Organizations: The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology (Guangzhou), Guangzhou, China · SandGold AI Research, Guangzhou, China · The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, Hong Kong SAR, China · Southern University of Science and Technology, Shenzhen, China
Existing image SR and generic diffusion models transfer poorly to fluid SR: they are sampling-intensive, ignore physical constraints, and often yield spectral mismatch and spurious divergence. We address fluid super-resolution (SR) with ReMD (Residual-Multigrid Diffusion), a physics-consistent diffusion framework. At each reverse step, ReMD performs a multigrid residual correction: the update direction is obtained by coupling data consistency with lightweight physics cues and then correcting the residual across scales; the multiscale hierarchy is instantiated with a multi-wavelet basis to capture both large structures and fine vortical details. This coarse-to-fine design accelerates convergence and preserves fine structures while remaining equation-free. Across atmospheric and oceanic benchmarks, ReMD improves accuracy and spectral fidelity, reduces divergence, and reaches comparable quality with markedly fewer sampling steps than diffusion baselines. Our results show that enforcing physics consistency inside the diffusion process via multigrid residual correction and multi-wavelet multiscale modeling is an effective route to efficient fluid SR. Our code are available on https://github.com/lizhihao2022/ReMD.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: Qualitative comparison on NS ( × 2 ) and ERA5 ( × 4 ). Each block shows (left) a zoomed LR input u0 , (top row) HR reconstructions, and (bottom row) absolute error maps w.r.t. ground truth (shared color scale per block). With only 5 reverse steps, ReMD yields (NS) sharper filaments/coherent fronts and (ERA5) preserved mesoscale shear bands while suppressing ringing/stripe artifacts seen in EDSR/FNO/SwinIR, and achieves lower errors than ResShift despite requiring 5 vs. 15 steps.
Figure 2: Overview of ReMD. Starting from a coarse LR initial solution, the reverse diffusion steps refine the HR estimate ut while a multigrid residual correction module combines data-consistency and physics residuals in the wavelet domain, yielding the final HR field u^ .
Model
NS
ERA5
Ocean
RMSE ↓
PSNR ↑
SSIM ↑
RMSE ↓
PSNR ↑
SSIM ↑
RMSE ↓
PSNR ↑
SSIM ↑
EDSR
2.97E-02
46.89
0.996
9.06E-02
57.13
0.998
1.36E-02
47.48
0.982
FNO
4.42E-02
43.44
0.988
1.35E-01
53.69
0.997
1.67E-02
45.74
0.974
MWT
8.45E-02
37.81
0.970
6.13E-01
40.53
0.968
4.55E-02
37.03
0.852
HiNOTE
8.03E-02
38.25
0.973
2.12E-01
49.76
0.994
1.99E-02
44.21
0.964
Galerkin
5.32E-02
41.83
0.981
3.45E-01
45.51
0.988
3.75E-02
38.70
0.890
Table 1: Quantitative comparison on three fluid SR benchmarks. NS ( 2× ), ERA5 ( 4× ), and Ocean ( 4× ). We report RMSE ↓ , PSNR ↑ , and SSIM ↑ . Bold denotes the best and underline the second-best within each dataset/metric block. ReMD attains the lowest errors and top (or tied) perceptual scores across datasets while using only 2–5 reverse steps, compared with 15 steps for the ResShift baseline.
Figure 3: Error–energy spectrum on ERA5 (, × 4,). Radial average of the Fourier‐domain error (log scale on y) versus frequency (x). Vertical dashed lines mark the LR Nyquist band and the transition toward the HR band. ReMD-5 (red) maintains the lowest error from large to high scales, remaining below ResShift-15 , FNO and image-SR baselines (EDSR, SwinIR), indicating superior spectral fidelity.
Figure 4: Patch-level comparison on NS ( × 4). Left: zoomed LR input. Black boxes highlight frontal bands; gray boxes mark small eddies. ReMD–5 recovers sharper, HR-like fronts and coherent vortices with fewer steps than ResShift–15, while avoiding texture/aliasing artifacts seen in image-SR baselines and blockiness in FNO, and remaining consistent with the LR content.
Model Configuration
RMSE ↓
PSNR ↑
SSIM ↑
w/o Residual correction
1.38E-02
47.37
0.981
w/o smoothing residual
1.40E-02
47.28
0.981
w/o diffusion residual
1.40E-02
47.26
0.981
w/o Spectrum residual
1.41E-02
47.20
0.981
ReMD (Baseline)
1.33E-02
47.71
0.983
Table 2: Ablation study ( Ocean , 4× SR). Removing the MG corrector (“w/o residual correction”) or any physics residual (smoothing, anisotropic diffusion, spectrum) degrades all metrics; dropping the spectrum term yields the largest deterioration.
