Principled MAP estimation for inverse problems: bridging the gap between convergence and performance
Authors: Alexandre Lagier, Valentine Tosel, Anne Gagneux, Mathurin Massias, Ségolène Martin
Organizations: ENS de Lyon, CNRS, Université Claude Bernard Lyon 1, Inria, LIP UMR 5668, 69342 Lyon Cedex 07, France · Univ. Bordeaux, Inria, Bordeaux INP, IMB, UMR 5251, F-33400 Talence, France · Inria, ENS de Lyon, CNRS, Université Claude Bernard Lyon 1, LIP UMR 5668, 69342 Lyon Cedex 07, France
Pretrained denoisers provide a powerful way to incorporate image priors into restoration algorithms. Plug-and-Play and RED approaches exploit fixed-noise-level denoisers within first-order optimization schemes, with convergence guarantees, but often struggle to achieve high-quality reconstruction on severely ill-posed inverse problems. In contrast, recent state-of-the-art approaches leverage denoisers derived from flow- or diffusion-based generative models and evaluate them along a sequence of decreasing noise levels. While these methods achieve strong empirical performance, their convergence theory remains limited. In this paper, we bridge this gap by specifically designing an algorithm that combines denoisers at decreasing noise levels with a schedule tailored to ensure convergence. From a Bayesian perspective, we prove that our method converges to a Maximum a Posteriori (MAP) estimate, under suitable assumptions. Subsequently, we apply our method to various ill-posed inverse problems and show that it surpasses convergent methods while competing with state-of-the-art empirical ones.
Figures & tables
Figure 1 : Evolution of the objective value across time of GAMMA, PnP-Flow and Approx-PGD (1+η) (with η controlling the number of sub-iterations). PnP-Flow diverges. GAMMA converges faster than Approx-PGD.
Method
Theory
Denoising
Deblurring
Super-res.
Rand. inpaint.
Box inpaint.
σ=0.2
σ=0.05 , σb=3.0
σ=0.05 , ×4
σ=0.01 , 70%
σ=0.05 , 80×80
PSNR
SSIM
LPIPS
PSNR
SSIM
LPIPS
PSNR
SSIM
LPIPS
PSNR
SSIM
LPIPS
PSNR
SSIM
LPIPS
Degraded
20.00
0.683
0.148
27.78
0.736
0.129
10.25
0.174
0.819
11.95
0.188
1.032
22.26
0.740
0.212
PnP-Flow
No
32.74
0.915
0.056
34.85
0.940
0.047
32.05
0.913
0.056
34.86
0.962
0.018
32.02
0.946
0.040
Approx-PGD
Yes
26.98
0.718
0.083
23.28
0.691
0.170
15.86
0.369
0.370
16.21
0.391
0.355
6.460
0.501
0.498
GAMMA (noiseless)
Yes
30.19
0.834
0.052
26.80
0.638
0.283
18.78
0.524
0.205
19.95
0.657
0.297
24.02
0.747
0.205
Table 1 : Comparisons of methods on different inverse problems on the CelebA dataset. Results are averaged across 100 test images. Higher PSNR / SSIM is better, lower LPIPS is better.
Figure 2 : Qualitative results on AFHQ-256. The full images table is in the Appendix, Figure 5 .
Appendix figures & tables6 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
Denoising
Deblurring
Super-res.
Rand. inpaint.
Box inpaint.
CelebA
PnP-Flow
N (number of steps)
100
100
100
100
100
α (learning rate)
0.8
0.01
0.3
0.01
0.5
Approx-PGD
γ (step size)
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
κ (noise level factor)
1.0
0.1
0.5
2.0
0.5
Appendix
Table 2 : Hyper-parameters used and GAMMA on CelebA and AFHQ-Cat datasets.
Denoising
Deblurring
Super-res.
Rand. inpaint.
Box inpaint.
CelebA
GAMMA
N (number of steps)
100
100
500
500
100
κ
1.0
1.0
2.0
1.5
1.2
λ0
10−3
10−3
10−3
10−3
10−3
β
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
AFHQ-Cat
GAMMA
Appendix
Table 3 : Hyperparameters used for GAMMA on the CelebA and AFHQ-Cat datasets.
Figure 3 : Ablation of the number Nϵ of noise samples ϵ used to approximate Eϵ[MMSEσ(x+σϵ)] - AFHQ - Box inpainting
Figure 4 : The two schedules σk=(k+1)γ/2σ0 used in our experiments. Setting N=2000 across all experiments ensures that σk is sufficiently close to 0 .
Method
Theory
Denoising
Deblurring
Super-res.
Rand. inpaint.
Box inpaint.
