mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Universal Approximation for Log-concave Distributions using Well-conditioned Normalizing Flows

arXiv 2107.02951 ↗First posted 7 Jul 2021cs.LG stat.MLcited by 7

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Normalizing flows are a widely used class of latent-variable generative models with a tractable likelihood. Affine-coupling (Dinh et al, 2014-16) models are a particularly common type of normalizing flows, for which the Jacobian of the latent-to-observable-variable transformation is triangular, allowing the likelihood to be computed in linear time. Despite the widespread usage of affine couplings, the special structure of the architecture makes understanding their representational power challenging. The question of universal approximation was only recently resolved by three parallel papers (Huang et al.,2020;Zhang et al.,2020;Koehler et al.,2020) -- who showed reasonably regular distributions can be approximated arbitrarily well using affine couplings -- albeit with networks with a nearly-singular Jacobian. As ill-conditioned Jacobians are an obstacle for likelihood-based training, the fundamental question remains: which distributions can be approximated using well-conditioned affine coupling flows? In this paper, we show that any log-concave distribution can be approximated using well-conditioned affine-coupling flows. In terms of proof techniques, we uncover and leverage deep connections between affine coupling architectures, underdamped Langevin dynamics (a stochastic differential equation often used to sample from Gibbs measures) and H'enon maps (a structured dynamical system that appears in the study of symplectic diffeomorphisms). Our results also inform the practice of training affine couplings: we approximate a padded version of the input distribution with iid Gaussians -- a strategy which Koehler et al.(2020) empirically observed to result in better-conditioned flows, but had hitherto no theoretical grounding. Our proof can thus be seen as providing theoretical evidence for the benefits of Gaussian padding when training normalizing flows.

Key facts. Cited by 7 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 19 of its 43 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 7 Jul 2021.

Builds on

19 of 43 references.

References · 19

  1. 2020Score-Based Generative Modeling through Stochastic Differential Equationscited by 9,122
  2. 2019Generative Modeling by Estimating Gradients of the Data Distributioncited by 4,101
  3. 2018Neural Ordinary Differential Equationscited by 3,779
  4. 2015Variational Inference with Normalizing Flowscited by 2,170
  5. 2016Density estimation using Real NVPcited by 2,042
  6. 2018Glow: Generative Flow with Invertible 1x1 Convolutionscited by 1,545
  7. 2014NICE: Non-linear Independent Components Estimationcited by 1,058
  8. 2018FFJORD: Free-form Continuous Dynamics for Scalable Reversible Generative Modelscited by 594
  9. 2019Augmented Neural ODEscited by 397
  10. 2018Invertible Residual Networkscited by 365
  11. 2020Coupling-based Invertible Neural Networks Are Universal Diffeomorphism Approximatorscited by 85
  12. 2020Understanding and Mitigating Exploding Inverses in Invertible Neural Networkscited by 71
7 more
  1. 2020Augmented Normalizing Flows: Bridging the Gap Between Generative Flows and Latent Variable Modelscited by 66
  2. 2019Sum-of-Squares Polynomial Flowcited by 62
  3. 2019Approximation Capabilities of Neural ODEs and Invertible Residual Networkscited by 56
  4. 2020VFlow: More Expressive Generative Flows with Variational Data Augmentationcited by 38
  5. 2020Representational aspects of depth and conditioning in normalizing flowscited by 25
  6. 2019Is There an Analog of Nesterov Acceleration for MCMC?cited by 19
  7. 2019Accelerated Flow for Probability Distributionscited by 15

Built on by

Cited by year

Citing papers per year: 2022: 3; 2023: 3; 2024: 1.

7 papers.