Diffusion Models

8 posts

google2 min readCurated summary

Towards demystifying the creativity of diffusion models

Diffusion models generate novel data because neural networks learn a smoothed approximation of the score function rather than perfectly memorizing it. This smoothing prevents denoising trajectories from collapsing directly onto training examples, allowing samples to interpolate between them. In high-dimensional data spaces, it helps recover the underlying data manifold while preserving realism and novelty. ## How Diffusion Models Denoise - Training corrupts real samples with noise, then teaches a model to reverse the corruption step by step. - The score function acts like a force field, directing noisy points toward meaningful data. - A perfectly learned score function would pull every generated sample onto one of the training examples, resulting in memorization. - In practice, neural networks learn an approximation of this function and therefore can generalize beyond the training set. ## Score Smoothing Creates Interpolation - Neural network regularization, including weight decay, makes sharp changes in the ideal score function difficult to represent. - In a one-dimensional example with training points at -1 and +1: - The perfect score sharply switches direction at zero. - Generated points eventually collapse onto either -1 or +1. - A smoothed score creates a gentler transition near zero. - Points in this transition region move more slowly and can settle between the training points. - This interpolation produces novel but plausible samples. - Smoothing can arise from explicit regularization or implicit regularization caused by gradient-based optimization. ## Recovering the Hidden Data Manifold - Real images occupy a small, structured manifold within a much larger high-dimensional pixel space. - Generating new images requires recovering this manifold from finite training data. - Score smoothing behaves differently depending on direction: - Along the manifold, it slows movement toward individual training examples. - Toward the manifold, the score is already relatively smooth, so smoothing has little effect. - This directional behavior prevents samples from becoming blurry in empty regions while reducing memorization along the manifold. - The result is a balance between fidelity and creativity: generated outputs remain realistic while differing from the training examples. ## Conclusion The paper argues that diffusion-model creativity is a predictable mathematical consequence of score smoothing. Neural networks’ regularized, approximate learning allows denoising trajectories to interpolate across the data manifold instead of merely retrieving memorized samples.

Read original(opens in new tab)
netflix3 min readCurated summary

Toward More Controllable AI Video Editing: An Early Research Exploration at Netflix

Netflix explores AI video-editing tools designed to preserve artists’ creative control rather than regenerate entire clips indiscriminately. The research addresses two major problems: unintended changes to untouched footage and physically implausible results when objects are removed. Its proposed systems, Vera and VOID, generate targeted edits while preserving scene identity, performance, and continuity. ## Challenges in Generative Video Editing - Full-video regeneration can unintentionally change: - Actors’ identities and performances - Backgrounds and objects - Important scene details - Object removal often produces unnatural results because models erase the target without reconstructing realistic motion and physical interactions. - Professional editors need precise control over what changes and what remains untouched. ## Vera: Layered Video Diffusion - Vera generates: - An edit layer containing the requested visual change - An alpha matte defining where that change should appear - These layers are composited with the original footage, leaving pixels outside the edited region intact. - The approach supports tasks such as: - Adding objects - Changing backgrounds - This layered design helps preserve original identities, performances, and details. ## Training Dataset - Netflix created a custom dataset because existing public datasets lacked high-quality layered video data. - The dataset contains 486,000 frames at 832×480 resolution. - It includes: - **Synthetic composites:** Foreground objects with alpha mattes placed over generated backgrounds. - **Realistic single-object videos:** Real footage processed with segmentation, matting, background generation, and human review. - **Realistic multi-object videos with effects:** Objects isolated along with shadows, reflections, and other scene effects. ## Vera’s Model Architecture - Vera uses a Mixture-of-Transformers design with three specialized DiTs for: - The edit layer - The alpha matte - The composite video - Each branch has its own attention projections and feed-forward weights, allowing specialization while joint attention enables communication between layers. - The model is initialized from a pretrained text-to-video model. - Additional embeddings and input layers help distinguish source-video, mask, alpha, and composite information. ## Evaluation and Results - Netflix tested Vera on: - 72 object-addition video-prompt pairs - 69 background-change pairs - The benchmark included varied motion speeds, camera movements, object counts, and scene complexity. - Evaluation measured: - Preservation of untouched content - Compliance with text instructions - Temporal and per-frame video quality - Vera-1.3B and Vera-14B substantially outperformed existing methods on content preservation while achieving comparable instruction-following and visual quality. Netflix’s research favors localized, layered editing over unrestricted video regeneration. Vera demonstrates how separating edits from original footage can make generative tools safer and more controllable for professional workflows; the accompanying VOID research aims to apply similar principles to physically plausible object and interaction removal.