Metrics
Methods
EDSR
FNO
MWT
HiNOTE
Galerkin
SwinIR
SR3
Resshift
ReMD-2
ReMD-5
RMSE ↓
2.97E-02
4.42E-02
8.45E-02
8.03E-02
5.32E-02
3.63E-02
3.34E-01
2.21E-02
2.11E-02
2.09E-02
PSNR ↑
46.89
43.44
37.81
38.25
41.83
45.15
25.87
49.47
49.84
49.94
Param Count
1367553
684065
272605
420618
703777
3696633
93868033
112366821
118584941
Param(MB)
5.22
5.17
1.75
1.61
2.68
17.85
358.17
428.65
455.55
Training Time (s/epoch)
8.87
4.78
1.72
57.91
146.25
86.26
53.48
64.1
100.33
Table 3: Efficiency on the NS. We report accuracy (RMSE ↓ /PSNR ↑ ), parameter size, and wall-time (training time per epoch; inference time in seconds). Diffusion baselines (SR3, ResShift-15) incur high sampling cost; ReMD-5 attains the best accuracy with fewer steps and lower inference time than ResShift, while ReMD-2 is the fastest with competitive accuracy.
Model
VE ↓
EE ↓
GED ↓
RMSE ( ×8 ) ↓
FNO
5.01E-03
2.57E-05
5.45E-02
3.76E-01
EDSR
6.43E-03
9.41E-05
4.38E-03
3.39E-01
SwinIR
6.16E-03
6.86E-05
5.10E-03
3.34E-01
LIIF
4.99E-03
2.08E-05
6.14E-03
3.32E-01
ResShift
3.26E-03
1.11E-05
4.51E-03
3.49E-01
ReMD (ours)
2.34E-03
3.56E-06
4.24E-03
3.23E-01
Table 4: Physics-related metrics (lower is better ↓ ). VE/EE are vorticity/enstrophy errors on NS2D ( ×4 ). GED is the energy discrepancy on ERA5_uo ( ×4 ). The last column reports RMSE on ERA5_uo ×8 super-resolution.
Figure 5: Time–RMSE trade-off on ERA5_uo ( ×4 SR). Each point varies the sampling steps; lower-left is better.
Diffusion models (DMs) have demonstrated remarkable success in real-world image super-resolution (SR), yet their reliance on time-consuming multi-step sampling largely hinders their practical applications. While recent efforts have introduced few- or single-step solutions, existing methods either inefficiently model the process from noisy input or fail to fully exploit iterative generative priors, compromising the fidelity and quality of the reconstructed images. To address this issue, we propose FlowSR, a novel approach that reformulates the SR problem as a rectified flow from low-resolution (LR) to high-resolution (HR) images. Our method leverages an improved consistency learning strategy to enable high-quality SR in a single step. Specifically, we refine the original consistency distillation process by incorporating HR regularization, ensuring that the learned SR flow not only enforces self-consistency but also converges precisely to the ground-truth HR target. Furthermore, we introduce a fast-slow scheduling strategy, where adjacent timesteps for consistency learning are sampled from two distinct schedulers: a fast scheduler with fewer timesteps to improve efficiency, and a slow scheduler with more timesteps to capture fine-grained texture details. Extensive experiments demonstrate that FlowSR achieves outstanding performance in both efficiency and image quality. Code: this https URL.
Jiaqi Xu, Wenbo Li, Haoze Sun +8
The Chinese University of Hong Kong · Huawei Noah’s Ark Lab · HKUST (GZ) +1
The effectiveness of super resolution (SR) models hinges on their ability to recover high frequency structure without introducing artifacts. Diffusion based approaches have recently advanced the state of the art in SR. However, most diffusion based SR pipelines operate purely in the spatial domain, which may yield high frequency details that are not well supported by the underlying low resolution evidence. On the other hand, unlike supervised SR models that may inject dataset specific textures, single image SR relies primarily on internal image statistics and can therefore be less prone to dataset-driven hallucinations; nevertheless, ambiguity in the LR observation can still lead to inconsistent high frequency details. To tackle this problem, we introduce BATDiff, an unsupervised Bivariate A trous Wavelet Diffusion model designed to provide structured cross scale guidance during the generative process. BATDiff employs an a Trous wavelet transform that constructs an undecimated multiscale representation in which high frequency components are progressively revealed while the full spatial resolution is preserved. As the core inference mechanism, BATDiff includes a bivariate cross scale module that models parent child dependencies between adjacent scales. It improves high frequency coherence and reduces mismatch artifacts in diffusion based SR. Experiments on standard benchmarks demonstrate that BATDiff produces sharper and more structurally consistent reconstructions than existing diffusion and non diffusion baselines, achieving improvements in fidelity and perceptual quality.
Most super-resolution models learn from paired data by supervising only the final high-resolution output. This provides little control over how the prediction should evolve between the downsampled observation and its fine target. We introduce GalerkinFlow, an equation-agnostic framework that turns each coarse--fine pair into supervision along an entire reconstruction path. At a random sample of intermediate states on the reconstruction path, the model predicts the coarse-to-fine residual velocity and uses coarse-anchor point to define a pseudo-endpoint. We show that the reconstruction loss of this pseudo-endpoint is exactly related to the intermediate velocity loss through a known time-dependent weight. Consequently, every intermediate state contributes supervision toward the same fine target, rather than serving only as an internal step toward an endpoint loss. Because intermediate states already reveal part of the missing fine-scale structure, we additionally supervise the coarse endpoint used during one-step inference. A finite-difference objective further constrains local spatial variation. GalerkinFlow combines convolutional features with scale-conditioned Galerkin operator mixing and requires no governing equation or physical metadata. It achieves the lowest raw-space errors among the evaluated equation-agnostic baselines on Navier--Stokes and Darcy Flow, while remaining competitive on DIV2K.