mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Drifting Fields are not Conservative

arXiv 2604.06333 ↗First posted 7 Apr 2026cs.LG cs.CVcited by 13

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Drifting models have recently gained attention for generating high-quality samples in a single forward pass. During training, they learn a push-forward map by following a vector-valued field, the drift field. We ask whether this procedure is equivalent to optimizing a scalar loss and find that, in general, it is not: drift fields are not conservative and cannot be written as the gradient of any scalar potential. We identify the position-dependent normalization as the source of non-conservatism, with the Gaussian kernel as the unique radial exception. Guided by this, we introduce the sharp kernel k^# and a sharp-normalized drift field that is conservative for general radial kernels. The resulting vector field is the gradient of a scalar potential that can be optimized directly using stochastic gradient descent. Moreover, the field has the form of a score difference of kernel density estimates, and gives exact equilibrium identifiability. Thus, sharp normalization closes the gap to related literature, such as Wasserstein gradient-flows and denoising score matching, also for non-Gaussian kernels. Empirically, sharp normalization preserves the performance of the original drifting objective, suggesting that the non-conservative flexibility is not required for high-quality generation.

Key facts. Cited by 13 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 14 of its 25 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 7 Apr 2026.

Builds on

14 of 25 references.

References · 14

  1. 2019PyTorch: An Imperative Style, High-Performance Deep Learning Librarycited by 20,305
  2. 2021High-Resolution Image Synthesis with Latent Diffusion Modelscited by 18,863
  3. 2021Diffusion Models Beat GANs on Image Synthesiscited by 8,255
  4. 2022Scalable Diffusion Models with Transformerscited by 6,054
  5. 2022Classifier-Free Diffusion Guidancecited by 5,847
  6. 2017Fashion-MNIST: a Novel Image Dataset for Benchmarking Machine Learning Algorithmscited by 4,349
  7. 2019Improved Precision and Recall Metric for Assessing Generative Modelscited by 944
  8. 2019Maximum Mean Discrepancy Gradient Flowcited by 127
  9. 2026Generative Modeling via Driftingcited by 116
  10. 2016Kernel Distribution Embeddings: Universal Kernels, Characteristic Kernels and Kernel Metrics on Distributionscited by 40
  11. 2026Sinkhorn-Drifting Generative Modelscited by 24
  12. 2026Generative Drifting is Secretly Score Matching: a Spectral and Variational Perspectivecited by 20
2 more
  1. 2026Gradient Flow Drifting: Generative Modeling via Wasserstein Gradient Flows of KDE-Approximated Divergencescited by 17
  2. 2026A Unified View of Score-Based and Drifting Modelscited by 11

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 13.

13 papers.

Sort: