Separating Intrinsic Ambiguity from Estimation Uncertainty in Deep Generative Models for Linear Inverse Problems

This article addresses the issue of estimating observation parameters (response and error parameters) in inverse problems. The focus is on cases where regularization is introduced in a Bayesian framework and the prior is modeled by a diffusion process. In this context, the issue of posterior sampling is known to be thorny, and a recent paper proposes a notably simple and effective solution. Additionally, it opens an remarkable flexibility when it comes to estimating observation parameters. The proposed strategy enables to define an optimal estimator for both observation parameters and image of interest. Furthermore, the strategy provides a means for uncertainty quantification. In addition, MCMC algorithms allow for the computation of estimates and properties of posteriors, while offering some guarantees. The paper presents several numerical experiments that clearly confirm the computational efficiency and the quality of both estimates and uncertainty quantification.

Learned generative priors now supply the regularization in ill-posed imaging inverse problems, and the uncertainty read from their posterior samples is taken as evidence earned from data. When examples of the true image are scarce, as in seismic and medical imaging, the widely adopted recourse is to train such a prior not on truths but on an archive of past reconstructions---prior laundering. We show that the uncertainty it then reports can be overconfident, and that no measurement-side check can reveal it. On the directions a forward operator leaves unresolved, this prior reports not what the data support but the assumption built into the older reconstruction method. More specifically, when the archive holds posterior samples, its population law---averaged over the measurements---is exactly the old regularizer advanced a single expectation--maximization step, frozen on the operator's blind subspace. The freeze leaves no signature in the data. Two truths differing only there induce identical data laws, so no goodness-of-fit test separates them, and self-consistency diagnostics, simulation-based calibration among them, pass whatever the prior believes. In the more realistic case, where the archive keeps a single-best reconstruction rather than posterior samples, the blind credible interval collapses to zero width. We prove these statements and demonstrate the inherited overconfidence on deployed seismic and groundwater imaging against a truth-trained control. We recommend reporting which directions the operator resolves---separating the confidence the data support from belief inherited through the pipeline.

Generative diffusion models can provide powerful prior probability models for inverse problems in imaging, but existing implementations suffer from two key limitations: $(i)$ the prior density is represented implicitly, and $(ii)$ they rely on likelihood approximations that introduce sampling biases. We address these challenges by introducing a new energy-based model trained for denoising with a covariance-based regularization term that enforces consistency across different measurement conditions. The trained model can compute normalized posterior densities for diverse linear inverse problems, without additional retraining or fine tuning. In addition to preserving the sampling capabilities of diffusion models, this enables previously unavailable capabilities: energy-guided adaptive sampling that adjusts schedules on-the-fly, unbiased Metropolis-Hastings correction steps, and blind estimation of the degradation operator via Bayes rule. We validate the method on multiple datasets (ImageNet, CelebA, AFHQ) and tasks (inpainting, deblurring), demonstrating competitive or superior performance to established baselines.