Open Sourcing the Hunt for Exoplanets

Cross-posted on the Google Research Blog.

Recently, we discovered two exoplanets by training a neural network to analyze data from NASA’s Kepler space telescope and accurately identify the most promising planet signals. And while this was only an initial analysis of ~700 stars, we consider this a successful proof-of-concept for using machine learning to discover exoplanets, and more generally another example of using machine learning to make meaningful gains in a variety of scientific disciplines (e.g. healthcare, quantum chemistry, and fusion research).

Today, we’re excited to release our code for processing the Kepler data, training our neural network model, and making predictions about new candidate signals. We hope this release will prove a useful starting point for developing similar models for other NASA missions, like K2 (Kepler’s second mission) and the upcoming Transiting Exoplanet Survey Satellite mission. As well as announcing the release of our code, we’d also like take this opportunity to dig a bit deeper into how our model works.

A Planet Hunting Primer

First, let’s consider how data collected by the Kepler telescope is used to detect the presence of a planet. The plot below is called a light curve, and it shows the brightness of the star (as measured by Kepler’s photometer) over time. When a planet passes in front of the star, it temporarily blocks some of the light, which causes the measured brightness to decrease and then increase again shortly thereafter, causing a “U-shaped” dip in the light curve.

A light curve from the Kepler space telescope with a “U-shaped” dip that indicates a transiting exoplanet.

However, other astronomical and instrumental phenomena can also cause the measured brightness of a star to decrease, including binary star systems, starspots, cosmic ray hits on Kepler’s photometer, and instrumental noise.

The first light curve has a “V-shaped” pattern that tells us that a very large object (i.e. another star) passed in front of the star that Kepler was observing. The second light curve contains two places where the brightness decreases, which indicates a binary system with one bright and one dim star: the larger dip is caused by the dimmer star passing in front of the brighter star, and vice versa. The third light curve is one example of the many other non-planet signals where the measured brightness of a star appears to decrease.

To search for planets in Kepler data, scientists use automated software (e.g. the Kepler data processing pipeline) to detect signals that might be caused by planets, and then manually follow up to decide whether each signal is a planet or a false positive. To avoid being overwhelmed with more signals than they can manage, the scientists apply a cutoff to the automated detections: those with signal-to-noise ratios above a fixed threshold are deemed worthy of follow-up analysis, while all detections below the threshold are discarded. Even with this cutoff, the number of detections is still formidable: to date, over 30,000 detected Kepler signals have been manually examined, and about 2,500 of those have been validated as actual planets!

Perhaps you’re wondering: does the signal-to-noise cutoff cause some real planet signals to be missed? The answer is, yes! However, if astronomers need to manually follow up on every detection, it’s not really worthwhile to lower the threshold, because as the threshold decreases the rate of false positive detections increases rapidly and actual planet detections become increasingly rare. However, there’s a tantalizing incentive: it’s possible that some potentially habitable planets like Earth, which are relatively small and orbit around relatively dim stars, might be hiding just below the traditional detection threshold — there might be hidden gems still undiscovered in the Kepler data!

A Machine Learning Approach

The Google Brain team applies machine learning to a diverse variety of data, from human genomes to sketches to formal mathematical logic. Considering the massive amount of data collected by the Kepler telescope, we wondered what we might find if we used machine learning to analyze some of the previously unexplored Kepler data. To find out, we teamed up with Andrew Vanderburg at UT Austin and developed a neural network to help search the low signal-to-noise detections for planets.

We trained a convolutional neural network (CNN) to predict the probability that a given Kepler signal is caused by a planet. We chose a CNN because they have been very successful in other problems with spatial and/or temporal structure, like audio generation and image classification.

Luckily, we had 30,000 Kepler signals that had already been manually examined and classified by humans. We used a subset of around 15,000 of these signals, of which around 3,500 were verified planets or strong planet candidates, to train our neural network to distinguish planets from false positives. The inputs to our network are two separate views of the same light curve: a wide view that allows the model to examine signals elsewhere on the light curve (e.g., a secondary signal caused by a binary star), and a zoomed-in view that enables the model to closely examine the shape of the detected signal (e.g., to distinguish “U-shaped” signals from “V-shaped” signals).

