← 研踪 PaperTrailarXiv:2610.00518 · v2
One-Step Generative Modeling via Training Dynamics Action
首次提交 2026-10-01 02:10
版本更新 2026-11-10 01:58
雷达观测 2026-11-10 15:22
摘要
One-step generative models construct a static generator through iterative training-time transport. Existing transport objectives primarily assess distributional motion, although a neural generator needs to realize the requested sample displacements jointly through shared parameter updates. The training-time construction raises the question: \emph{once training becomes the iterative process that constructs the final one-step map, what to optimize: the next distributional move, or the route by which the finite generator learns the final map?} To address the question, we introduce \textbf{T}raining \textbf{D}ynamics \textbf{A}ction (\textbf{TDAction}), which selects transport targets according to local shared-parameter realization cost while retaining a prescribed level of distributional progress. We formulate the cost as a soft-terminal control problem and derive a closed-form Batch Tangent Action-to-Go value that accounts for parameter effort and terminal mismatch. The criterion captures cross-sample interactions omitted by independent pairwise costs; under isotropic mobility, the criterion agrees with quadratic Euclidean assignment for deterministic balanced couplings. Randomized tangent probes provide a low-rank implementation that constructs shared detached targets without adding an inference-time trajectory. Controlled studies examine the relationship between generator geometry, transport selection, and realized local action. On ImageNet $256\times256$, TDAction attains an FID below $1.1$ without distillation.
观测到的版本
相邻记录可能跳过中间版本；首次发现 v2 及以上也会标为版本更新。
v2 · 2026-11-10 01:58 · 最新观测版本
One-Step Generative Modeling via Training Dynamics Action
One-step generative models construct a static generator through iterative training-time transport. Existing transport objectives primarily assess distributional motion, although a neural generator needs to realize the requested sample displacements jointly through shared parameter updates. The training-time construction raises the question: \emph{once training becomes the iterative process that constructs the final one-step map, what to optimize: the next distributional move, or the route by which the finite generator learns the final map?} To address the question, we introduce \textbf{T}raining \textbf{D}ynamics \textbf{A}ction (\textbf{TDAction}), which selects transport targets according to local shared-parameter realization cost while retaining a prescribed level of distributional progress. We formulate the cost as a soft-terminal control problem and derive a closed-form Batch Tangent Action-to-Go value that accounts for parameter effort and terminal mismatch. The criterion captures cross-sample interactions omitted by independent pairwise costs; under isotropic mobility, the criterion agrees with quadratic Euclidean assignment for deterministic balanced couplings. Randomized tangent probes provide a low-rank implementation that constructs shared detached targets without adding an inference-time trajectory. Controlled studies examine the relationship between generator geometry, transport selection, and realized local action. On ImageNet $256\times256$, TDAction attains an FID below $1.1$ without distillation.
查看此版本解读 →查看此版本原文 ↗