Adaptive Moments are Surprisingly Effective for Plug-and-Play Diffusion Sampling
Organizations: Cornell University
Abstract
Guided diffusion sampling relies on approximating often intractable likelihood scores, which introduces significant noise into the sampling dynamics. We propose using adaptive moment estimation to stabilize these noisy likelihood scores during sampling. Despite its simplicity, our approach achieves state-of-the-art results on image restoration and class-conditional generation tasks, outperforming more complicated methods, which are often computationally more expensive. We provide empirical analysis of our method on both synthetic and real data, demonstrating that mitigating gradient noise through adaptive moments offers an effective way to improve alignment.
Figures & tables
Appendix figures & tables16 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
| Inpainting | Super Resolution 4x | Super Resolution 16x | Gaussian Deblur 3 | Gaussian Deblur 12 | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Method | LPIPS | FID | IS | LPIPS | FID | IS | LPIPS | FID | IS | LPIPS | FID | IS | LPIPS | FID | IS |
| GDM | 0.30 | 66.83 | 36.85 | 0.48 | 63.73 | 26.34 | 0.48 | 49.41 | 30.11 | 0.48 | 65.04 | 24.69 | 0.50 | 51.97 | 27.76 |
| RED-diff | 0.31 | 75.86 | 36.60 | 0.20 | 30.42 | 102.09 | 0.57 | 100.30 | 9.66 | 0.27 | 40.13 | 76.44 | 0.52 | 209.90 | 5.85 |
| DPS | 0.16 | 27.79 | 132.32 | 0.19 | 26.43 | 128.03 | 0.30 | 35.55 | 60.02 | 0.23 | 27.66 | 109.29 | 0.34 | 40.25 | 45.07 |
| LGD | 0.18 | 37.37 | 89.52 | 0.24 | 31.97 | 105.63 | 0.32 | 38.10 | 49.85 | 0.31 | 37.02 | 74.39 | 0.39 | 46.11 | 36.46 |
| MPGD | 0.45 | 142.47 | 14.47 | 0.16 | 27.75 | 120.52 | 0.35 | 52.66 | 35.93 | 0.23 | 31.18 | 107.18 | 0.38 | 52.11 | 34.34 |
| Super Resolution 8x | Super Resolution 12x | Gaussian Deblur 6 | Gaussian Deblur 9 | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Method | LPIPS | FID | IS | LPIPS | FID | IS | LPIPS | FID | IS | LPIPS | FID | IS |
| DPS | 0.23 | 29.02 | 88.64 | 0.26 | 32.63 | 71.02 | 0.26 | 31.39 | 71.41 | 0.30 | 36.65 | 54.54 |
| TFG | 0.22 | 31.76 | 79.87 | 0.27 | 41.54 | 52.95 | 0.29 | 35.43 | 63.57 | 0.33 | 42.91 | 46.36 |
| TFG | 0.22 | 31.56 | 80.09 | 0.27 | 37.08 | 57.60 | 0.26 | 33.21 | 72.71 | 0.32 | 40.15 | 49.85 |
| TFG | 0.22 | 32.26 | 76.58 | 0.27 | 39.84 | 53.69 | 0.26 | 33.58 | 73.29 | 0.31 | 39.58 | 49.63 |
| AdamDPS | 0.19 | 24.36 | 117.35 | 0.23 | 27.60 | 85.87 | 0.23 | 27.26 | 90.08 | 0.28 | 33.63 | 62.14 |
| Inpainting | Super Resolution 4x | Super Resolution 16x | Gaussian Deblur 3 | Gaussian Deblur 12 | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Method | LPIPS | FID | LPIPS | FID | LPIPS | FID | LPIPS | FID | LPIPS | FID |
| GDM | 0.32 | 80.77 | 0.40 | 60.26 | 0.44 | 52.76 | 0.42 | 58.80 | 0.46 | 58.48 |
| RED-diff | 0.22 | 40.72 | 0.12 | 22.04 | 0.35 | 103.73 | 0.16 | 32.82 | 0.40 | 120.05 |
| DPS | 0.13 | 17.13 | 0.14 | 17.74 | 0.25 | 30.68 | 0.18 | 23.58 | 0.29 | 34.74 |
