GASS: Geometry-Aware Spherical Sampling for Disentangled Diversity Enhancement in Text-to-Image Generation
Authors: Ye Zhu, Kaleb S. Newman, Johannes F. Lutzeyer, Adriana Romero-Soriano, Michal Drozdzal, Olga Russakovsky
Organizations: Laboratoire d’Informatique (LIX), CNRS, École Polytechnique, IPP, France · Department of Computer Science, Princeton University, USA · FAIR at Meta - Montreal, Canada · McGill University, Canada · Mila, Quebec AI Institute, Canada · Canada CIFAR AI chair
Despite high semantic alignment, modern text-to-image (T2I) generative models still struggle to synthesize diverse images from a given prompt. In this work, we enhance the T2I diversity through a geometric lens. Unlike most existing methods that rely primarily on entropy-based guidance to increase sample dissimilarity, we introduce Geometry-Aware Spherical Sampling (GASS) to enhance diversity by explicitly controlling both prompt-dependent and prompt-independent sources of variation. Specifically, we decompose the diversity measure in CLIP embeddings using two orthogonal directions: the text embedding, which captures semantic variation related to the prompt, and an identified orthogonal direction that captures prompt-independent variation (e.g., backgrounds). Based on this decomposition, GASS increases the geometric projection spread of generated image embeddings along both axes and guides the T2I sampling process via expanded predictions along the generation trajectory. Our experiments on different frozen T2I backbones (U-Net and DiT, diffusion and flow) and benchmarks demonstrate the effectiveness of disentangled diversity enhancement with minimal impact on image fidelity and semantic alignment.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: Illustration of our geometric decomposition of sample diversity and GASS enhancement method in CLIP space. We decompose the diversity of generated image batches from T2I models in the CLIP hypersphere along two orthogonal axes: text embedding et (i.e., prompt-dependent) and our identified direction uind (i.e., prompt-independent). Our GASS method explicitly expands the geometric spread along both axes, thus enhancing the diversity of generated images across prompt-dependent content (e.g., object viewing angles) and prompt-independent visual attributes (e.g., backgrounds).
Figure 2: Illustration of our proposed Geometry-Aware Spherical Sampling (GASS) method. At the generation inference step t , original T2I sampling first estimates the predicted clean image x^0∣t based on the intermediate noisy samples xt , and then predict the noise we should remove from xt to get xt−1 . Our GASS alters the predicted clean image from x^0∣t to x^0∣t∗ through the geometric expansion (see Sec. 4.1 ) and the gradient-based optimization (see Sec. 4.2 ), thus guiding the iterative sampling process with frozen generative backbones.
Img Source
ClipScore
Ddep
Dind
SPP
SD2.1
0.303 ± 0.03
0.071 ± 0.02
0.075 ± 0.02
0.146 ± 0.04
SD3-M
0.302 ± 0.02
0.060 ± 0.03
0.065 ± 0.03
0.126 ± 0.05
Real
0.293 ± 0.02
0.110 ± 0.03
0.110 ± 0.02
0.220 ± 0.05
Table 1: Quantitative comparison of spherical spread scores (SPP) between generated and real images. Real images show greater coverage spread than generated ones in both prompt-dependent ( Ddep ) and prompt-independent ( Dind ) measures. Mean and std reported over 1000 classes from ImageNet.
Figure 3: Non-cherry-picked qualitative comparisons with other diversity enhancement methods on ImageNet ( Russakovsky et al., 2015 ) and Drawbench ( Saharia et al., 2022 ) . Compared to other methods (i.e., PG ( Corso et al., 2024 ) , CADS ( Sadat et al., 2024 ) , IG ( Kynkäänniemi et al., 2024 ) , and SPELL ( Kirchhof et al., 2025 ) ), our proposed GASS generates images with both richer semantic variation (e.g., object poses and layout) and more detailed and diverse backgrounds.
