CoChat
Sign Up
PreprintCited by 6,172Generative Adversarial Networks and Image SynthesisAdversarial Robustness in Machine LearningModel Reduction and Neural Networks

The DOI matches its DataCite record; 49 of the 49 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; 10 of the 38 sources its claims cite were checked for support.

Score-Based Generative Modeling through Stochastic Differential Equations

Open access
Song, Yang, Sohl-Dickstein, Jascha, Kingma, Diederik P., Kumar, Abhishek, Ermon, Stefano, Poole, Ben·2020·arXiv
DOI 10.48550/arxiv.2011.13456arXiv 2011.13456
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Creating noise from data is easy; creating data from noise is generative modeling. We present a stochastic differential equation (SDE) that smoothly transforms a complex data distribution to a known prior distribution by slowly injecting noise, and a corresponding reverse-time SDE that transforms the prior distribution back into the data distribution by slowly removing the noise. Crucially, the reverse-time SDE depends only on the time-dependent gradient field (\aka, score) of the perturbed data distribution. By leveraging advances in score-based generative modeling, we can accurately estimate these scores with neural networks, and use numerical SDE solvers to generate samples. We show that this framework encapsulates previous approaches in score-based generative modeling and diffusion probabilistic modeling, allowing for new sampling procedures and new modeling capabilities. In particular, we introduce a predictor-corrector framework to correct errors in the evolution of the discretized reverse-time SDE. We also derive an equivalent neural ODE that samples from the same distribution as the SDE, but additionally enables exact likelihood computation, and improved sampling efficiency. In addition, we provide a new way to solve inverse problems with score-based models, as demonstrated with experiments on class-conditional generation, image inpainting, and colorization. Combined with multiple architectural improvements, we achieve record-breaking performance for unconditional image generation on CIFAR-10 with an Inception score of 9.89 and FID of 2.20, a competitive likelihood of 2.99 bits/dim, and demonstrate high fidelity generation of 1024 x 1024 images for the first time from a score-based generative model.

Overview

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

The paper introduces a stochastic differential equation framework that unifies score-based generative modeling and diffusion probabilistic modeling by reversing a noising SDE with a learned time-dependent score network. It derives predictor-corrector and probability-flow ODE samplers, enabling exact likelihoods and controllable generation, and reports record CIFAR-10 sample quality and likelihood plus first 1024×1024 score-based samples.

Key findings

  • SMLD and DDPM are unified as discretizations of Variance Exploding (VE) and Variance Preserving (VP) SDEs; the reverse-time SDE depends only on the time-dependent score, and a new sub-VP SDE is proposed.
  • Predictor-Corrector samplers improve sample quality, while the probability flow ODE enables exact likelihood computation, fast adaptive sampling, latent manipulation, and uniquely identifiable encoding.
  • On CIFAR-10, NCSN++ cont. (deep, VE) achieves an Inception score of 9.89 and FID of 2.20 for unconditional generation; DDPM++ cont. (deep, sub-VP) achieves 2.99 bits/dim on uniformly dequantized CIFAR-10.
  • Controllable generation is demonstrated for class-conditional CIFAR-10, image inpainting and colorization on 256×256 LSUN, and high-fidelity 1024×1024 CelebA-HQ samples from a score-based model.

Methods

  • The framework models data corruption as a continuous-time diffusion process `dx = f(x,t)dt + g(t)dw`, derives the reverse-time SDE and probability flow ODE, and trains a time-dependent score model `sθ(x,t)` via denoising score matching; VE, VP, and sub-VP SDEs are instantiated.
  • Sampling uses general-purpose SDE solvers, reverse diffusion, ancestral sampling, Predictor-Corrector samplers with Langevin correctors, and probability flow ODE solvers; architecture improvements yield NCSN++ and DDPM++ models.
  • Experiments evaluate FID, Inception score, bits/dim negative log-likelihood, and qualitative samples on CIFAR-10, CelebA-HQ 1024×1024, and LSUN 256×256 bedroom/church; class-conditional generation uses a time-dependent classifier.