Once we had trained our model, we investigated the features it learned about light curves to see if they matched with our expectations. One technique we used (originally suggested in this paper) was to systematically occlude small regions of the input light curves to see whether the model’s output changed. Regions that are particularly important to the model’s decision will change the output prediction if they are occluded, but occluding unimportant regions will not have a significant effect. Below is a light curve from a binary star that our model correctly predicts is not a planet. The points highlighted in green are the points that most change the model’s output prediction when occluded, and they correspond exactly to the secondary “dip” indicative of a binary system. When those points are occluded, the model’s output prediction changes from ~0% probability of being a planet to ~40% probability of being a planet. So, those points are part of the reason the model rejects this light curve, but the model uses other evidence as well - for example, zooming in on the centred primary dip shows that it's actually “V-shaped”, which is also indicative of a binary system.

Searching for New Planets

Once we were confident with our model’s predictions, we tested its effectiveness by searching for new planets in a small set 670 stars. We chose these stars because they were already known to have multiple orbiting planets, and we believed that some of these stars might host additional planets that had not yet been detected. Importantly, we allowed our search to include signals that were below the signal-to-noise threshold that astronomers had previously considered. As expected, our neural network rejected most of these signals as spurious detections, but a handful of promising candidates rose to the top, including our two newly discovered planets: Kepler-90 i and Kepler-80 g.

Find your own Planet(s)!

Let’s take a look at how the code released today can help (re-)discover the planet Kepler-90 i. The first step is to train a model by following the instructions on the code’s home page. It takes a while to download and process the data from the Kepler telescope, but once that’s done, it’s relatively fast to train a model and make predictions about new signals. One way to find new signals to show the model is to use an algorithm called Box Least Squares (BLS), which searches for periodic “box shaped” dips in brightness (see below). The BLS algorithm will detect “U-shaped” planet signals, “V-shaped” binary star signals and many other types of false positive signals to show the model. There are various freely available software implementations of the BLS algorithm, including VARTOOLS and LcTools. Alternatively, you can even look for candidate planet transits by eye, like the Planet Hunters.

A low signal-to-noise detection in the light curve of the Kepler 90 star detected by the BLS algorithm. The detection has period 14.44912 days, duration 2.70408 hours (0.11267 days) beginning 2.2 days after 12:00 on 1/1/2009 (the year the Kepler telescope launched).

To run this detected signal though our trained model, we simply execute the following command:

python predict.py  --kepler_id=11442793 --period=14.44912 --t0=2.2
--duration=0.11267 --kepler_data_dir=$HOME/astronet/kepler 
--output_image_file=$HOME/astronet/kepler-90i.png 
--model_dir=$HOME/astronet/model

The output of the command is prediction = 0.94, which means the model is 94% certain that this signal is a real planet. Of course, this is only a small step in the overall process of discovering and validating an exoplanet: the model’s prediction is not proof one way or the other. The process of validating this signal as a real exoplanet requires significant follow-up work by an expert astronomer — see Sections 6.3 and 6.4 of our paper for the full details. In this particular case, our follow-up analysis validated this signal as a bona fide exoplanet, and it’s now called Kepler-90 i!

Our work here is far from done. We’ve only searched 670 stars out of 200,000 observed by Kepler — who knows what we might find when we turn our technique to the entire dataset. Before we do that, though, we have a few improvements we want to make to our model. As we discussed in our paper, our model is not yet as good at rejecting binary stars and instrumental false positives as some more mature computer heuristics. We’re hard at work improving our model, and now that it’s open sourced, we hope others will do the same!


By Chris Shallue, Senior Software Engineer, Google Brain Team

If you’d like to learn more, Chris is featured on the latest episode of This Week In Machine Learning & AI discussing his work.

The Building Blocks of Interpretability

Cross-posted on the Google Research Blog.

In 2015, our early attempts to visualize how neural networks understand images led to psychedelic images. Soon after, we open sourced our code as DeepDream and it grew into a small art movement producing all sorts of amazing things. But we also continued the original line of research behind DeepDream, trying to address one of the most exciting questions in Deep Learning: how do neural networks do what they do?

Last year in the online journal Distill, we demonstrated how those same techniques could show what individual neurons in a network do, rather than just what is “interesting to the network” as in DeepDream. This allowed us to see how neurons in the middle of the network are detectors for all sorts of things — buttons, patches of cloth, buildings — and see how those build up to be more and more sophisticated over the networks layers.

Visualizations of neurons in GoogLeNet. Neurons in higher layers represent higher level ideas.

