cs.LGJul 13, 2026

Velocity Scheduled Flow Matching

Authors: Vitalii Bondar

Organizations: Cherkasy State Technological University Cherkasy, Ukraine

Abstract

Flow matching trains a neural network to regress the conditional velocity along a linear interpolant between noise and data, and the number of network evaluations~(NFE) sets the cost of sampling. The straight-line interpolant carries an implicit choice: the sample moves at constant speed throughout the trajectory. We relax this choice and introduce Velocity Scheduled Flow Matching~(VSFM), which replaces the conditional target x1x0x_1 - x_0 with v(t)(x1x0)v(t)(x_1 - x_0) for any nonnegative profile v:[0,1]R0v:[0,1]\to\mathbb{R}_{\geq 0} satisfying 01vdt=1\int_0^1 v\,dt = 1. We study six polynomial profiles drawn from motion planning. The first use of VSFM is at inference time: a pretrained linear flow-matching model can be sampled under any admissible profile by integrating its ODE on a non-uniform ττ-schedule, with no retraining and no additional computation; on CIFAR-10 this lowers FID by up to 19.8%19.8\%. Training from scratch under a braking profile gives a further reduction of 17.4%17.4\% at 44~NFE. Both gains follow from the local truncation error of the Euler integrator on the induced grid.

Explore similar work

May 12, 2026cs.LG

Sharpen Your Flow: Sharpness-Aware Sampling for Flow Matching

Flow matching models generate samples by numerically integrating a learned velocity field, with each integration step requiring a neural network evaluation. Fast generation therefore requires using a small fixed evaluation budget effectively: the key question is not only how to integrate the flow, but where the sampler should spend its steps. We propose SharpEuler, a training-free sampler that profiles a pretrained model offline by estimating where the learned velocity field changes most rapidly along calibration trajectories. This finite-difference estimate defines a solver-aware sharpness profile, which is smoothed and converted by a quantile transform into a timestep grid for any desired inference budget. At test time, sampling remains ordinary Euler integration with the same number of model evaluations as a uniform schedule. We justify SharpEuler using three principles: a numerical principle identifying trajectory acceleration as the leading source of Euler discretization error, a variational principle deriving sharpness-based power-law timestep densities, and a statistical guarantee showing that the finite-sample calibrated sampler is stable at the terminal distribution level. Our experiments show that SharpEuler improves sample quality at fixed budgets, reducing inter-mode leakage and increasing mode coverage.
Aditi Gupta, Soon Hoe Lim, Annan Yu +1
Sep 15, 2026cs.LG

Same Flow, Different Paths: Variance Reduction in Flow Matching

In flow matching (FM), a velocity model vθv_θ is trained using a predefined path gtg_t that connects data and noise samples (e.g., gt(x0,x1)=(1t)x0+tx1g_t(x_0, x_1) = (1 - t) x_0 + t x_1). In this work, we study the choice of this path from an optimization perspective by analyzing the variance of stochastic gradients. We consider the class G(pt,vt)G(p_t,v^\star_t) of paths that induce the same marginal distributions ptp_t and marginal velocity field vtv^\star_t, and therefore the same FM objective. Our main finding is that the choice of path gtg_t can fundamentally change the convergence rate of SGD, even when the FM objective remains exactly the same. (i) For a linear velocity model and one-dimensional Gaussian data, we derive a tight bound on the SGD iteration complexity up to logarithmic factors and find an analytically optimal path that minimizes this bound among linear paths inducing the same FM problem. (ii) We then extend the variance analysis to general FM problems and formulate path selection at a fixed θθ as the variance-minimization problem PathOptθ, constrained to gtG(pt,vt)g_t\in G(p_t,v^\star_t). We show that this constraint is essential: reducing variance without it can lead to slower convergence. (iii) Since the constraint gtG(pt,vt)g_t \in G(p_t,v^\star_t) cannot generally be verified directly, we derive an equivalent formulation with constraints that can be estimated from samples, allowing paths to be found numerically. Our theoretical results are supported by experiments with Gaussian data, Gaussian mixture models, and real datasets.
Alexander Tyurin
May 14, 2026cs.CV

The Velocity Deficit: Initial Energy Injection for Flow Matching

While Flow Matching theoretically guarantees constant-velocity trajectories, we identify a critical breakdown in high-dimensional practice: the Velocity Deficit. We show that the MSE objective systematically underestimates velocity magnitude, causing generated samples to fail to reach the data manifold-a phenomenon we term Integration Lag. To rectify this, we propose Initial Energy Injection, instantiated via two complementary methods: the training-based Magnitude-Aware Flow Matching (MAFM) and the training-free Scale Schedule Corrector (SSC). Both are grounded in our discovery of a crucial asymmetry: velocity contraction causes harmful kinetic stagnation at the trajectory's start, yet acts as a beneficial denoising mechanism at its end. Empirically, SSC yields significant efficiency gains with zero retraining and just one line of code. On ImageNet-1k (256x256), it improves FID by 44.6% (from 13.68 to 7.58) and achieves a 5x speedup, enabling a 50-step generator (FID 7.58) to beat a 250-step baseline (FID 8.65). Furthermore, our methods generalize to Text-to-Image tasks and high-resolution generation, improving FID on MS-COCO by ~22%.
Linze Li, Zong-Wei Hong, Shen Zhang +4