Read original(opens in new tab)
pinterest3 min readCurated summary

On the (re)-prioritization of open-source AI

Pinterest argues that AI competition is shifting beyond ever-larger proprietary models. Open-source models now deliver comparable quality at a fraction of the cost, while compact models fine-tuned for specific tasks can outperform general-purpose systems. The company’s strategy is to combine open-source models with Pinterest-specific data, internal systems, and deep product integration. ## Open-Source Models and Cost Efficiency - Pinterest reports achieving performance comparable to leading proprietary AI models at less than 10% of the cost. - The company is shifting more investment toward fine-tuned open-source models, especially for visual and multimodal applications. - As core LLM architectures become increasingly commoditized, competitive advantage is moving toward: - Domain-specific data - Personalization - Product integration - End-to-end system optimization ## Choosing What to Build, Buy, or Adapt Pinterest evaluates foundation-model strategy by modality: - **User modeling and recommendation** - These systems are tightly coupled to a product’s behavior and are generally built internally. - Pinterest uses long-term user-action sequences and a graph containing hundreds of billions of user, board, and content nodes. - Examples include PinFM for representation learning and PinRec for generative recommendations. - **Visual models** - Pinterest largely trains visual encoders and diffusion models in-house. - Its visual-search data and image-board collections provide the weakly supervised datasets needed for large-scale training. - Internal models benefit from Pinterest’s specialized visual domain. - **Text models** - Pinterest has historically relied more on open-source and proprietary third-party LLMs. - Progress in reasoning and language modeling depends heavily on enormous datasets and compute resources, making external models practical. ## Domain-Specific Data as the Differentiator - Open-source multimodal architectures are narrowing the capability gap with proprietary models. - Pinterest’s experience reflects an older machine-learning pattern: model architectures become broadly available, while value comes from specialized data and fine-tuning. - Its visual encoders, including UVE and PinCLIP, improved retrieval by training on Pinterest image and visual-search data rather than using generic embeddings. - Pinterest Canvas similarly adapts an internally trained diffusion model for image editing and enhancement, outperforming larger general-purpose visual-generation models in those use cases. ## Pinterest Assistant and Specialized Tools - Pinterest Assistant combines: - Multimodal retrieval systems - Recommendation services - Specialized generative models - A core multimodal LLM - Most recommendation and agentic capabilities are handled by Pinterest-native tools built on its user and visual foundation models. - The central LLM acts primarily as an intelligent router, handling query understanding, planning, and tool calling rather than performing every task itself. - This architecture allows Pinterest to improve the overall product by optimizing smaller, specialized components instead of relying solely on a larger general-purpose model. Pinterest’s recommendation is to use open-source models as adaptable building blocks, then differentiate through proprietary data, specialized models, and tight integration with the product. The most effective AI systems may therefore be smaller, cheaper, and more purpose-built than frontier general-purpose models.

Read original(opens in new tab)
googleOriginal article

Deep researcher with test-time diffusion (opens in new tab)

Google Cloud researchers have introduced Test-Time Diffusion Deep Researcher (TTD-DR), a framework that treats long-form research report writing as an iterative diffusion process. By mimicking human research patterns, the system treats initial drafts as "noisy" versions that are gradually polished through retrieval-augmented denoising and self-evolutionary algorithms. This approach achieves state-of-the-art results in generating comprehensive academic-style reports and solving complex multi-hop reasoning tasks. ### The Backbone DR Architecture The system operates through a three-stage pipeline designed to transition from a broad query to a detailed final document: * **Research Plan Generation:** Upon receiving a query, the agent produces a structured outline of key areas to guide the subsequent information-gathering process. * **Iterative Search Agents:** Two sub-agents work in tandem; one formulates specific search questions based on the plan, while the other performs Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) to synthesize precise answers from available sources. * **Final Report Synthesis:** The agent combines the initial research plan with the accumulated question-answer pairs to produce a coherent, evidence-based final report. ### Component-wise Self-Evolution To ensure high-quality inputs at every stage, the framework employs a self-evolutionary algorithm that optimizes the performance of individual agents: * **Diverse Variant Generation:** The system explores multiple diverse answer variants to cover a larger search space and identify the most valuable information. * **Environmental Feedback:** An "LLM-as-a-judge" assesses these variants using auto-raters for metrics like helpfulness and comprehensiveness, providing specific textual feedback for improvement. * **Revision and Cross-over:** Variants undergo iterative revisions based on feedback before being merged into a single, high-quality output that consolidates the best information from all evolutionary paths. ### Report-level Refinement via Diffusion The core innovation of TTD-DR is modeling the writing process as a denoising diffusion mechanism: * **Messy-to-Polished Transformation:** The framework treats the initial rough draft as a noisy input that requires cleaning through factual verification. * **Denoising with Retrieval:** The agent identifies missing information or weak arguments in the draft and uses search tools as a "denoising step" to inject new facts and strengthen the content. * **Continuous Improvement Loop:** This process repeats in cycles, where each iteration uses newly retrieved information to refine the draft into a more accurate and high-quality final version. TTD-DR demonstrates that shifting AI development from linear generation to iterative, diffusion-based refinement significantly improves the depth and rigor of long-form content. This methodology serves as a powerful blueprint for building autonomous agents capable of handling complex, multi-step knowledge tasks.

