We introduce RewardFlow, an inversion-free framework that steers pretrained diffusion and flow-matching models at inference time through multi-reward Langevin dynamics. RewardFlow unifies complementary differentiable rewards for semantic alignment, perceptual fidelity, localized grounding, object consistency, and human preference, and further introduces a differentiable VQA-based reward that provides fine-grained semantic supervision through language-vision reasoning. To coordinate these heterogeneous objectives, we design a prompt-aware adaptive policy that extracts semantic primitives from the instruction, infers edit intent, and dynamically modulates reward weights and step sizes throughout sampling. Across several image editing and compositional generation benchmarks, RewardFlow delivers state-of-the-art edit fidelity and compositional alignment.
Figures & tables
Figure 2: Gradient localization of our differentiable rewards. We visualize the image-space gradient ∇IRtot(⋅) for various edit prompts. Our proposed rewards prevent semantic leakage by concentrating the gradient precisely on target semantic regions, demonstrating the fine-grained spatial control enabled by RewardFlow.
Method
Distance ↓ ( ×103 )
PSNR ↑
LPIPS ↓ ( ×103 )
MSE ↓ ( ×104 )
SSIM ↑ ( ×102 )
Whole ↑
Edited ↑
NFE ↓
Step ↓
EF [ 18 ]
8.39
27.49
44.38
29.79
85.61
25.87
22.14
70
50
ProxG [ 14 ]
8.39
28.45
38.27
25.63
85.87
25.04
21.64
100
50
P2P [ 15 ]
9.58
27.72
44.98
30.02
85.01
24.94
21.57
100
50
DI [ 19 ]
11.60
27.25
49.25
32.87
84.86
25.83
22.39
100
50
AREdit [ 41 ]
13.12
28.78
42.67
37.88
87.19
26.57
24.51
16
30
InfEdit [ 46 ]
13.87
28.63
39.80
33.19
86.28
25.84
22.44
12
12
Table 1: PIE-Bench image editing results. RewardFlow consistently improves edit fidelity and spatial localization across all metrics while maintaining competitive runtime. Best results are in bold and strong baselines are underlined .
Figure 3: Image editing qualitative comparison across diverse instruction types. RewardFlow produces edits that are both semantically accurate and spatially localized, while better preserving background structure, lighting, and identity compared to prior methods.
Model
Color
Shape
Texture
Spatial
Non-Spatial
Complex
SD v1.4 [ 36 ]
0.38
0.36
0.42
0.12
0.31
0.31
SD v2.1 [ 36 ]
0.51
0.42
0.49
0.13
0.31
0.34
SDXL [ 33 ]
0.64
0.54
0.56
0.20
0.31
0.41
PixArt- α [ 7 ]
0.69
0.56
0.70
0.21
0.32
0.41
DALL-E 2 [ 29 ]
0.57
0.55
0.64
0.13
0.30
0.37
DALL-E 3 [ 30 ]
0.81
0.68
0.81
–
–
–
Table 2: T2I compositional generation on T2I-CompBench . Accuracy across fine-grained attribute binding (color, shape, texture), object relationships (spatial and non-spatial), and complex compositions. RewardFlow consistently improves all base models (PixArt- α , Flux, and Qwen Image). Best results are in bold .
Setting / Variant
Distance ↓ ( ×103 )
PSNR ↑
LPIPS ↓ ( ×103 )
MSE ↓ ( ×104 )
SSIM ↑ ( ×102 )
Whole ↑
Edited ↑
✗ Dynamic Reward Weighting.
8.47
30.77
38.78
34.67
89.37
29.02
27.01
✗ Semantic Primitives (SPs)
9.03
31.19
39.12
35.01
88.47
27.45
26.51
✗ Reward-Aware Step Size
9.15
31.38
39.56
35.21
89.12
28.32
26.92
✗ KL-Tether
9.56
29.98
40.26
35.28
87.23
27.98
26.13
Reward Flow (Full)
7.64
32.09
38.47
33.57
90.21
29.78
27.57
Table 3: Ablation on key RewardFlow components.
