Independently Recurrent Neural Network (IndRNN): Building A Longer and Deeper RNN
Open accessAbstract
Recurrent neural networks (RNNs) have been widely used for processing sequential data. However, RNNs are commonly difficult to train due to the well-known gradient vanishing and exploding problems and hard to learn long-term patterns. Long short-term memory (LSTM) and gated recurrent unit (GRU) were developed to address these problems, but the use of hyperbolic tangent and the sigmoid action functions results in gradient decay over layers. Consequently, construction of an efficiently trainable deep network is challenging. In addition, all the neurons in an RNN layer are entangled together and their behaviour is hard to interpret. To address these problems, a new type of RNN, referred to as independently recurrent neural network (IndRNN), is proposed in this paper, where neurons in the same layer are independent of each other and they are connected across layers. We have shown that an IndRNN can be easily regulated to prevent the gradient exploding and vanishing problems while allowing the network to learn long-term dependencies. Moreover, an IndRNN can work with non-saturated activation functions such as relu (rectified linear unit) and be still trained robustly. Multiple IndRNNs can be stacked to construct a network that is deeper than the existing RNNs. Experimental results have shown that the proposed IndRNN is able to process very long sequences (over 5000 time steps), can be used to construct very deep networks (21 layers used in the experiment) and still be trained robustly. Better performances have been achieved on various tasks by using IndRNNs compared with the traditional RNN and LSTM.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Long short-term memory and gated recurrent linear units were developed to handle the long-term dependency constraint and gradient vanishing problem with impressive results.
“To this end, several popular variants have been developed to efficiently handle this constraint and the gradient vanishing problem with impressive results, including long short-term memory (LSTM) [13] and gated recurrent linear units (GRU) [14].”
From A survey on deep multimodal learning for computer vision: advances, trends, applications, and datasets (2022) · cites this paper as [14]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 49 · Cited by 972
- Authors
- Li, S., Li, W., Cook, C., Zhu, C., & Gao, Y.
- Affiliations
- University of Wollongong (AU)
- University of Electronic Science and Technology of China (CN)
- Venue
- 2018 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition
- Publisher
- IEEE
- Published
- 2018-06
- Pages
- 5457-5466
- ISSN
- 1063-6919 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2964347220
- Cited by
- 972
- References
- 49
- Citations by year
- 2026: 34 · 2025: 107 · 2024: 148 · 2023: 145 · 2022: 148 · 2021: 160 · 2020: 136 · 2019: 77 · 2018: 17
- FWCI
- 39.80
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- Locations
- IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition/Proceedings - IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition/Proceedings (publishedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- Research Online (University of Wollongong) (submittedVersion)
- Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- arXiv (Cornell University)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Neural Networks and Applications
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Environmental Engineering › Hydrological Forecasting Using AI
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Topic Modeling
- Keywords
- recurrent neural networks, long short-term memory, gated recurrent unit, gradient vanishing, long-range dependencies, rectified linear units, sequence processing
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review