MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7104448482 · doi:10.71781/10312

Learning generative models from a control perspective

2025· dissertation· en· W7104448482 on OpenAlexfundno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen MIND · 2025
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicGenerative Adversarial Networks and Image Synthesis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSamsungInstitute for Catastrophic Loss ReductionNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institute for Advanced Research
KeywordsGenerative grammarInferenceGenerative modelProbabilistic logicPerspective (graphical)Generative DesignGraphStatistical model

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The main topic of this thesis is to bridge two important domains in machine learning: probabilistic generative models and control methods. Generative models are used for modeling distributions of various kinds of data and are of great importance in creative generation applications. Generative models can also be used for versatile probabilistic inference tasks, such as posterior solving or normalizing factor estimation, which are important in many scientific applications. The focus of this thesis is to study how control insights can guide us to design better generative modeling algorithms, for example, achieving a better trade-off between exploration and exploitation. We present a series of our works on this aspect. In the first work, we propose energy-based GFlowNet to jointly train a GFlowNet as well as an energy-based model for modeling discrete data. For continuous distributions, we investigate how to train a hierarchical variational model as a GFlowNet in a diffusion-like way. Lastly, we extend our approach to graph combinatorial optimization problems to sample high-quality solutions. Together, these contributions advance sample quality and steerability of generative models through new training objectives and inference techniques. Last but not least, we outline ongoing and future work from both the algorithmic perspective and the applicative angles in the last chapter.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.753
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.263 · 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.

Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen MINDSame topicGenerative Adversarial Networks and Image SynthesisFrench-language works237,207