| ▲ | programjames 4 hours ago | |
It is a good post, but is missing the connection to continuous normalizing flows. Diffusion models, flow matching, consistency models are biased approximations of continuous normalizing flows (which themselves have some slight biases, but less). Adversarial losses can somewhat help with bias (e.g. RL, GANs), but training those has issues. | ||
| ▲ | programjames 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] | |
As explanation, something I wrote previously: The most common approach to modeling continuous distributions is to train a reversible model f that maps it to another continuous distribution P that is already known. The original image can be recovered by tracking the bits needed to encode its latent, as well as the reverse path:
This technique is known as normalizing flows, as usually a normal distribution is chosen for the known distribution. The second term can be a little hard to compute, so diffusion models approximate it by using a stochastic PDE for the mapping. When f is a solution to an ordinary differential equation,
then
The last equality is known as Hutchison's estimator. Switching to a stochastic PDE
and tracking the difference δx = x′ − x, the mean-squared error approximately satisfies
which is close to Hutchinson's estimator, but weighted a little strange. | ||
| ▲ | benanne 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | |
I briefly covered that connection in an earlier blog post: https://sander.ai/2023/07/20/perspectives.html#flow ... but it's definitely something that might deserve a longer-form treatment at some point :) | ||