Limitations

  • Stated: sampling remains slower than GANs on the same datasets, and the breadth of available samplers introduces many hyperparameters; future work is needed for automatic selection and tuning.
  • Stated/evident: the 1024×1024 samples are not perfect, with visible flaws such as facial symmetry; architecture exploration for VP SDEs was limited to CIFAR-10 due to limited computing resources.
  • Evident: likelihood comparisons omit models evaluated with variational dequantization or discrete data except DDPM ELBO values annotated with an asterisk; sample quality and likelihood favor different SDEs (VE better sample quality, VP/sub-VP better likelihood), requiring per-domain experimentation.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

DataCite · 10.48550/arxiv.2011.13456

Cites

49 of 49 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

10 of 38 cited sources checked · 5 supported · 1 flagged · accuracy not yet measured

Show all 104 claims

  • It may state two separate claims as one. 40
  • Probably not a substantial claim. 25
61 of 61

  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    For ease of presentation, the diffusion coefficient is assumed to be a scalar and not to depend on x.

    “For ease of presentation we assume the diffusion coefficient is a scalar (instead of a dˆ d matrix) and does not depend on x, but our theory can be generalized to hold in those cases (see Appendix A).”

  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    The discretization schedule of time is fixed beforehand.

    “We assume the discretization schedule of time is fixed beforehand, and thus we absorb the dependency on ∆t into the notations of fi and Gi.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    In colorization, the known data dimensions are coupled.

    “Colorization is a special case of imputation, except that the known data dimensions are coupled.”

  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    p(y(t)|y) is tractable.

    “• ppyptq | yq is tractable. We can often derive this distribution from the interaction between the forward process and the SDE, like in the case of image imputation and colorization.”

  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    pt(x(t)|y(t),y) ≈ pt(x(t)|y(t)).

    “• ptpxptq | yptq,yq « ptpxptq | yptqq. For small t, yptq is almost the same as y so the approximation holds. For large t, y becomes further away from xptq in the Markov chain, and thus have smaller impact on xptq. Moreover, the approximation error for large t matter less for the final sample, since it is used early in the sampling process.”
5 of 5

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.

  • Appendix F reverses the sign of the score estimate

    Minor

    Appendix F defines the noisy sample as x0 + σiz. The Gaussian perturbation score therefore points in the −z/σi direction, not +z/σi as stated. This conflicts with the paper's definition of the trained model as an estimator of the perturbed-distribution score.

1 of 1

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 48 references

Research works printed but not linked: 6

  1. Ian Goodfellow, Jean Pouget-Abadie, Mehdi Mirza, Bing Xu, David Warde-Farley, Sherjil Ozair, Aaron Courville, and Yoshua Bengio. Generative adversarial nets. In Advances in neural informa- tion processing systems, pp. 2672–2680, 2014.
  2. Anirudh Goyal Alias Parth Goyal, Nan Rosemary Ke, Surya Ganguli, and Yoshua Bengio. Variational walkback: Learning a transition operator as a stochastic recurrent net. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, pp. 4392–4402, 2017.
  3. Jonathan Ho, Xi Chen, Aravind Srinivas, Yan Duan, and Pieter Abbeel. Flow++: Improving flow- based generative models with variational dequantization and architecture design. In International Conference on Machine Learning, pp. 2722–2730, 2019.
  4. Tero Karras, Timo Aila, Samuli Laine, and Jaakko Lehtinen. Progressive growing of gans for improved quality, stability, and variation. In International Conference on Learning Representations, 2018.
  5. Durk P Kingma and Prafulla Dhariwal. Glow: Generative flow with invertible 1x1 convolutions. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, pp. 10215–10224, 2018.
  6. Yang Song, Chenlin Meng, and Stefano Ermon. Mintnet: Building invertible neural networks with masked convolutions. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, pp. 11002–11012, 2019b.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 101–200 of 6,172

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Song, Y., Sohl-Dickstein, J., Kingma, D. P., Kumar, A., Ermon, S., & Poole, B.
Affiliations
  • Stanford University (US)
  • Google (United States) (US)
ORCID
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2020
ISSN
2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.48550/arxiv.2011.13456
arXiv
2011.13456
OpenAlex
W3110257065
Semantic Scholar
633e2fbfc0b21e959a244100937c5853afca4853
Cited by
1,953
References
48
Citations by year
2026: 51 · 2025: 576 · 2024: 858 · 2023: 385 · 2022: 56 · 2021: 25 · 2020: 1
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
Licence
arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
Locations
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Generative Adversarial Networks and Image Synthesis
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Adversarial Robustness in Machine Learning
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Statistical and Nonlinear Physics › Model Reduction and Neural Networks
Keywords
stochastic differential equations, score estimation, diffusion probabilistic models, neural ordinary differential equations, exact likelihood, inverse problems, image generation, image inpainting, image colorization

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-11-08, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).

A second model labelled each claim on 2026-11-08 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).

Cited sources are checked with a language model’s help (gpt-6-sol).

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review