Convergence of the Inexact Langevin Algorithm in KL Divergence with Application to Score-based Generative Models
arXiv:2211.01512v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Motivated by the increasingly popular Score-based Generative Modeling (SGM), we study the Inexact Langevin Dynamics (ILD) and Inexact Langevin Algorithm (ILA) where a score function estimate is used in place of the exact score. We establish {\em stable} biased convergence guarantees in terms of the Kullback-Leibler (KL) divergence. To achieve these guarantees, we impose two key assumptions: 1) the target distribution satisfies the log-Sobolev inequality, and 2) the error of score estimator exhibits a sub-Gaussian tail, referred to as Moment G — Kaylee Yingxi Yang, Andre Wibisono
View PDF HTML (experimental)
Abstract:Motivated by the increasingly popular Score-based Generative Modeling (SGM), we study the Inexact Langevin Dynamics (ILD) and Inexact Langevin Algorithm (ILA) where a score function estimate is used in place of the exact score. We establish {\em stable} biased convergence guarantees in terms of the Kullback-Leibler (KL) divergence. To achieve these guarantees, we impose two key assumptions: 1) the target distribution satisfies the log-Sobolev inequality, and 2) the error of score estimator exhibits a sub-Gaussian tail, referred to as Moment Generating Function (MGF) error assumption. Under the stronger $L^\infty$ score error assumption, we obtain a stable convergence bound in Rényi divergence. We also generalize the proof technique to SGM, and derive a stable convergence bound in KL divergence. In addition, we explore the question of how to obtain a provably accurate score estimator. We demonstrate that a simple estimator based on kernel density estimation fulfills the MGF error assumption for sub-Gaussian target distributions, at the population level.
Comments: Improved SGM convergence dependency on the LSI constant, and a minor correction to the MGF error assumption
Subjects:
Machine Learning (cs.LG); Statistics Theory (math.ST)
Cite as: arXiv:2211.01512 [cs.LG]
(or arXiv:2211.01512v3 [cs.LG] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2211.01512
arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite
Submission history
From: Kaylee Yingxi Yang [view email] [v1] Wed, 2 Nov 2022 23:12:59 UTC (24 KB) [v2] Fri, 2 Jun 2023 14:57:31 UTC (31 KB) [v3] Sat, 28 Mar 2026 03:35:31 UTC (31 KB)
Sign in to highlight and annotate this article
Conversation starters
Daily AI Digest
Get the top 5 AI stories delivered to your inbox every morning.
More about
researchpaperarxiv
Balancing Efficiency and Empathy: Healthcare Providers' Perspectives on AI-Supported Workflows for Serious Illness Conversations in the Emergency Department
arXiv:2506.00241v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Serious Illness Conversations (SICs), discussions about values and care preferences for patients with life-threatening illness, rarely occur in Emergency Departments (EDs), despite evidence that early conversations improve care alignment and reduce unnecessary interventions. We interviewed 11 ED providers to identify challenges in SICs and opportunities for technology support, with a focus on AI. Our analysis revealed a four-stage SIC workflow (identification, preparation, conduction, documentation) and barriers at each stage, including fragmented patient information, limited time and space, lack of conversational guidance, and burdensome documentation. Providers expressed interest in AI systems for synthesizing information, supporting re
Locating Risk: Task Designers and the Challenge of Risk Disclosure in RAI Content Work
arXiv:2505.24246v4 Announce Type: replace Abstract: As AI systems are increasingly tested and deployed in open-ended and high-stakes domains, crowdworkers are often tasked with responsible AI (RAI) content work. These tasks include labeling violent content, moderating disturbing text, or simulating harmful behavior for red teaming exercises to shape AI system behaviors. While prior research efforts have highlighted the risks to worker well-being associated with RAI content work, far less attention has been paid to how these risks are communicated to workers by task designers or individuals who design and post RAI tasks. Existing transparency frameworks and guidelines, such as model cards, datasheets, and crowdworksheets, focus on documenting model information and dataset collection process
FIRMED: A Peak-Centered Multimodal Dataset with Fine-Grained Annotation for Emotion Recognition
arXiv:2507.02350v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Traditional video-induced physiological datasets usually rely on whole-trial labels, which introduce temporal label noise in dynamic emotion recognition. We present FIRMED, a peak-centered multimodal dataset based on an immediate-recall annotation paradigm, with synchronized EEG, ECG, GSR, PPG, and facial recordings from 35 participants. FIRMED provides event-centered timestamps, emotion labels, and intensity annotations, and its annotation quality is supported by subjective and physiological validation. Benchmark experiments show that FIRMED consistently outperforms whole-trial labeling, yielding an average gain of 3.8 percentage points across eight EEG-based classifiers, with further improvements under multimodal fusion. FIRMED provides
Knowledge Map
Connected Articles — Knowledge Graph
This article is connected to other articles through shared AI topics and tags.