| LGD | 0.17 | 35.29 | 0.14 | 19.63 | 0.27 | 35.15 | 0.20 | 25.72 | 0.33 | 40.10 |
| MPGD | 0.42 | 76.60 | 0.09 | 15.70 | 0.28 | 44.16 | 0.14 | 20.88 | 0.32 | 49.50 |
| Super Resolution 8x | Super Resolution 12x | Gaussian Deblur 6 | Gaussian Deblur 9 | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Method | LPIPS | FID | LPIPS | FID | LPIPS | FID | LPIPS | FID |
| DPS | 0.21 | 25.36 | 0.22 | 25.22 | 0.22 | 26.99 | 0.26 | 31.44 |
| TFG | 0.17 | 23.70 | 0.22 | 31.46 | 0.24 | 31.36 | 0.27 | 38.37 |
| TFG | 0.16 | 22.10 | 0.22 | 29.77 | 0.21 | 27.40 | 0.27 | 36.95 |
| TFG | 0.17 | 23.18 | 0.21 | 29.02 | 0.20 | 26.25 | 0.25 | 33.75 |
| AdamDPS | 0.16 | 19.45 | 0.20 | 22.64 | 0.20 | 24.32 | 0.23 | 26.48 |
| DDPM | DDIM | |||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| LPIPS | FID | LPIPS | FID | |||||||||||||
| Method | 100 | 50 | 25 | 12 | 100 | 50 | 25 | 12 | 100 | 50 | 25 | 12 | 100 | 50 | 25 | 12 |
| DPS | 0.30 | 0.33 | 0.42 | 0.58 | 35.55 | 44.54 | 62.21 | 154.29 | 0.31 | 0.34 | 0.45 | 0.57 | 41.50 | 43.62 | 51.34 | 58.01 |
| TFG | 0.32 | 0.34 | 0.39 | 0.50 | 42.92 | 44.55 | 52.35 | 118.59 | 0.35 | 0.35 | 0.35 | 0.41 | 58.38 | 59.20 | 53.84 | 60.34 |
| AdamDPS | 0.27 | 0.30 | 0.35 | 0.46 | 30.16 | 35.63 | 49.05 | 98.71 | 0.29 | 0.30 | 0.35 | 0.44 | 39.60 | 37.18 | 46.35 | 77.33 |
| DDPM | DDIM | |||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| LPIPS | FID | LPIPS | FID | |||||||||||||
| Method | 100 | 50 | 25 | 12 | 100 | 50 | 25 | 12 | 100 | 50 | 25 | 12 | 100 | 50 | 25 | 12 |
| DPS | 0.25 | 0.29 | 0.35 | 0.52 | 30.68 | 40.15 | 58.25 | 184.52 | 0.29 | 0.29 | 0.37 | 0.51 | 30.31 | 32.35 | 42.73 | 67.90 |
| TFG | 0.26 | 0.29 | 0.34 | 0.40 | 38.83 | 39.72 | 44.83 | 70.17 | 0.35 | 0.34 | 0.33 | 0.34 | 55.81 | 51.70 | 49.85 | 47.33 |
| AdamDPS | 0.24 | 0.26 | 0.29 | 0.38 | 27.62 | 30.32 | 34.15 | 72.19 | 0.27 | 0.27 | 0.29 | 0.37 | 27.53 | 27.20 | 32.51 | 61.72 |
| Guidance Classifier Accuracy (%) | Held-out Classifier Accuracy (%) | FID | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Method | ViT | ViT Finetuned | ConvNeXt | ||
| RED-diff | 10.7 | 9.9 | 10.2 | 10.7 | 203.8 |
| DPS | 42.8 | 39.4 | 40.3 | 42.8 | 32.3 |
| LGD | 21.8 | 19.6 | 18.1 | 21.8 | 31.0 |
| MPGD | 26.7 | 24.9 | 24.3 | 26.7 | 34.1 |
| UGD | 9.3 | 9.7 | 10.2 | 9.3 | 25.4 |
| Guidance Classifier Top-10 Accuracy (%) | Held-out Classifier Top-10 Accuracy (%) | FID | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Method | ViT | DINO v2 | MobileViT v2 | ||
| RED-diff | 12.7 | 23.0 | 3.2 | 1.4 | 272.7 |
| DPS | 0.7 | 0.8 | 1.2 | 1.0 | 43.0 |
| LGD | 0.7 | 0.7 | 1.2 | 1.1 | 42.5 |
| MPGD | 0.9 | 0.8 | 1.2 | 1.4 | 43.6 |
| UGD | 0.8 | 0.6 | 0.7 | 0.7 | 42.3 |
| Guidance Classifier Accuracy (%) | Held-out Classifier Accuracy (%) | FID | |||
| Method | ViT | DINO v2 | MobileViT v2 | ||
| CG | 61.0 | 63.4 | 58.3 | 51.0 | 30.8 |
| AdamCG | 82.5 | 84.2 | 77.8 | 68.1 | 29.6 |
Diffusion Sampling
Diffusion sampling studies how to turn a trained diffusion model into high-quality samples efficiently and reliably.
See all 258 papers