googleOriginal article

Zooming in: Efficient regional environmental risk assessment with generative AI (opens in new tab)

Google Research has introduced a dynamical-generative downscaling method that combines physics-based climate modeling with probabilistic diffusion models to produce high-resolution regional environmental risk assessments. By bridging the resolution gap between global Earth system models and city-level data needs, this approach provides a computationally efficient way to quantify climate uncertainties at a 10 km scale. This hybrid technique significantly reduces error rates compared to traditional statistical methods while remaining far less computationally expensive than full-scale dynamical simulations. ## The Resolution Gap in Climate Modeling * Traditional Earth system models typically operate at a resolution of ~100 km, which is too coarse for city-level planning regarding floods, heatwaves, and wildfires. * Existing "dynamical downscaling" uses regional climate models (RCMs) to provide physically realistic 10 km projections, but the computational cost is too high to apply to large ensembles of climate data. * Statistical downscaling offers a faster alternative but often fails to capture complex local weather patterns or extreme events, and it struggles to generalize to unprecedented future climate conditions. ## A Hybrid Dynamical-Generative Framework * The process begins with a "physics-based first pass," where an RCM downscales global data to an intermediate resolution of 50 km to establish a common physical representation. * A generative AI system called "R2D2" (Regional Residual Diffusion-based Downscaling) then adds fine-scale details, such as the effects of complex topography, to reach the target 10 km resolution. * R2D2 specifically learns the "residual"—the difference between intermediate and high-resolution fields—which simplifies the learning task and improves the model's ability to generalize to unseen environmental conditions. ## Efficiency and Accuracy in Risk Assessment * The model was trained and validated using the Western United States Dynamically Downscaled Dataset (WUS-D3), which utilizes the "gold standard" WRF model. * The dynamical-generative approach reduced fine-scale errors by over 40% compared to popular statistical methods like BCSD and STAR-ESDM. * A key advantage of this method is its scalability; the AI requires training on only one dynamically downscaled model to effectively process outputs from various other Earth system models, allowing for the rapid assessment of large climate ensembles. By combining the physical grounding of traditional regional models with the speed of diffusion-based AI, researchers can now produce granular risk assessments that were previously cost-prohibitive. This method allows for a more robust exploration of future climate scenarios, providing essential data for farming, water management, and community protection.

lineOriginal article

How to evaluate AI-generated images? (opens in new tab)

To optimize the Background Person Removal (BPR) feature in image editing services, the LY Corporation AMD team evaluated various generative AI inpainting models to determine which automated metrics best align with human judgment. While traditional research benchmarks often fail to reflect performance in high-resolution, real-world scenarios, this study identifies a framework for selecting models that produce the most natural results. The research highlights that as the complexity and size of the masked area increase, the gap between model performance becomes more pronounced, requiring more sophisticated evaluation strategies. ### Background Person Removal Workflow * **Instance Segmentation:** The process begins by identifying individual pixels to classify objects such as people, buildings, or trees within the input image. * **Salient Object Detection:** This step distinguishes the main subjects of the photo from background elements to ensure only unwanted figures are targeted for removal. * **Inpainting Execution:** Once the background figures are removed, inpainting technology is used to reconstruct the empty space so it blends seamlessly with the surrounding environment. ### Comparison of Inpainting Technologies * **Diffusion-based Models:** These models, such as FLUX.1-Fill-dev, restore damaged areas by gradually removing noise. While they excel at restoring complex details, they are generally slower than GANs and can occasionally generate artifacts. * **GAN-based Models:** Using a generator-discriminator architecture, models like LaMa and HINT offer faster generation speeds and competitive performance for lower-resolution or smaller inpainting tasks. * **Performance Discrepancy:** Experiments showed that while most models perform well on small areas, high-resolution images with large missing sections reveal significant quality differences that are not always captured in standard academic benchmarks. ### Evaluation Methodology and Metrics * **BPR Evaluation Dataset:** The team curated a specific dataset of 10 images with high quality-variance to test 11 different inpainting models released between 2022 and 2024. * **Single Image Quality Metrics:** Evaluated models using LAION Aesthetics score-v2, CLIP-IQA, and Q-Align to measure the aesthetic quality of individual generated frames. * **Preference and Reward Models:** Utilized PickScore, ImageReward, and HPS v2 to determine which generated images would be most preferred by human users. * **Objective:** The goal of these tests was to find an automated evaluation method that minimizes the need for expensive and time-consuming human reviews while maintaining high reliability. Selecting an inpainting model based solely on paper-presented metrics is insufficient for production-level services. For features like BPR, it is critical to implement an evaluation pipeline that combines both aesthetic scoring and human preference models to ensure consistent quality across diverse, high-resolution user photos.