More in Research Papers
Locating Risk: Task Designers and the Challenge of Risk Disclosure in RAI Content Work
arXiv:2505.24246v4 Announce Type: replace Abstract: As AI systems are increasingly tested and deployed in open-ended and high-stakes domains, crowdworkers are often tasked with responsible AI (RAI) content work. These tasks include labeling violent content, moderating disturbing text, or simulating harmful behavior for red teaming exercises to shape AI system behaviors. While prior research efforts have highlighted the risks to worker well-being associated with RAI content work, far less attention has been paid to how these risks are communicated to workers by task designers or individuals who design and post RAI tasks. Existing transparency frameworks and guidelines, such as model cards, datasheets, and crowdworksheets, focus on documenting model information and dataset collection process
Togedule: Scheduling Meetings with Large Language Models and Adaptive Representations of Group Availability
arXiv:2505.01000v5 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Scheduling is a perennial-and often challenging-problem for many groups. Existing tools are mostly static, showing an identical set of choices to everyone, regardless of the current status of attendees' inputs and preferences. In this paper, we propose Togedule, an adaptive scheduling tool that uses large language models to dynamically adjust the pool of choices and their presentation format. With the initial prototype, we conducted a formative study (N=10) and identified the potential benefits and risks of such an adaptive scheduling tool. Then, after enhancing the system, we conducted two controlled experiments, one each for attendees and organizers (total N=66). For each experiment, we compared scheduling with verbal messages, shared c
Dynamic Cogeneration of Bug Reproduction Test in Agentic Program Repair
arXiv:2601.19066v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Bug Reproduction Tests (BRTs) have been used in many Automated Program Repair (APR) systems, primarily for validating promising fixes and aiding fix generation. In practice, when developers submit a patch, they often implement the BRT alongside the fix. Our experience deploying agentic APR reveals that developers similarly desire a BRT within AI-generated patches to increase their confidence. However, canonical APR systems tend to generate BRTs and fixes separately, and focus on producing only the fix in the final patch. In this paper, we study agentic APR in the context of cogeneration, where the APR agent is instructed to generate both a fix and a BRT in the same patch. We evaluate the effectiveness of different cogeneration strategies
The Necessity of a Holistic Safety Evaluation Framework for AI-Based Automation Features
arXiv:2602.05157v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: The intersection of Safety of Intended Functionality (SOTIF) and Functional Safety (FuSa) analysis of driving automation features has traditionally excluded Quality Management (QM) components (components that has no ASIL requirements allocated from vehicle-level HARA) from rigorous safety impact evaluations. While QM components are not typically classified as safety-relevant, recent developments in artificial intelligence (AI) integration reveal that such components can contribute to SOTIF-related hazardous risks. Compliance with emerging AI safety standards, such as ISO/PAS 8800, necessitates re-evaluating safety considerations for these components. This paper examines the necessity of conducting holistic safety analysis and risk assessm
Discussion
Sign in to join the discussion
No comments yet — be the first to share your thoughts!