CoChat
Sign Up
PreprintCited by 1,550Generative Adversarial Networks and Image SynthesisImage and Signal Denoising MethodsAdversarial Robustness in Machine Learning

Improved Denoising Diffusion Probabilistic Models

Open access
Nichol, Alex, Dhariwal, Prafulla·2021·arXiv
DOI 10.48550/arxiv.2102.09672arXiv 2102.09672
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Denoising diffusion probabilistic models (DDPM) are a class of generative models which have recently been shown to produce excellent samples. We show that with a few simple modifications, DDPMs can also achieve competitive log-likelihoods while maintaining high sample quality. Additionally, we find that learning variances of the reverse diffusion process allows sampling with an order of magnitude fewer forward passes with a negligible difference in sample quality, which is important for the practical deployment of these models. We additionally use precision and recall to compare how well DDPMs and GANs cover the target distribution. Finally, we show that the sample quality and likelihood of these models scale smoothly with model capacity and training compute, making them easily scalable. We release our code at https://github.com/openai/improved-diffusion

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

DataCite · 10.48550/arxiv.2102.09672

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • The Square Cosine Schedule proposed in iDDPM works best for the paper's control tasks.

    “In our control tasks, we empirically found that the Square Cosine Schedule proposed in iDDPM [33] works best for our tasks.”

    From Diffusion Policy: Visuomotor Policy Learning via Action Diffusion (2023) · cites this paper as [33]

  • The Square Cosine Schedule works best for the paper's control tasks.

    “In our control tasks, we empirically found that the Square Cosine Schedule proposed in iDDPM Nichol and Dhariwal (2021) works best for our tasks.”

    From Diffusion policy: Visuomotor policy learning via action diffusion (2025) · cites this paper as Nichol and Dhariwal (2021)

  • The Square Cosine Schedule works best for the paper's control tasks.

    “In our control tasks, we empirically found that the Square Cosine Schedule proposed in iDDPM Nichol and Dhariwal (2021) works best for our tasks.”

    From Diffusion Policy: Visuomotor Policy Learning via Action Diffusion (2023) · cites this paper as Nichol and Dhariwal (2021)

Self-check

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

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 10

  1. Chen, X., Mishra, N., Rohaninejad, M., and Abbeel, P. Pixelsnail: An improved autoregressive generative model. In International Conference on Machine Learning , pp. 864-872. PMLR, 2018.
  2. Child, R. Very deep vaes generalize autoregressive models and can outperform them on images. arXiv preprint arXiv:2011.10650 , 2020. · arXiv
  3. Ho, J., Chen, X., Srinivas, A., Duan, Y., and Abbeel, P. Flow++: Improving flow-based generative models with variational dequantization and architecture design. arXiv preprint arXiv:1902.00275 , 2019. · arXiv
  4. Hyv¨ arinen, A. Estimation of non-normalized statistical models by score matching. Journal of Machine Learning Research , 6(Apr):695-709, 2005.
  5. Kingma, D. P. and Dhariwal, P. Glow: Generative flow with invertible 1x1 convolutions. In Advances in neural information processing systems , pp. 10215-10224, 2018.
  6. Parmar, N., Vaswani, A., Uszkoreit, J., Kaiser, Ł., Shazeer, N., Ku, A., and Tran, D. Image transformer. arXiv preprint arXiv:1802.05751 , 2018. · arXiv
  7. Ravuri, S. and Vinyals, O. Classification accuracy score for conditional generative models. arXiv preprint arXiv:1905.10887 , 2019. · arXiv
  8. Song, Y. and Ermon, S. Generative modeling by estimating gradients of the data distribution. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems , pp. 11918-11930, 2019.
  9. Song, Y. and Ermon, S. Improved techniques for training score-based generative models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2006.09011 , 2020. · arXiv
  10. Vahdat, A. and Kautz, J. Nvae: A deep hierarchical variational autoencoder. arXiv preprint arXiv:2007.03898 , 2020. · arXiv

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Nichol, A., & Dhariwal, P.
Affiliations
OpenAI (United States) (US)
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2021
ISSN
2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.48550/arxiv.2102.09672
arXiv
2102.09672
OpenAlex
W3122887982
Cited by
1,550
References
5
Citations by year
2026: 12 · 2025: 411 · 2024: 693 · 2023: 367 · 2022: 31 · 2021: 36
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 › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Image and Signal Denoising Methods
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Adversarial Robustness in Machine Learning
Keywords
denoising diffusion probabilistic models, log-likelihood estimation, sampling efficiency, generative models, GaN comparison, precision and recall

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.

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