While visualizing neurons is exciting, our work last year was missing something important: how do these neurons actually connect to what the network does in practice?

Today, we’re excited to publish “The Building Blocks of Interpretability,” a new Distill article exploring how feature visualization can combine together with other interpretability techniques to understand aspects of how networks make decisions. We show that these combinations can allow us to sort of “stand in the middle of a neural network” and see some of the decisions being made at that point, and how they influence the final output. For example, we can see things like how a network detects a floppy ear, and then that increases the probability it gives to the image being a “Labrador retriever” or “beagle”.

We explore techniques for understanding which neurons fire in the network. Normally, if we ask which neurons fire, we get something meaningless like “neuron 538 fired a little bit,” which isn’t very helpful even to experts. Our techniques make things more meaningful to humans by attaching visualizations to each neuron, so we can see things like “the floppy ear detector fired”. It’s almost a kind of MRI for neural networks.

We can also zoom out and show how the entire image was “perceived” at different layers. This allows us to really see the transition from the network detecting very simple combinations of edges, to rich textures and 3d structure, to high-level structures like ears, snouts, heads and legs.

These insights are exciting by themselves, but they become even more exciting when we can relate them to the final decision the network makes. So not only can we see that the network detected a floppy ear, but we can also see how that increases the probability of the image being a labrador retriever.

In addition to our paper, we’re also releasing Lucid, a neural network visualization library building off our work on DeepDream. It allows you to make the sort of lucid feature visualizations we see above, in addition to more artistic DeepDream images.

We’re also releasing colab notebooks. These notebooks make it extremely easy to use Lucid to reproduce visualizations in our article! Just open the notebook, click a button to run code — no setup required!

In colab notebooks you can click a button to run code, and see the result below.

This work only scratches the surface of the kind of interfaces that we think it’s possible to build for understanding neural networks. We’re excited to see what the community will do — and we’re excited to work together towards deeper human understanding of neural networks.

By Chris Olah, Research Scientist and Arvind Satyanarayan, Visiting Researcher, Google Brain Team

DeepVariant: Highly Accurate Genomes With Deep Neural Networks

Crossposted on the Google Research Blog

Across many scientific disciplines, but in particular in the field of genomics, major breakthroughs have often resulted from new technologies. From Sanger sequencing, which made it possible to sequence the human genome, to the microarray technologies that enabled the first large-scale genome-wide experiments, new instruments and tools have allowed us to look ever more deeply into the genome and apply the results broadly to health, agriculture and ecology.

One of the most transformative new technologies in genomics was high-throughput sequencing (HTS), which first became commercially available in the early 2000s. HTS allowed scientists and clinicians to produce sequencing data quickly, cheaply, and at scale. However, the output of HTS instruments is not the genome sequence for the individual being analyzed — for humans this is 3 billion paired bases (guanine, cytosine, adenine and thymine) organized into 23 pairs of chromosomes. Instead, these instruments generate ~1 billion short sequences, known as reads. Each read represents just 100 of the 3 billion bases, and per-base error rates range from 0.1-10%. Processing the HTS output into a single, accurate and complete genome sequence is a major outstanding challenge. The importance of this problem, for biomedical applications in particular, has motivated efforts such as the Genome in a Bottle Consortium (GIAB), which produces high confidence human reference genomes that can be used for validation and benchmarking, as well as the precisionFDA community challenges, which are designed to foster innovation that will improve the quality and accuracy of HTS-based genomic tests.

CAPTION: For any given location in the genome, there are multiple reads among the ~1 billion that include a base at that position. Each read is aligned to a reference, and then each of the bases in the read is compared to the base of the reference at that location. When a read includes a base that differs from the reference, it may indicate a variant (a difference in the true sequence), or it may be an error.

Today, we announce the open source release of DeepVariant, a deep learning technology to reconstruct the true genome sequence from HTS sequencer data with significantly greater accuracy than previous classical methods. This work is the product of more than two years of research by the Google Brain team, in collaboration with Verily Life Sciences. DeepVariant transforms the task of variant calling, as this reconstruction problem is known in genomics, into an image classification problem well-suited to Google's existing technology and expertise.

CAPTION: Each of the four images above is a visualization of actual sequencer reads aligned to a reference genome. A key question is how to use the reads to determine whether there is a variant on both chromosomes, on just one chromosome, or on neither chromosome. There is more than one type of variant, with SNPs and insertions/deletions being the most common. A: a true SNP on one chromosome pair, B: a deletion on one chromosome, C: a deletion on both chromosomes, D: a false variant caused by errors. It's easy to see that these look quite distinct when visualized in this manner.

