Schrödinger bridge (SB) learns stochastic transport between prescribed initial and target distributions. When the initial distribution shifts at test time, the learned dynamics can fail to recover the target distribution. We introduce the Distributionally Robust Schrödinger Bridge (DRSB), which learns a single controller that accounts for uncertainty in the initial distribution. The DRSB objective consists of control energy and a KL penalty between the resulting terminal distribution and the target distribution. DRSB seeks a single controller that minimizes the worst-case value of this objective as the initial distribution varies within an ambiguity set around the nominal distribution. We derive an exact variational formulation of this objective and connect its fixed-terminal-cost subproblem to stochastic optimal control and distributionally robust optimization. This formulation motivates an alternating algorithm that updates the adversarial initial distribution, estimates the terminal log-density ratio, and trains the controller. We develop Wasserstein and Sinkhorn variants using stochastic control optimality conditions to approximate the gradients required for adversarial updates. Experiments on two-dimensional transport tasks and image-to-image translation show improved robustness to input perturbations relative to standard SB, with a tradeoff in nominal performance. On Gaussian mixture transport, Sinkhorn DRSB also achieves lower mean sliced Wasserstein distance than fixed-level noise augmentation at both tested unseen noise levels.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: Deployment under initial distribution uncertainty. Blue circles denote nominal samples from μ , and purple squares denote shifted test samples from μtest . The desired target ν is unchanged. (a) A standard SB controller matches ν for μ , but this matching need not persist under an initial distribution shift. (b) DRSB trains one controller to reduce the worst-case sum of control energy and terminal mismatch over an ambiguity set of initial distributions.
Gaussian-to-Gaussian
GMM-to-GMM
Input
DSBM
DRSB
DSBM
DRSB
Org
0.038 ± 0.007
0.123 ± 0.012
0.902 ± 0.242
1.165 ± 0.138
Noisy
0.684 ± 0.013
0.638 ± 0.016
2.407 ± 0.243
2.212 ± 0.413
Shifted
0.666 ± 0.011
0.501 ± 0.014
5.917 ± 0.127
5.840 ± 0.095
Worst
0.951 ± 0.013
0.710 ± 0.013
1.988 ± 0.100
1.478 ± 0.100
Table 1: SWD ( ↓ ) under input perturbations (mean ± std, 10 seeds). Org denotes the original input; the other conditions are defined in the text.
Figure 3
DSBM
DSBM + Aug
DRSB-S
δ
δtrain=1
δtrain=2
Org
0.902 ± 0.242
0.850 ± 0.178
0.907 ± 0.153
1.165 ± 0.138
1.0
1.287 ± 0.112
1.042 ± 0.246
1.119 ± 0.196
1.150 ± 0.206
2.0
1.842 ± 0.086
1.881 ± 0.145
1.800 ± 0.153
1.636 ± 0.157
3.0
2.175 ± 0.118
2.298 ± 0.146
2.220 ± 0.165
1.953 ± 0.095
4.0
2.407 ± 0.243
2.425 ± 0.129
2.308 ± 0.138
2.212 ± 0.413
Table 2: GMM-to-GMM SWD ( ↓ ) with noise augmentation (mean ± std, 10 seeds). Test levels δ=3,4 are unseen by both augmentation baselines.
Appendix figures & tables9 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
Figure 5: Training dynamics. (a) Evolution of λ in DRSB-W. (b) ε -schedule for DRSB-S and corresponding λ evolution.
Model
Org
δ=0.25
0.50
1.00
DSBM
25.55 ± 0.50
26.59 ± 0.48
26.15 ± 0.49
26.81 ± 0.52
DRSB-S κ =0.005, ε =9
26.76 ± 0.49
26.28 ± 0.44
26.60 ± 0.52
27.15 ± 0.49
DRSB-S κ =0.005, ε =12
26.36 ± 0.48
26.48 ± 0.48
26.10 ± 0.50
26.66 ± 0.52
DRSB-S κ =0.005, ε =15
26.08 ± 0.47
26.57 ± 0.50
26.35 ± 0.53
26.40 ± 0.53
DRSB-S κ =0.32, ε =7
26.70 ± 0.48
25.93 ± 0.48
26.05 ± 0.47
26.05 ± 0.50
DRSB-S κ =0.32, ε =12
26.52 ± 0.50
25.82 ± 0.49
25.98 ± 0.49
25.94 ± 0.47
Appendix
Table 4: FID ( ↓ ) sensitivity to κ and ε on FFHQ Woman → Man under noise δ .
