MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4393154888 · doi:10.1609/aaai.v38i3.28021

Rethinking Peculiar Images by Diffusion Models: Revealing Local Minima’s Role

2024· article· en· W4393154888 on OpenAlexaff
Jinhyeok Jang, Chan‐Hyun Youn, Minsu Jeon, Changha Lee

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicHandwritten Text Recognition Techniques
Canadian institutionsKootenay Association for Science & Technology
FundersKorea Coast GuardKorea Aerospace IndustriesKorea Institute of Marine Science and Technology promotion
KeywordsMaxima and minimaDiffusionEconomic geographyGeographySociologyPhysicsMathematicsMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent significant advancements in diffusion models have revolutionized image generation, enabling the synthesis of highly realistic images with text-based guidance. These breakthroughs have paved the way for constructing datasets via generative artificial intelligence (AI), offering immense potential for various applications. However, two critical challenges hinder the widespread adoption of synthesized data: computational cost and the generation of peculiar images. While computational costs have improved through various approaches, the issue of peculiar image generation remains relatively unexplored. Existing solutions rely on heuristics, extra training, or AI-based post-processing to mitigate this problem. In this paper, we present a novel approach to address both issues simultaneously. We establish that both gradient descent and diffusion sampling are specific cases of the generalized expectation maximization algorithm. We hypothesize and empirically demonstrate that peculiar image generation is akin to the local minima problem in optimization. Inspired by optimization techniques, we apply naive momentum and positive-negative momentum to diffusion sampling. Last, we propose new metrics to evaluate the peculiarity. Experimental results show momentum effectively prevents peculiar image generation without extra computation.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.956
Threshold uncertainty score0.926

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.055
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.229 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial IntelligenceSame topicHandwritten Text Recognition TechniquesFrench-language works237,207