Flow Factorization for Efficient Generative Flow Networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Generative Flow Networks (GFlowNets) is a new family of probabilistic samplers for generating objects under an unnormalized reward distribution. It has emerged as a promising framework for learning stochastic policies that generate high-quality and diverse discrete objects proportional to their rewards, surpassing traditional reward-maximizing reinforcement learning methods. However, existing GFlowNets often suffer with data efficiency due to the direct parameterization of edge flows or dependence on backward policies that are challenging to specify or optimize, especially in high-dimensional action spaces. While the recent development of GFlowNets has primarily focused on developing alternative loss functions, we introduce a novel approach by exploring enhanced flow representations from an architectural perspective. In this paper, we propose to factorize the conventional edge flows into separate state flow and edge-based allocation streams. By introducing an effective method to synergistically combine these two streams to estimate the flows, we develop Bifurcated Generative Flow Networks (BN), a practical implementation to improve learning efficiency. We conduct extensive experiments on various standard benchmarks, and results show that BN significantly improves learning efficiency and effectiveness compared to state-of-the-art baselines.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".