Figure 4: Text-to-image qualitative results. Across all prompts, RewardFlow produces images that exhibit higher alignment with the textual descriptions while also generating outputs with more visually appealing composition and aesthetics.
Figure 5: Gradient localization across reward combinations. Including all rewards concentrates gradients to accurate object contours and eliminates leakage.
Figure 6: Effect of removing reward components. ( ✗ RC, SAM, LLM, HPS, and PE) denote excluding ( Rrg , Roc , Rvqa , Rhps , and Rper ), respectively. RewardFlow (all rewards) achieves semantically precise edits, modifying only instruction-relevant content while maintaining background and context integrity.
Figure 7: Ablations illustrating the effect of removing key components. RewardFlow (all components) achieves the best visual consistency and instruction alignment.
Rglb
Rper
Rhps
Roc
Rrg
Rvqa
Distance ↓ ( ×103 )
PSNR ↑
LPIPS ↓ ( ×103 )
MSE ↓ ( ×104 )
SSIM ↑ ( ×102 )
Whole ↑
Edited ↑
✓
✗
✗
✗
✗
✗
11.23
26.33
45.22
39.34
84.09
19.33
21.22
✓
✓
✗
✗
✗
✗
10.21
27.57
43.12
37.45
85.17
19.88
22.85
✓
✓
✓
✗
✗
✗
9.77
28.82
41.67
37.12
86.39
20.12
23.33
✓
✓
✓
✓
✗
✗
8.39
29.44
40.58
36.55
87.71
21.47
24.75
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✗
8.01
30.12
40.02
35.28
88.92
26.47
25.91
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
7.64
32.09
38.47
33.57
90.21
29.78
27.57
Table 4: Ablation on reward components. Each column indicates whether the corresponding reward is enabled ( ✓ ) or disabled ( ✗ ).
Figure 9: Overview of the RewardFlow framework.
Figure 10: Prompt template used for semantic primitives and Rvqa .
Figure 11: Reward progression over time.
Model
Overall ↑
Single ↑
Two ↑
Counting ↑
Colors ↑
Position ↑
Color Attribution ↑
SD v2.1
0.50
0.98
0.51
0.44
0.85
0.07
0.17
SDXL
0.55
0.98
0.74
0.39
0.85
0.15
0.23
IF-XL
0.61
0.97
0.74
0.66
0.81
0.13
0.35
PixArt- α
0.48
0.98
0.50
0.44
0.80
0.08
0.07
DALL-E 2
0.52
0.94
0.66
0.49
0.77
0.10
0.19
DALL-E 3
0.67
0.96
0.87
0.47
0.83
0.43
0.45
Table 5: T2I generation on GenEval .
Figure 12: Image Editing Qualitative Results with Flux + RewardFlow . For each input image on the left, RewardFlow is instructed to apply a targeted edit (text below), and the right image shows the generated result. Tasks span from global scene modifications and object-level edits to very fine-grained, localized edits.
Figure 13: Image Editing Qualitative Results with Qwen Image + RewardFlow . For each input image on the left, RewardFlow is instructed to apply a targeted edit (text below), and the right image shows the generated result. Tasks span from global scene modifications and object-level edits to very fine-grained, localized edits.
Figure 14: Image Editing Qualitative Comparisons. Comparison across a range of challenging edits, such as diverse attribute-, style-, and object-level transformations. Each row shows the source image followed by results from strong baselines and RewardFlow.
VLMs
Distance ↓ ( ×103 )
PSNR ↑
LPIPS ↓ ( ×103 )
MSE ↓ ( ×104 )
SSIM ↑ ( ×102 )
Whole ↑
Edited ↑
Qwen 2.5VL 3B †
7.64
32.09
38.47
33.57
90.21
29.78
27.57
LLaMa-4-8B
6.57
33.43
37.19
31.31
91.33
30.44
28.82
Qwen 3 Next-34B
6.53
32.34
38.05
32.76
91.49
31.01
29.03
Table 6: VLM Comparison on PIE-Bench .