We started with GIAB reference genomes, for which there is high-quality ground truth (or the closest approximation currently possible). Using multiple replicates of these genomes, we produced tens of millions of training examples in the form of multi-channel tensors encoding the HTS instrument data, and then trained a TensorFlow-based image classification model to identify the true genome sequence from the experimental data produced by the instruments. Although the resulting deep learning model, DeepVariant, had no specialized knowledge about genomics or HTS, within a year it had won the the highest SNP accuracy award at the precisionFDA Truth Challenge, outperforming state-of-the-art methods. Since then, we've further reduced the error rate by more than 50%.

DeepVariant is being released as open source software to encourage collaboration and to accelerate the use of this technology to solve real world problems. To further this goal, we partnered with Google Cloud Platform (GCP) to deploy DeepVariant workflows on GCP, available today, in configurations optimized for low-cost and fast turnarounds using scalable GCP technologies like the Pipelines API. This paired set of releases provides a smooth ramp for users to explore and evaluate the capabilities of DeepVariant in their current compute environment while providing a scalable, cloud-based solution to satisfy the needs of even the largest genomics datasets.

DeepVariant is the first of what we hope will be many contributions that leverage Google's computing infrastructure and ML expertise to both better understand the genome and to provide deep learning-based genomics tools to the community. This is all part of a broader goal to apply Google technologies to healthcare and other scientific applications, and to make the results of these efforts broadly accessible.

By Mark DePristo and Ryan Poplin, Google Brain Team

Tangent: Source-to-Source Debuggable Derivatives

Crossposted on the Google Research Blog

Tangent is a new, free, and open source Python library for automatic differentiation. In contrast to existing machine learning libraries, Tangent is a source-to-source system, consuming a Python function f and emitting a new Python function that computes the gradient of f. This allows much better user visibility into gradient computations, as well as easy user-level editing and debugging of gradients. Tangent comes with many more features for debugging and designing machine learning models.

• Easily debug your backward pass
• Fast gradient surgery
• Forward mode automatic differentiation
• Efficient Hessian-vector products
• Code optimizations

This post gives an overview of the Tangent API. It covers how to use Tangent to generate gradient code in Python that is easy to interpret, debug and modify.

Neural networks (NNs) have led to great advances in machine learning models for images, video, audio, and text. The fundamental abstraction that lets us train NNs to perform well at these tasks is a 30-year-old idea called reverse-mode automatic differentiation (also known as backpropagation), which comprises two passes through the NN. First, we run a “forward pass” to calculate the output value of each node. Then we run a “backward pass” to calculate a series of derivatives to determine how to update the weights to increase the model’s accuracy.

Training NNs, and doing research on novel architectures, requires us to compute these derivatives correctly, efficiently, and easily. We also need to be able to debug these derivatives when our model isn’t training well, or when we’re trying to build something new that we do not yet understand. Automatic differentiation, or just “autodiff,” is a technique to calculate the derivatives of computer programs that denote some mathematical function, and nearly every machine learning library implements it.

Existing libraries implement automatic differentiation by tracing a program’s execution (at runtime, like TF Eager, PyTorch and Autograd) or by building a dynamic data-flow graph and then differentiating the graph (ahead-of-time, like TensorFlow). In contrast, Tangent performs ahead-of-time autodiff on the Python source code itself, and produces Python source code as its output.

As a result, you can finally read your automatic derivative code just like the rest of your program. Tangent is useful to researchers and students who not only want to write their models in Python, but also read and debug automatically-generated derivative code without sacrificing speed and flexibility.

You can easily inspect and debug your models written in Tangent, without special tools or indirection. Tangent works on a large and growing subset of Python, provides extra autodiff features other Python ML libraries don’t have, is high-performance, and is compatible with TensorFlow and NumPy.

Automatic differentiation of Python code

How do we automatically generate derivatives of plain Python code? Math functions like tf.exp or tf.log have derivatives, which we can compose to build the backward pass. Similarly, pieces of syntax, such as  subroutines, conditionals, and loops, also have backward-pass versions. Tangent contains recipes for generating derivative code for each piece of Python syntax, along with many NumPy and TensorFlow function calls.