Base Models
SD2.1
SD3-M
Methods
Density ↑
Coverage ↑
VS ↑
ClipScore ↑
SPP ↑
Density ↑
Coverage ↑
VS ↑
ClipScore ↑
SPP ↑
Vanilla Guidance (CFG)
1.130
0.623
31.826
0.308
0.143
1.105
0.588
28.119
0.308
0.137
PG-ICLR’24
1.039
0.614
32.082
0.309
0.146
1.103
0.586
28.119
0.308
0.129
CADS-ICLR’24
0.897
0.567
28.935
0.306
0.142
1.374
0.636
28.456
0.309
0.133
IG-NeurIPS’24
0.901
0.574
28.935
0.306
0.140
1.389
0.627
27.415
0.310
0.129
SPELL-ICML’25
0.912
0.578
32.601
0.305
0.144
1.105
0.585
28.433
0.302
0.128
Table 2: Quantitative evaluations on ImageNet with SD2.1 and SD3-M as base T2I models.
Base Models
SD2.1
SD3-M
Methods
VS ↑
ImageReward ↑
ClipScore ↑
SPP ↑
VS ↑
ImageReward ↑
ClipScore ↑
SPP ↑
Vanilla Guidance (CFG)
8.599
0.217
0.306
0.122
8.115
0.779
0.318
0.113
PG-ICLR’24
8.637
0.231
0.306
0.121
8.002
0.799
0.318
0.113
CADS-ICLR’24
8.784
0.173
0.305
0.125
8.118
0.726
0.316
0.112
IG-NeurIPS’24
8.761
0.215
0.306
0.125
8.002
0.798
0.318
0.112
SPELL-ICML’25
8.726
0.205
0.305
0.131
8.166
0.671
0.315
0.112
Table 3: Quantitative evaluations on DrawBench with SD2.1 and SD3-M as base T2I models.
Prompt
VS ↑
ImageReward ↑
ClipScore ↑
SPP ↑
Short
8.301 → 8.535
0.748 → 0.698
0.322 → 0.321
0.113 → 0.121
Medium
7.663 → 7.918
1.115 → 1.043
0.318 → 0.322
0.103 → 0.107
Long
7.549 → 7.935
0.572 → 0.622
0.310 → 0.310
0.092 → 0.099
Table 4: Quantitative analysis w.r.t. different levels of prompt complexities from Drawbench. We show the performance change compared to the CFG baseline. For instance, 8.301 → 8.535 means that the metric changes from 8.301 (CFG baseline) to 8.535 (with GASS).
Figure 4: GASS controls the source of diversity by expanding the geometric spread along specified directions. Specially, GASS on prompt-dependent axis et diversifies images through variations via poses and layout, while expansion along prompt-independent direction uind changes attributes like background and styles.
Method
VS ↑
ImageReward ↑
ClipScore ↑
SPP ↑
IP
8.203
0.774
0.308
0.113
RD
8.206
0.778
0.313
0.113
GASS
8.212
0.778
0.320
0.114
Table 5: Ablation results on different strategies for constructing the decomposition basis. IP stands for Isotropic Perturbation, and RD represents Random Direction.
GASS Variants
VS ↑
ImageReward ↑
ClipScore ↑
SPP ↑
w/o Norm.
8.876
0.732
0.313
0.123
rdep=0 , rind=0.02
8.207
0.787
0.319
0.111
rdep=0.02 , rind=0
8.206
0.780
0.320
0.112
rdep=rind=0.02
8.212
0.778
0.320
0.114
rdep=rind=0.05
8.205
0.778
0.320
0.112
t=10 (consecutive)
8.215
0.808
0.318
0.114
Table 6: Additional ablation results of GASS variants. We show the impact of the re-normalization technique, expansion range, and perturbation steps on Drawbench.
Figure 5: GASS still introduces generated image diversity, even when provided with more complex text prompts.
Figure 6: GASS can be applied sparsely on early consecutive or uniform perturbation steps along the T2I generation trajectories. The early consecutive scheduler tends to generate images with lower color saturation compared to the uniform counterpart.
Appendix figures & tables4 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
Backbone
Method
Hyperparameters
SD3-M
IG-NeurIPS’24
σ∈(0.2,0.8]
PG-ICLR’24
power coeff = 30.0
CADS-ICLR’24
τ1=0.9,τ2=1.20,s=0.10,ψ=1.0
SPELL-ICML’25
λ=1.6,r=250
SD2.1
IG-NeurIPS’24
σ∈(0.1,0.9]
PG-ICLR’24
power coeff = 30.0
Appendix
Table 7: Hyperparameter settings for different baseline methods across SD2.1 and SD3-M.
Figure 7: Additional non-cherry-picked qualitative results comparison with other methods on ImageNet with the example class ”goldfish” .
Figure 8: Additional non-cherry-picked qualitative results comparison with other methods on Drawbench.
Figure 9: Failure case analysis. (Left): A small number of images still resemble the original ones after GASS. (Right:) When the base models can’t generate accurate counts specified by the prompt, despite GASS introducing extra diversity, it is less likely to correct these inconsistencies by itself.
Text-to-image generation creates images from natural-language prompts using generative models, with research focused on fidelity, control, efficiency, and safety.
Recent text-to-image models built on large-scale Transformer backbones and flow-based objectives deliver strong text-image alignment and high visual quality, yet often produce overly similar samples under a fixed prompt. Existing diversity-enhancement methods alleviate this issue, but typically require expensive sampling or auxiliary optimization, incurring non-trivial overhead. To investigate the root cause of this homogeneity, we examine intermediate Transformer features and observe that the zero-frequency spatial average (DC) component rapidly converges across seeds early in generation, causing early trajectory lock-in that limits downstream variation. Building on this observation, we propose DC Attenuation for diVersity Enhancement (DAVE), a training-free representation-level intervention that selectively attenuates this component in the early regime. DAVE preserves the sampling pipeline with negligible overhead, improving prompt-consistent diversity while maintaining competitive image quality.
Dahee Kwon, Haeun Lee, Jaesik Choi
Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology (KAIST) · INEEJI
Text-to-image (T2I) platforms typically return several images per prompt so users can explore different visual interpretations and choose one that matches their intent. However, T2I models are usually optimized for single-image quality which comes at a cost of multi-image diversity, limiting this exploration. Diversity is also contextual: one user wants variations in background, while another wants them in artistic style, and the same user may later want variations in clothing. The generated images should differ along whatever axis the user cares about. In this paper, we introduce T-DIG, a text-conditioned diversity framework for image generation and editing. T-DIG is an iterative framework comprising multiple modules that lets users type prompts, inspect default generations, request variations using natural language, and continue refining outputs until they're satisfied. At its core, T-DIG uses an LLM policy that produces K axis-conditioned prompts or edit instructions for a frozen generator or editor. We train this policy with GRPO using a text-conditioned diversity reward and alignment penalties. Because the image generator remains frozen, T-DIG applies to open-weight, distilled, and proprietary models. We also release the first dataset for text-conditioned prompt diversity in image generation, with the training and validation splits built from human-written axes and a test set drawn from real user interactions with T-DIG. T-DIG far exceeds baselines in improving text-conditioned diversity, while preserving base-prompt alignment across a variety of metrics and human judgements. We show that user-directed diversity exploration can be added to a wide range of image generation models, open and closed, without the need to access their weights. Website: https://image-study.org/t-dig/
Simran Khanuja, Rohit Gandikota, Gaurav Parmar +1
Carnegie Mellon University · Northeastern University
Image diversity remains a fundamental challenge for text-to-image diffusion models. Low-diversity generation often leads to repetitive outputs, increasing sampling redundancy and hindering both creative exploration and downstream applications. A key factor is the tendency of diffusion models to collapse toward strong modes in the learned distribution. Existing attempts to improve diversity, such as steering-based guidance, often introduce distortions that degrade image quality. To address this issue, we propose Token-Prompt Embedding Space Optimization (TPSO), a training-free and model-agnostic module. TPSO introduces learnable parameters to explore underrepresented regions of the token embedding space, reducing the tendency to repeatedly sample from strong modes of the distribution. Meanwhile, a prompt-level semantic constraint regulates distribution shifts, preventing quality degradation while preserving semantic fidelity. Extensive experiments on MS-COCO across three representative diffusion backbones demonstrate that TPSO substantially improves diversity, boosting performance from 1.10 to 4.18, while maintaining image quality with only a modest inference-time overhead of 3.6% to 8.9%. Code is available at: https://github.com/Open-Debin/TPSO.
Debin Meng, Chen Jin, Zheng Gao +3
Queen Mary University of London · Centre for AI, AstraZeneca, UK · University of Bedfordshire +1