The FID Lottery: Quantifying Hidden Randomness in Generative-Model Evaluation
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
The Frechet Inception Distance (FID) is the de facto arbiter of image generation, yet most papers report just a single number from a single trained model using a single sampling seed. How reproducible is that number if we retrain the model, or merely resample from it? In this paper, we treat FID as a random variable on a two-axis panel of training and generation seeds, and measure its variance directly on several hundred SiT networks trained on class-conditional ImageNet 256x256. We report surprising findings: (a) Retraining the model using the same recipe with a different seed moves FID 3.2x more (in Inception feature space) than redrawing samples from a fixed network. (b) That gap is driven by three factors: random initialisation, data ordering, and the per-step Gaussian noise of the flow-matching loss. (c) Increasing compute or model size barely tightens the spread, holding the FID coefficient of variation (CoV) inside a 1-2% band. (d) Per-cell classifier-free-guidance tuning halves the spread but reshuffles which seeds work best, and a lucky training seed reaches the same FID with up to 2x less compute than an unlucky one. Based on these findings, we recommend a new FID evaluation protocol: evaluate under per-cell optimal guidance, treat any FID gap below the empirically measured ~1.3% CoV as inconclusive, and report an error bar over several training seeds rather than a single FID number.
Key facts. Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 14 of its 99 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 18 Jun 2026.
Builds on
14 of 99 references.
References · 14
- 2020Scaling Laws for Neural Language Modelscited by 6,586
- 2022Classifier-Free Diffusion Guidancecited by 5,847
- 2017Deep Learning Scaling is Predictable, Empiricallycited by 582
- 2020Scaling Laws for Autoregressive Generative Modelingcited by 522
- 2019Deep Ensembles: A Loss Landscape Perspectivecited by 443
- 2020Fine-Tuning Pretrained Language Models: Weight Initializations, Data Orders, and Early Stoppingcited by 384
- 2018A Note on the Inception Scorecited by 226
- 2021Torch.manual_seed(3407) is all you need: On the influence of random seeds in deep learning architectures for computer visioncited by 81
- 2024Good Seed Makes a Good Crop: Discovering Secret Seeds in Text-to-Image Diffusion Modelscited by 48
- 2024Scaling Laws For Diffusion Transformerscited by 44
- 2023On the Variance of Neural Network Training with respect to Test Sets and Distributionscited by 22
- 2025A Pragmatic Note on Evaluating Generative Models with Fr'echet Inception Distance for Retinal Image Synthesiscited by 9
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 2.
2 papers.
- 2026The Seriality Gap in Video Diffusion Modelscited by 2
- 2026Diffusable Latents from Structure-Agnostic Distillationcited by 0
- 2026Diffusable Latents from Structure-Agnostic Distillation30 Sep 2026
- 2026The Seriality Gap in Video Diffusion Models14 Jul 2026
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2022A Study on the Evaluation of Generative Models
- 2026One Pass Is Not Enough: Recursive Latent Refinement for Generative Models
- 2025Images Speak Louder Than Scores: Failure Mode Escape for Enhancing Generative Quality
- 2022Elucidating the Design Space of Diffusion-Based Generative Models
- 2026Are We Overthinking One-Step Generation?
- 2026Setting-Matched and Semantics-Scaled Benchmarking of One-Step Generative Models Against Multistep Diffusion and Flow Models
- 2023Exposing flaws of generative model evaluation metrics and their unfair treatment of diffusion models
- 2024Controlling the Fidelity and Diversity of Deep Generative Models via Pseudo Density