How do modern latent variable models like invertible models (normalizing flows) balance between expressiveness and tractability in generative modeling?

/ / Published in Artificial Intelligence, EITC/AI/ADL Advanced Deep Learning, Advanced generative models, Modern latent variable models, Examination review

Modern latent variable models, such as invertible models or normalizing flows, are instrumental in the landscape of generative modeling due to their unique ability to balance expressiveness and tractability. This balance is achieved through a combination of mathematical rigor and innovative architectural design, which allows for the precise modeling of complex data distributions while maintaining computational feasibility.

Expressiveness in Normalizing Flows

Expressiveness in the context of generative models refers to the model's ability to capture and represent complex data distributions. Normalizing flows achieve high expressiveness through a series of invertible transformations. These transformations map a simple base distribution, such as a multivariate Gaussian, to a more complex target distribution that resembles the data distribution.

The core idea behind normalizing flows is that a complex distribution can be obtained by applying a sequence of invertible and differentiable functions to a simple initial distribution. Mathematically, if z is a latent variable drawn from a simple distribution p_Z(z), and x is the observed variable, the relationship between x and z can be expressed through a series of transformations f_1, f_2, \ldots, f_K:

    \[ x = f_K \circ f_{K-1} \circ \cdots \circ f_1(z). \]

The sequence of transformations f_1, f_2, \ldots, f_K is designed to be invertible, ensuring that each transformation has a well-defined inverse. This invertibility is important for both sampling and likelihood estimation.

Tractability in Normalizing Flows

Tractability, on the other hand, involves the ability to efficiently compute the likelihood of observed data and to sample from the model. Normalizing flows ensure tractability by leveraging the change of variables formula in probability theory, which allows for the computation of the probability density function of the transformed variable. Given the invertible transformation x = f(z), the density of x can be computed as:

    \[ p_X(x) = p_Z(z) \left| \det \left( \frac{\partial f^{-1}(x)}{\partial x} \right) \right|, \]

where \left| \det \left( \frac{\partial f^{-1}(x)}{\partial x} \right) \right| is the absolute value of the determinant of the Jacobian matrix of the inverse transformation f^{-1}.

For the model to be tractable, the Jacobian determinant must be efficiently computable. This requirement influences the design of the invertible transformations used in normalizing flows. Popular choices include affine coupling layers and autoregressive transformations, which are specifically designed to allow for efficient computation of the Jacobian determinant.

Affine Coupling Layers

Affine coupling layers are a common building block in normalizing flows. In an affine coupling layer, the input variable x is split into two parts: x_1 and x_2. The transformation is then defined as:

    \[ y_1 = x_1, \]

    \[ y_2 = x_2 \odot \exp(s(x_1)) + t(x_1), \]

where s and t are scale and translation functions, respectively, and \odot denotes element-wise multiplication. The inverse transformation is straightforward:

    \[ x_1 = y_1, \]

    \[ x_2 = (y_2 - t(y_1)) \odot \exp(-s(y_1)). \]

The Jacobian of this transformation is triangular, making its determinant easy to compute as the product of the diagonal elements:

    \[ \det \left( \frac{\partial (y_1, y_2)}{\partial (x_1, x_2)} \right) = \exp \left( \sum_i s_i(x_1) \right). \]

This design ensures that the transformation is both expressive and tractable.

Autoregressive Transformations

Autoregressive transformations are another key component in normalizing flows. In an autoregressive model, the transformation of each variable depends on the previous variables in a sequential manner. For example, in a masked autoregressive flow (MAF), the transformation is defined as:

    \[ y_i = \mu_i(x_{<i}) + \sigma_i(x_{<i}) \cdot x_i, \]

where \mu_i and \sigma_i are functions of the preceding variables x_{<i}. The inverse transformation is similarly defined, and the Jacobian determinant is the product of the diagonal elements:

    \[ \det \left( \frac{\partial y}{\partial x} \right) = \prod_i \sigma_i(x_{<i}). \]

Autoregressive transformations are highly expressive because they allow for complex dependencies between variables, and they are tractable because the Jacobian determinant is easy to compute.

Practical Applications and Examples

Normalizing flows have been successfully applied in various domains, including image generation, density estimation, and anomaly detection. One notable example is the Glow model, which uses a series of invertible 1×1 convolutions and affine coupling layers to generate high-quality images. Glow demonstrates the power of normalizing flows in capturing the intricate details of natural images while maintaining tractability for both sampling and likelihood estimation.

Another example is the RealNVP model, which also uses affine coupling layers and has been applied to tasks such as image generation and density estimation. RealNVP's design ensures that the model is both expressive and computationally efficient, making it a popular choice for generative modeling.

Conclusion

Modern latent variable models like normalizing flows achieve a delicate balance between expressiveness and tractability through the use of invertible transformations and efficient computation of the Jacobian determinant. By leveraging affine coupling layers and autoregressive transformations, these models can capture complex data distributions while ensuring that likelihood estimation and sampling remain computationally feasible. The success of models like Glow and RealNVP in various applications highlights the effectiveness of normalizing flows in generative modeling.

Other recent questions and answers regarding Advanced generative models:

More questions and answers:

Tagged under: , , , , , ,