Tangent has a one-function API:

import tangent
df = tangent.grad(f)

Here’s an animated graphic of what happens when we call tangent.grad on a Python function:

If you want to print out your derivatives, you can run

import tangent
df = tangent.grad(f, verbose=1)

Under the hood, tangent.grad first grabs the source code of the Python function you pass it. Tangent has a large library of recipes for the derivatives of Python syntax, as well as TensorFlow Eager functions. The function tangent.grad then walks your code in reverse order, looks up the matching backward-pass recipe, and adds it to the end of the derivative function. This reverse-order processing gives the technique its name: reverse-mode automatic differentiation.

The function df above only works for scalar (non-array) inputs. Tangent also supports

• Using TensorFlow Eager functions, for processing arrays of numbers.
• Subroutines
• Control flow

Although we started with TensorFlow Eager support, Tangent isn’t tied to one numeric library or another—we would gladly welcome pull requests adding PyTorch or MXNet derivative recipes.

Next Steps

Tangent is open source now at github.com/google/tangent. Go check it out for download and installation instructions. Tangent is still an experiment, so expect some bugs. If you report them to us on GitHub, we will do our best to fix them quickly.

We are working to add support in Tangent for more aspects of the Python language (e.g., closures, inline function definitions, classes, more NumPy and TensorFlow functions). We also hope to add more advanced automatic differentiation and compiler functionality in the future, such as automatic trade-off between memory and compute (Griewank and Walther 2000; Gruslys et al., 2016), more aggressive optimizations, and lambda lifting.

We intend to develop Tangent together as a community. We welcome pull requests with fixes and features. Happy deriving!

By Alex Wiltschko, Research Scientist, Google Brain Team

Acknowledgments

Bart van Merriënboer contributed immensely to all aspects of Tangent during his internship, and Dan Moldovan led TF Eager integration, infrastructure and benchmarking. Also, thanks to the Google Brain team for their support of this post and special thanks to Sanders Kleinfeld and Aleks Haecky for their valuable contribution for the technical aspects of the post.

Introducing tf-seq2seq: An Open Source Sequence-to-Sequence Framework in TensorFlow

Crossposted on the Google Research Blog

Last year, we announced Google Neural Machine Translation (GNMT), a sequence-to-sequence (“seq2seq”) model which is now used in Google Translate production systems. While GNMT achieved huge improvements in translation quality, its impact was limited by the fact that the framework for training these models was unavailable to external researchers.

Today, we are excited to introduce tf-seq2seq, an open source seq2seq framework in TensorFlow that makes it easy to experiment with seq2seq models and achieve state-of-the-art results. To that end, we made the tf-seq2seq codebase clean and modular, maintaining full test coverage and documenting all of its functionality.

Our framework supports various configurations of the standard seq2seq model, such as depth of the encoder/decoder, attention mechanism, RNN cell type, or beam size. This versatility allowed us to discover optimal hyperparameters and outperform other frameworks, as described in our paper, “Massive Exploration of Neural Machine Translation Architectures.”

A seq2seq model translating from Mandarin to English. At each time step, the encoder takes in one Chinese character and its own previous state (black arrow), and produces an output vector (blue arrow). The decoder then generates an English translation word-by-word, at each time step taking in the last word, the previous state, and a weighted combination of all the outputs of the encoder (aka attention [3], depicted in blue) and then producing the next English word. Please note that in our implementation we use wordpieces [4] to handle rare words.

In addition to machine translation, tf-seq2seq can also be applied to any other sequence-to-sequence task (i.e. learning to produce an output sequence given an input sequence), including machine summarization, image captioning, speech recognition, and conversational modeling. We carefully designed our framework to maintain this level of generality and provide tutorials, preprocessed data, and other utilities for machine translation.

We hope that you will use tf-seq2seq to accelerate (or kick off) your own deep learning research. We also welcome your contributions to our GitHub repository, where we have a variety of open issues that we would love to have your help with!

Acknowledgments:
We’d like to thank Eugene Brevdo, Melody Guan, Lukasz Kaiser, Quoc V. Le, Thang Luong, and Chris Olah for all their help. For a deeper dive into how seq2seq models work, please see the resources below.