σ=0.2
σ=0.05 , σb=3.0
σ=0.05 , ×4
σ=0.01 , 70%
σ=0.05 , 80×80
PSNR
SSIM
LPIPS
PSNR
SSIM
LPIPS
PSNR
SSIM
LPIPS
PSNR
SSIM
LPIPS
PSNR
SSIM
LPIPS
Degraded
20.00
0.292
0.550
24.43
0.531
0.452
11.77
0.220
0.877
13.44
0.221
1.090
21.68
0.726
0.219
PnP-Flow
No
32.27
0.876
0.164
29.48
0.795
0.317
29.02
0.811
0.171
34.97
0.939
0.037
28.63
0.911
0.107
Approx-PGD
Yes
28.21
0.679
0.236
18.42
0.464
0.526
7.08
0.059
0.690
18.36
0.404
0.510
17.86
0.717
0.354
GAMMA (noiseless)
Yes
30.03
0.751
0.102
14.23
0.311
0.613
26.60
0.703
0.361
22.09
0.593
0.326
21.91
0.603
0.277
Appendix
Table 4 : Comparisons of methods on different inverse problems on the AFHQ dataset. Results are averaged across 100 test images. Higher PSNR / SSIM is better, lower LPIPS is better.
Image restoration faces a fundamental tradeoff: methods that minimize error produce blurry reconstructions, while those that maximize perceptual quality yield sharp but less faithful images. Existing approaches either commit to a single operating point on this distortion perception (DP) frontier or require paired-data supervision, auxiliary models, or hyperparameter tuning of the sampler to access different points. We show that flow map models, a recent extension of flow matching for few-step sampling that learns an average field, implicitly define a one-parameter family of denoisers that continuously spans the DP frontier. The lookahead parameter t acts as a control knob between the MMSE and perceptual regimes. For Gaussian targets, we prove that varying t exactly recovers the optimal DP frontier; for natural images, we observe similar behavior empirically. Within a Plug-and-Play solver, the same mechanism extends to general inverse problems, where it controls a tradeoff between perceptual alignment and data consistency. Despite the lack of exact optimality guarantees in this setting, a single trained flow map spans the DP tradeoff, matching or exceeding specialized baselines at both extremes. Extensive experiments on CelebA (128×128) and AFHQ (256×256) across several linear and nonlinear inverse tasks validate our findings.
Nicolas Zilberstein, Morteza Mardani, Santiago Segarra
Plug-and-Play (PnP) methods solve imaging inverse problems by incorporating deep denoisers into iterative optimization algorithms. Although practical implementations often decrease the denoiser noise level σ along iterations, most existing convergence analyses assume a fixed denoiser. In this work, we establish convergence guarantees for a broad family of Plug-and-Play algorithms with annealed noise level, spanning deterministic methods (RED--GD and PnP--PGD) and stochastic methods (SNORE, equivariant RED, and a variant of PnP--Flow). For each method, we identify an explicit, nonconvex objective associated with the terminal denoising level and prove asymptotic stationarity of the iterates with respect to this objective. Our analysis does not prescribe any decay rate for the noise schedule, and our assumptions cover both learned gradient-step denoisers and exact MMSE denoisers. Overall, our theoretical results bridge the gap between existing PnP convergence theory and the decreasing-denoising practices used by state-of-the-art image restoration methods. We empirically demonstrate the benefits of such schedules and illustrate the predicted convergence behavior on several imaging inverse problems, including inpainting, super-resolution, demosaicing and tomography.
Plug-and-play (PnP) methods for solving inverse problems have recently achieved strong performance by leveraging denoising priors based on powerful generative diffusion and flow models. However, existing diffusion- and flow-based PnP methods typically rely on stochastic renoise-denoise operations, which complicate the analysis of their convergence behavior. In this work, we identify and formalize the deterministic renoise-denoise operator underlying flow-based plug-and-play methods. This perspective reveals that these methods implicitly define a deterministic operator given by the expectation of a denoiser over the latent noise distribution. Building on this insight, we propose FlowADMM, a PnP algorithm that integrates the renoise-denoise operator into the classical alternating direction method of multiplier (ADMM) framework. We establish convergence guarantees for FlowADMM under weak Lipschitz conditions on the underlying flow network, and extend the analysis to non-stationary time schedules. Empirically, FlowADMM achieves state-of-the-art performance among flow-based PnP methods on a range of inverse problems, including denoising, deblurring, super-resolution, and inpainting, while requiring fewer data consistency evaluations than prior approaches.
Hendrik Sommerhoff, Michael Moeller
Computer Vision Group, University of Siegen Hölderlinstraße 3, 57076 Siegen, Germany