Flow Matching for Fast Posterior Sampling in Bayesian Inverse Problems

A growing family of training-free solvers -- FlowDPS, FLOWER, PnP-Flow and their diffusion ancestors (DPS, DAPS) -- repurpose a pretrained flow-matching prior to solve imaging inverse problems by adding a measurement-guidance term to the deterministic probability-flow ODE. Despite strong empirical results, what these per-step corrections actually approximate -- and how far the resulting samples are from the true posterior $p(x\mid y)$ -- has not been characterized. We give a posterior-transport account of flow-based inverse problem solving. Our starting point is a simple but consequential fact: for a \emph{deterministic} flow prior, Bayesian conditioning is realized entirely by a \emph{reweighting of the source distribution}, not by a drift correction; pushing the reweighted source through the \emph{unmodified} velocity field yields exact posterior samples. From this we show that trajectory-guidance solvers can be read as the minimum-kinetic-energy \emph{correction} field needed to morph the unconditional source into the posterior, and that FlowDPS / FLOWER / PnP-Flow correspond to distinct zeroth-order / Gaussian / proximal approximations of this single object; we bound the resulting posterior bias in Wasserstein distance. A controlled $2$D study with a closed-form posterior confirms the theory decisively: source reweighting matches the true posterior to the Monte-Carlo floor on every metric, whereas trajectory guidance incurs $200$--$800\times$ larger error and collapses posterior modes, \emph{regardless of guidance strength}. Guided by the analysis we propose a cheap, principled velocity-correction solver that is competitive across two in-domain priors (AFHQ, CelebA) and two out-of-distribution settings while, unlike point-estimate source-space optimizers, producing diverse posterior samples with uncertainty that correlates with reconstruction error.

Flow matching methods for imaging inverse problems typically incorporate measurements through network conditioning or guidance during sampling. Neither approach explicitly applies the forward operator within the learned conditional velocity field. We develop a principled measurement-conditional velocity parameterization that does. For a linear interpolation path, we express the optimal velocity through the posterior mean $E[x_1|x_t, y]$ and show that this mean is the unique minimizer of a variational objective with an explicit data-consistency term. The velocity defined by this minimizer provably transports the source distribution to the measurement-conditioned posterior. This result leads to a forward operator-aware velocity field that is trained end-to-end and requires no separate guidance during sampling. Across five imaging tasks, our method achieves leading reconstruction quality with up to $50\times$ fewer network evaluations than competitive flow-based methods. Varying the number of sampling steps also controls the distortion-perception trade-off without retraining.

Diffusion and flow-matching models can produce high-quality posterior samples for inverse problems, but typically require tens to thousands of network evaluations per draw. MeanFlow enables one-step generation, yet applying it to inverse problems leaves no intermediate steps at which to enforce measurement consistency. We introduce SNaP, a one-step MeanFlow posterior sampler for linear inverse problems with Gaussian noise. Its central innovation is a measurement-adapted source: a Gaussian distribution whose mean and anisotropic covariance are determined by the measurement operator, observation, and noise level. The source anchors well-measured directions while preserving variation where the measurements are weak or uninformative. We show that the exact conditional flow transports this source to the true posterior. Across natural-image restoration and multi-coil MRI, SNaP produces diverse, high-quality samples with one network evaluation per draw, 30 to 2250 $\times$ faster than iterative samplers.