called Adaptive Batch Normalization (AdaBN) to increase the generalization ability of a DNN. By modulating the statistics in all Batch Normalization layers across the network, our approach achieves deep adaptation effect for domain adaptation tasks. In contrary to other deep learning domain adaptation methods, our method does not require additional components, and is parameter-free. It archives state-of-the-art performance despite its surprising simplicity. Furthermore, we demonstrate that our method is complementary with other existing methods. Combining AdaBN with existing domain adaptation treatments may further improve model performance.
  @cite_26: Training Deep Neural Networks is complicated by the fact that the distribution of each layer's inputs changes during training, as the parameters of the previous layers change. This slows down the training by requiring lower learning rates and careful parameter initialization, and makes it notoriously hard to train models with saturating nonlinearities. We refer to this phenomenon as internal covariate shift, and address the problem by normalizing layer inputs. Our method draws its strength from making normalization a part of the model architecture and performing the normalization for each training mini-batch. Batch Normalization allows us to use much higher learning rates and be less careful about initialization. It also acts as a regularizer, in some cases eliminating the need for Dropout. Applied to a state-of-the-art image classification model, Batch Normalization achieves the same accuracy with 14 times fewer training steps, and beats the original model by a significant margin. Using an ensemble of batch-normalized networks, we improve upon the best published result on ImageNet classification: reaching 4.9 top-5 validation error (and 4.8 test error), exceeding the accuracy of human raters.
summary: Last worth to mention is Batch Normalization @cite_26 , recently revisited under a specific domain adaptation perspective @cite_14 . The idea is quite similar in spirit to the idea of aligning second order statistics. However Batch Normalization tries to compensate for the source's internal covariance shift by normalizing each mini-batch to be zero-mean and unit variance (whitening), while not taking into account target's statistics: layer's activation are decorrelated for the source data, but not for target points.