Learning to Sample Effective and Diverse Prompts for Text-to-Image Generation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recent advances in text-to-image diffusion models have achieved impressive image generation capabilities. However, it remains challenging to control the generation process with desired properties (e.g., aesthetic quality, user intention), which can be expressed as black-box reward functions. In this paper, we focus on prompt adaptation, which refines the original prompt into model-preferred prompts to generate desired images. While prior work uses reinforcement learning (RL) to optimize prompts, we observe that applying RL often results in generating similar postfixes and deterministic behaviors. To this end, we introduce Prompt Adaptation with GFlowNets (PAG), a novel approach that frames prompt adaptation as a probabilistic inference problem. Our key insight is that leveraging Generative Flow Networks (GFlowNets) allows us to shift from reward max-imization to sampling from an unnormalized density function, enabling both high-quality and diverse prompt generation. However, we identify that a naive application of GFlowNets suffers from mode collapse and uncovers a previously overlooked phenomenon: the progressive loss of neural plasticity in the model, which is compounded by inefficient credit assignment in sequential prompt generation. To address this critical challenge, we develop a systematic approach in PAG with flow reactivation, reward-prioritized sampling, and reward decomposition for prompt adaptation. Extensive experiments validate that PAG successfully learns to sample effective and diverse prompts for text-to-image generation. We also show that PAG exhibits strong robustness across various reward functions and transferability to different text-to-image models.
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 | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".