Figure 15: RewardFlow counting failure case.
Figure 16: Text-to-image qualitative results with Flux as backbone. Qualitative comparison of Flux, Flux + Global Reward, and Flux + RewardFlow across diverse prompts.
In generative modeling, we often wish to produce samples that maximize a user-specified reward such as aesthetic quality or alignment with human preferences, a problem known as guidance. Despite their widespread use, existing guidance methods either require expensive multi-particle, many-step schemes or rely on poorly understood approximations. We reformulate guidance as a deterministic optimal control problem, yielding a hierarchy of algorithms that subsumes existing approaches at the coarsest level. We show that the flow map, an object of significant recent interest for its role in fast inference, arises naturally in the optimal solution. Based on this observation, we propose Flow Map Reward Guidance (FMRG): a training-free, single-trajectory framework that uses the flow map to both integrate and guide the flow. At text-to-image scale, FMRG matches or surpasses baselines across inverse problems and reward-guided generation with as few as 3 NFEs, giving at least an order-of-magnitude speedup in comparison to prior state of the art. Code is available at https://github.com/jrrhuang/fmrg.
Text-to-image diffusion models can generate individual concepts well, but they often omit or merge concepts incorrectly with multiple concepts. We trace these failures to an early coordination bottleneck: before denoising begins, prompt-conditioned attention may allocate different concepts to strongly overlapping spatial support, which can keep their attention coupled as denoising proceeds. This observation motivates treating compositional generation as a boundary-condition problem rather than repeatedly controlling the evolving trajectory. To this end, we propose Rectify-then-Diffuse (RTD), a training-free framework that rectifies the initial allocation once before standard denoising. Firstly, we propose Soft-Overlap Disentanglement (SOD), which converts normalized overlap between pilot concept maps into a differentiable and layout-agnostic separation objective. Secondly, we introduce Isotropic Gradient Rectification (IGR), which normalizes the SOD gradient and applies a bounded latent displacement with a consistent scale across prompts and initializations. Extensive experiments show that RTD achieves state-of-the-art compositional fidelity and robust gains. On the AE-Bench object pair subset, RTD improves BLIP-VQA by 45.8% and ImageReward by 19.6% over CO3 while running 2.3× faster. Code will be released at https://github.com/Z-yiwei/rectify-then-diffuse
Ning Zhu, An Chen, Mengfei Zhao +4
Glasgow College, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China · School of Mathematical Sciences, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China
We present Qwen-Image-2.0-RL, a post-training pipeline that applies reinforcement learning from human feedback (RLHF) and on-policy distillation (OPD) to improve both the visual quality and instruction-following capability of the Qwen-Image-2.0 diffusion model. To provide reliable reward signals, we construct task-specific composite reward models by fine-tuning vision-language models with a pointwise scoring paradigm and chain-of-thought reasoning. For text-to-image generation, the reward models cover alignment, aesthetics, and portrait fidelity dimensions. For image editing tasks, the reward system addresses instruction-following accuracy and face identity preservation. Building on this reward system, we develop a scalable GRPO-based RL training framework, incorporating a hybrid classifier-free guidance (CFG) strategy to preserve pre-trained knowledge, prompt curation via intra-group reward range filtering, and per-category reward weight calibration. To merge the task-specialized RL policies for T2I and editing, we propose on-policy distillation as the final training stage, which consolidates multiple teachers into a single student model through trajectory-level velocity matching. Extensive evaluation shows that Qwen-Image-2.0-RL achieves 57.84 overall score on Qwen-Image-Bench (+2.61 over the base model), Elo ratings of 1193 in text-to-image arena (+78) and 1349 in image edit arena (+93), demonstrating consistent gains in aesthetic quality, prompt adherence, and editing accuracy.