googleOriginal article

Bringing 3D shoppable products online with generative AI (opens in new tab)

Google has developed a series of generative AI techniques to transform standard 2D product images into immersive, interactive 3D visualizations for online shopping. By evolving from early neural reconstruction methods to state-of-the-art video generation models like Veo, Google can now produce high-quality 360-degree spins from as few as three images. This progression significantly reduces the cost and complexity for businesses to create shoppable 3D experiences at scale across diverse product categories. ## First Generation: Neural Radiance Fields (NeRFs) * Launched in 2022, this initial approach utilized NeRF technology to synthesize novel views and 360° spins, specifically for footwear on Google Search. * The system required five or more images and relied on complex sub-processes, including background removal, XYZ prediction (NOCS), and camera position estimation. * While a breakthrough, the technology struggled with "noisy" signals and complex geometries, such as the thin structures found in sandals or high heels. ## Second Generation: View-Conditioned Diffusion * Introduced in 2023, this version addressed previous limitations by using a diffusion-based architecture to predict unseen viewpoints from limited data. * The model utilized Score Distillation Sampling (SDS), which compares rendered 3D models against generated targets to iteratively refine parameters for better realism. * This approach allowed Google to scale 3D visualizations to the majority of shoes viewed on Google Shopping, handling more diverse and difficult footwear styles. ## Third Generation: Generalizing with Veo * The current advancement leverages Google’s Veo video generation model to transform product images into consistent, high-fidelity 360° videos. * By training on millions of synthetic 3D assets, Veo captures complex interactions between light, texture, and geometry, making it effective for shiny surfaces and diverse categories like electronics and furniture. * This method removes the need for precise camera pose estimation, increasing reliability across different environments. * While the model can generate a 3D representation from a single image by "hallucinating" missing details, using three images significantly reduces errors and ensures high-fidelity accuracy. These technological milestones mark a shift from specialized 3D reconstruction toward generalized AI models that make digital products feel tangible and interactive for consumers.

figma2 min readCurated summary

An Update on our Make Designs Feature | Figma Blog

Figma temporarily disabled its Make Designs AI feature after discovering that some generated mockups closely resembled real applications, including Apple’s weather app. The issue came not from model training, but from insufficiently reviewed components and example screens in Figma’s custom design systems. Figma removed the problematic assets and planned stronger quality assurance before relaunching the feature, later bringing it back under the name First Draft with updates. ## How Make Designs Works - Combines an AI model, contextual design-system data, and a user prompt. - Uses generally available models such as OpenAI’s GPT-4o and Amazon Titan, without additional fine-tuning. - Relies on separate mobile and desktop design systems containing hundreds of components and example compositions. - The language model selects, arranges, parameterizes, and themes components based on the prompt. - Amazon Titan generates the images used in the resulting designs. ## What Went Wrong - Figma reviewed the design systems during development and private beta testing. - Shortly before Config 2024, new components and example screens were added without sufficient vetting. - Some assets resembled patterns from real-world applications. - A prompt for a weather app produced results that appeared notably similar to Apple’s first-party design. - The incident was identified after designer Andy Allen raised the concern, prompting an immediate investigation. ## Figma’s Response - The team traced the similarities to assets in the underlying design systems. - Problematic components and examples were removed. - Make Designs was rolled back and disabled. - Figma postponed relaunching the feature while developing a more robust QA process. ## Future Direction - Make Designs was originally called “First Draft” to emphasize that AI output is only a starting point. - Figma wants users eventually to connect the feature to their own company design systems. - This could reduce the time spent locating, assembling, and configuring components. - Figma maintains that designers remain essential for refining drafts into meaningful user experiences. - The feature was later re-enabled with updates and renamed First Draft. Figma’s experience highlights the need to carefully audit not only AI models but also the data, components, and examples supplied to them. AI-generated designs should be treated as starting points that require professional review and creative refinement.

Read original(opens in new tab)