Geometrical Insights for Implicit Generative Modeling
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Learning algorithms for implicit generative models can optimize a variety of criteria that measure how the data distribution differs from the implicit model distribution, including the Wasserstein distance, the Energy distance, and the Maximum Mean Discrepancy criterion. A careful look at the geometries induced by these distances on the space of probability measures reveals interesting differences. In particular, we can establish surprising approximate global convergence guarantees for the 1-Wasserstein distance,even when the parametric generator has a nonconvex parametrization.
Key facts. Cited by 7 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 21 Dec 2017.
Builds on
No reference list yet.
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2021: 1; 2022: 3; 2023: 1; 2024: 1; 2025: 0; 2026: 1.
7 papers.
- 2021KALE Flow: A Relaxed KL Gradient Flow for Probabilities with Disjoint Supportcited by 37
- 2022Survival Mixture Density Networkscited by 9
- 2022Learning Energy Networks with Generalized Fenchel-Young Lossescited by 8
- 2026Theoretical Analysis of Engression and Reverse Markov Engressioncited by 4
- 2024Resistance Distance and Linearized Optimal Transport on Graphscited by 2
- 2022On The Energy Statistics of Feature Maps in Pruning of Neural Networks with Skip-Connectionscited by 0
- 2023Touring sampling with pushforward mapscited by 0
- 2026Theoretical Analysis of Engression and Reverse Markov Engression31 May 2026
- 2024Resistance Distance and Linearized Optimal Transport on Graphs23 Apr 2024
- 2023Touring sampling with pushforward maps23 Nov 2023
- 2022Survival Mixture Density Networks23 Aug 2022
- 2022Learning Energy Networks with Generalized Fenchel-Young Losses19 May 2022
- 2022On The Energy Statistics of Feature Maps in Pruning of Neural Networks with Skip-Connections26 Jan 2022
- 2021KALE Flow: A Relaxed KL Gradient Flow for Probabilities with Disjoint Support16 Jun 2021