Scale-VAE: Preventing Posterior Collapse in Variational Autoencoder
Abstract
Variational autoencoder (VAE) is a widely used generative model that gains great popularity for its capability in density estimation and representation learning. However, when employing a strong autoregressive generation network, VAE tends to converge to a degenerate local optimum known as posterior collapse. In this paper, we propose a model named Scale-VAE to solve this problem. Scale-VAE does not force the KL term to be larger than a positive constant, but aims to make the latent variables easier to be exploited by the generation network. Specifically, each dimension of the mean for the approximate posterior distribution is multiplied by a factor to keep that dimension discriminative across data instances. The same factors are used for all data instances so as not to change the relative relationship between the posterior distributions. Latent variables from the scaled-up posteriors are fed into the generation network, but the original posteriors are still used to calculate the KL term. In this way, Scale-VAE can solve the posterior collapse problem with a training cost similar to or even lower than the basic VAE. Experimental results show that Scale-VAE outperforms state-of-the-art models in density estimation, representation learning, and consistency of the latent space, and is competitive with other models in generation.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Probabilistic Variational Contrastive Learning
Jeong, M., Kim, S., & Hero, A. (2025) · arXiv.org · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2506.10159 · Cited by 2
“In contrast to VAE embeddings—which often rely on pixel-level reconstruction through expressive decoder [45]—VCL preserves semantics via contrastive objectives.”
Autoencoders in Natural Language Processing: A Comprehensive Review
Redah, M., & Al-Khatib, W. (2026) · De Computis · doi:10.3390/computers15040232 · Cited by 1
Scalable Robust Bayesian Co-Clustering with Compositional ELBOs
Ashwin, V., & Bajaj, C. (2025) · arXiv.org · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2504.04079 · Cited by 1
“We also use the Scale trick from [37] to alleviate posterior collapse and promote meaningful separation of latent variables, and stabilize joint learning of reconstruction and clustering objectives.”
Information-Bottlenecked Variational Autoencoder for Top-N Recommendation via Gating Mechanism
Guo, X.-B., Li, S., Li, Y.-R., et al. (2026) · ACM Transactions on Information Systems · doi:10.1145/3845987
“We compared VAEinfox with several SOTA models across six datasets, including Multi-VAE [48], a strong performer in item recommendation using a multinomial likelihood for fair comparison; 𝛽 -VAE [29], re-weighting the KL term with a parameter 𝛽 ; SE-VAE [38], combining amortized and stochastic variational inference; In…”
Peñalver, A. C., Fernández-Rodicio, E., & Castro-González, Á. (2026) · IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation · doi:10.1109/icra57385.2026.11697185
“Pure generation is analysed by sampling z and controlling dispersion with a fixed temperature τ that scales the latent sample [42], [43].”
Entropic Auto-Encoding via Implicit Free-Energy Minimization
Aliahmadi, H., Babayan, I., & van Anders, G. (2026) · arXiv.org · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2605.16164
“Under ELBO optimization, such landscape effects can stabilize low-loss basins that favor reconstruction over inference [41, 36], reinforcing ill-conditioned stationary points [24] and latent non-identifiability [39], and producing “accurate” decoders that are insensitive to latent codes.”
Toward Architecture-Agnostic Local Control of Posterior Collapse in VAEs
Song, H.-H., Kim, S., & Lee, S. (2025) · arXiv.org · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2508.12530
“A recent study(Song et al., 2024) similarly argues that posterior collapse arises from optimization dynamics rather than solely from KL imbalance.”
- Authors
- Song, T., Sun, J., Liu, X., & Peng, W.
- ORCID
- Song, Tianbao
- Venue
- Proceedings of the Language Resources and Evaluation Conference
- Published
- 2024-05
- Pages
- 14347-14357
- ISSN
- 2522-2686
- OpenAlex
- W7131836346
- Semantic Scholar
- ea7d13bde25a306d515664fbaf2df107370fcc32
- Cited by
- 0
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 0.00
- Type
- conference paper
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Language Resources and Evaluation Conference (LREC) (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Topic Modeling
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Gaussian Processes and Bayesian Inference
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Neural Networks and Applications
- Keywords
- posterior collapse, variational autoencoder, generative models, latent representation learning
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