Model
δ =0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
(a) Gaussian-to-Gaussian
DSBM
0.052 ± 0.006
0.072 ± 0.009
0.128 ± 0.012
0.214 ± 0.010
0.313 ± 0.015
0.431 ± 0.012
0.555 ± 0.013
0.684 ± 0.013
DRSB-W
0.080 ± 0.010
0.093 ± 0.012
0.138 ± 0.013
0.216 ± 0.013
0.315 ± 0.012
0.425 ± 0.013
0.548 ± 0.013
0.678 ± 0.013
DRSB-S
0.131 ± 0.011
0.134 ± 0.014
0.165 ± 0.015
0.227 ± 0.016
0.314 ± 0.015
0.414 ± 0.015
0.522 ± 0.015
0.638 ± 0.016
(b) GMM-to-GMM
DSBM
1.164 ± 0.137
1.287 ± 0.112
1.597 ± 0.077
1.842 ± 0.086
2.051 ± 0.116
2.175 ± 0.118
2.254 ± 0.108
2.407 ± 0.243
Appendix
Table 5: SWD ( ↓ ) on 2D transport tasks under varying L2 -norm noise levels δ (mean ± std over 10 seeds). Bold indicates best performance; gray indicates outperforming the baseline DSBM.
Model
Org
Up
Down
Left
Right
W-wst
S-wst
(a) Gaussian-to-Gaussian
DSBM
0.038 ± 0.007
0.665 ± 0.012
0.673 ± 0.020
0.666 ± 0.011
0.651 ± 0.009
1.081 ± 0.021
0.951 ± 0.013
DRSB-W
0.144 ± 0.007
0.691 ± 0.020
0.698 ± 0.020
0.517 ± 0.014
0.792 ± 0.014
0.972 ± 0.007
0.812 ± 0.012
DRSB-S
0.123 ± 0.012
0.647 ± 0.018
0.640 ± 0.014
0.501 ± 0.014
0.769 ± 0.016
0.881 ± 0.018
0.710 ± 0.013
(b) GMM-to-GMM
DSBM
0.902 ± 0.242
6.167 ± 0.233
5.798 ± 0.245
5.917 ± 0.127
5.917 ± 0.132
2.086 ± 0.166
1.988 ± 0.100
Appendix
Table 6: SWD ( ↓ ) on 2D transport tasks under distribution shifts (mean ± std over 10 seeds). Org: original distribution; Up/Down/Left/Right: directional shift; W-wst: DRSB-W worst case; S-wst: DRSB-S worst case. Bold indicates best performance; gray indicates outperforming the baseline DSBM.
Figure 6: Cost comparison within the Wasserstein ambiguity set. Left : Evaluated distributions with the ambiguity-set boundary (dashed). Right : Measured cost versus ρ .
Gaussian DSBM
Gaussian DRSB
FFHQ DSBM
FFHQ DRSB
Iterations
140
50
70
50
Gradient steps (total)
224k
101k
3.36M
320k
Trajectories
4,096
1,024
20,480
40,960
Wall-clock time
754 s
404 s
8.5 h
1.4 h
Stage time / DSBM time
1×
0.54×
1×
0.16×
Appendix
Table 7: Measured training costs. DRSB columns report the additional stage after DSBM pretraining. Trajectory counts follow the reported training configurations.
k
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
Rk
0.260
0.319
0.240
0.111
0.002
0.004
0.002
0.000
0.002
0.001
λk
6.601
5.696
4.535
3.627
3.427
3.457
3.477
3.488
3.494
3.483
Gk
0.752
1.232
1.735
2.142
2.068
1.757
1.672
1.631
1.524
1.550
Uk
22.94
22.92
23.19
23.74
24.10
24.22
24.29
24.36
24.32
24.30
Appendix
Table 8: Reported update diagnostics on the 2D Gaussian task.
k
5
10
20
30
40
50
L
270.99
276.16
304.99
311.99
311.44
311.37
Appendix
Table 9: Variational objective at the reported epochs.
k
10
20
30
40
50
cos(∇X0V,−uθ(0,X0))
0.9997
0.9996
0.9996
0.9997
0.9998
∥∇X0V∥/∥uθ(0,X0)∥
0.9310
1.0761
1.0249
1.0278
1.0089
Appendix
Table 10: SOC consistency diagnostics on the 2D Gaussian task.
The Schrödinger bridge problem is concerned with finding a stochastic dynamical system bridging two marginal distributions that minimises a certain transportation cost. This problem, which represents a generalisation of optimal transport to the stochastic case, has received attention due to its connections to diffusion models and flow matching, as well as its applications in the natural sciences. However, all existing algorithms allow to infer such dynamics only for cases where samples from both distributions are available. In this paper, we propose the first general method for modelling Schrödinger bridges when one (or both) distributions are given by their unnormalised densities, with no access to data samples. Our algorithm relies on a generalisation of the iterative proportional fitting (IPF) procedure to the data-free case, inspired by recent developments in off-policy reinforcement learning for training of diffusion samplers. We demonstrate the efficacy of the proposed data-to-energy IPF on synthetic problems, finding that it can successfully learn transports between multimodal distributions. As a secondary consequence of our reinforcement learning formulation, which assumes a fixed time discretisation scheme for the dynamics, we find that existing data-to-data Schrödinger bridge algorithms can be substantially improved by learning the diffusion coefficient of the dynamics. Finally, we apply the newly developed algorithm to the problem of sampling posterior distributions in latent spaces of generative models, thus creating a data-free image-to-image translation method. Code: https://github.com/mmacosha/d2e-stochastic-dynamics
Learning generative models in settings where the source and target distributions are only specified through unpaired samples is gaining in importance. Here, one frequently-used model are Schrödinger bridges (SB), which represent the most likely evolution between both endpoint distributions. To accelerate training, simulation-free SBs avoid the path simulation of the original SB models. However, learning simulation-free SBs requires paired data; a coupling of the source and target samples is obtained as the solution of the entropic optimal transport (OT) problem. As obtaining the optimal global coupling is infeasible in many practical cases, the entropic OT problem is iteratively solved on minibatches instead. Still, the repeated cost remains substantial and the locality can distort the global transport geometry. We propose quantized diffusion Schrödinger bridges (QDSB), which compute the endpoint coupling on anchor-quantized endpoint distributions and lift the resulting plan back to original data points through cell-wise sampling. We show that the regularized optimal coupling is stable w.r.t. anchor quantization, with an error controlled by the quality of the anchor approximation. In real-world experiments, QDSB matches the sample quality of existing baselines, requiring substantially less time. Code and data are available at github.com/mathefuchs/qdsb.
Tobias Fuchs, Florian Kalinke, Nadja Klein
Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, Karlsruhe, Germany
Over the past few years, diffusion-based Schrödinger bridge models have been proposed to approximate optimal transport dynamics between two prescribed boundary distributions, with successful applications to generative modeling. More precisely, these methods aim to estimate a path measure whose initial and terminal marginals match the two boundary distributions, while minimizing the Kullback-Leibler divergence with respect to a reference Markov process. In this work, we consider the generalized Schrödinger bridge problem, in which the reference process is a twisted Brownian motion, that is, a Feynman-Kac transform of a Brownian motion induced by a time-dependent differentiable potential. Building on the Iterative Markovian Fitting (IMF) paradigm, and in particular on its special case Diffusion Schrödinger Bridge Matching (DSBM), which corresponds to the zero potential case, we introduce Twisted Schrödinger Bridge Matching (TSBM), a diffusion-based method designed to handle both continuous- and discrete-time potentials. Unlike previous approaches, TSBM provides a rigorous extension of the IMF scheme to the generalized Schrödinger bridge problem. This derivation leads to a new bridge-matching loss that depends explicitly on the gradient of the potential and recovers the DSBM objective when the potential vanishes, yielding improved performance. We further introduce trajectory-based variance-reduction techniques that substantially stabilize optimization and may be useful beyond the present setting. Finally, we empirically demonstrate the benefits of TSBM for trajectory inference across increasingly high-dimensional settings, including crowd navigation and single-cell data. Code available at https://github.com/maxencenoble/twisted-sb-matching.
Maxence Noble, Marie Scheid, Yazid Janati +2
CMAP, Ecole polytechnique · Institute of Foundation Models · MBZUAI +1