References:
[1] Massive Exploration of Neural Machine Translation Architectures, Denny Britz, Anna Goldie, Minh-Thang Luong, Quoc Le
[2] Sequence to Sequence Learning with Neural Networks, Ilya Sutskever, Oriol Vinyals, Quoc V. Le. NIPS, 2014
[3] Neural Machine Translation by Jointly Learning to Align and Translate, Dzmitry Bahdanau, Kyunghyun Cho, Yoshua Bengio. ICLR, 2015
[4] Google’s Neural Machine Translation System: Bridging the Gap between Human and Machine Translation, Yonghui Wu, Mike Schuster, Zhifeng Chen, Quoc V. Le, Mohammad Norouzi, Wolfgang Macherey, Maxim Krikun, Yuan Cao, Qin Gao, Klaus Macherey, Jeff Klingner, Apurva Shah, Melvin Johnson, Xiaobing Liu, Łukasz Kaiser, Stephan Gouws, Yoshikiyo Kato, Taku Kudo, Hideto Kazawa, Keith Stevens, George Kurian, Nishant Patil, Wei Wang, Cliff Young, Jason Smith, Jason Riesa, Alex Rudnick, Oriol Vinyals, Greg Corrado, Macduff Hughes, Jeffrey Dean. Technical Report, 2016
[5] Attention and Augmented Recurrent Neural Networks, Chris Olah, Shan Carter. Distill, 2016
[6] Neural Machine Translation and Sequence-to-sequence Models: A Tutorial, Graham Neubig
[7] Sequence-to-Sequence Models, TensorFlow.org

By Anna Goldie and Denny Britz, Research Software Engineer and Google Brain Resident, Google Brain Team

Open sourcing the Embedding Projector: a tool for visualizing high dimensional data

Originally posted on the Google Research Blog

Recent advances in machine learning (ML) have shown impressive results, with applications ranging from image recognition, language translation, medical diagnosis and more. With the widespread adoption of ML systems, it is increasingly important for research scientists to be able to explore how the data is being interpreted by the models. However, one of the main challenges in exploring this data is that it often has hundreds or even thousands of dimensions, requiring special tools to investigate the space.

To enable a more intuitive exploration process, we are open-sourcing the Embedding Projector, a web application for interactive visualization and analysis of high-dimensional data recently shown as an A.I. Experiment, as part of TensorFlow. We are also releasing a standalone version at projector.tensorflow.org, where users can visualize their high-dimensional data without the need to install and run TensorFlow.

Exploring Embeddings

The data needed to train machine learning systems comes in a form that computers don't immediately understand. To translate the things we understand naturally (e.g. words, sounds, or videos) to a form that the algorithms can process, we use embeddings, a mathematical vector representation that captures different facets (dimensions) of the data. For example, in this language embedding, similar words are mapped to points that are close to each other.

With the Embedding Projector, you can navigate through views of data in either a 2D or a 3D mode, zooming, rotating, and panning using natural click-and-drag gestures. Below is a figure showing the nearest points to the embedding for the word “important” after training a TensorFlow model using the word2vec tutorial. Clicking on any point (which represents the learned embedding for a given word) in this visualization, brings up a list of nearest points and distances, which shows which words the algorithm has learned to be semantically related. This type of interaction represents an important way in which one can explore how an algorithm is performing.

Methods of Dimensionality Reduction

The Embedding Projector offers three commonly used methods of data dimensionality reduction, which allow easier visualization of complex data: PCA, t-SNE and custom linear projections. PCA is often effective at exploring the internal structure of the embeddings, revealing the most influential dimensions in the data. t-SNE, on the other hand, is useful for exploring local neighborhoods and finding clusters, allowing developers to make sure that an embedding preserves the meaning in the data (e.g. in the MNIST dataset, seeing that the same digits are clustered together). Finally, custom linear projections can help discover meaningful "directions" in data sets - such as the distinction between a formal and casual tone in a language generation model - which would allow the design of more adaptable ML systems.

A custom linear projection of the 100 nearest points of "See attachments." onto the "yes" - "yeah" vector (“yes” is right, “yeah” is left) of a corpus of 35k frequently used phrases in emails

The Embedding Projector website includes a few datasets to play with. We’ve also made it easy for users to publish and share their embeddings with others (just click on the “Publish” button on the left pane). It is our hope that the Embedding Projector will be a useful tool to help the research community explore and refine their ML applications, as well as enable anyone to better understand how ML algorithms interpret data. If you'd like to get the full details on the Embedding Projector, you can read the paper here. Have fun exploring the world of embeddings!

By Daniel Smilkov and the Big Picture group