Simple ReFlow: Improved Techniques for Fast Flow Models
Beomsu Kim, Yu-Guan Hsieh, Michal Klein, Marco Cuturi and, Jong Chul Ye, Bahjat Kawar, James Thornton

TL;DR
This paper introduces seven improvements to the ReFlow technique, significantly accelerating flow model sampling while maintaining high sample quality, achieving state-of-the-art FID scores with only nine neural evaluations.
Contribution
It proposes novel training and inference enhancements for ReFlow, enabling fast, high-quality sampling with fewer evaluations in flow-based generative models.
Findings
Achieved state-of-the-art FID scores on multiple datasets.
Reduced neural evaluations to nine for fast sampling.
Validated improvements through extensive ablation studies.
Abstract
Diffusion and flow-matching models achieve remarkable generative performance but at the cost of many sampling steps, this slows inference and limits applicability to time-critical tasks. The ReFlow procedure can accelerate sampling by straightening generation trajectories. However, ReFlow is an iterative procedure, typically requiring training on simulated data, and results in reduced sample quality. To mitigate sample deterioration, we examine the design space of ReFlow and highlight potential pitfalls in prior heuristic practices. We then propose seven improvements for training dynamics, learning and inference, which are verified with thorough ablation studies on CIFAR10 , AFHQv2 , and FFHQ . Combining all our techniques, we achieve state-of-the-art FID scores (without / with guidance, resp.) for fast generation via neural ODEs: /…
Peer Reviews
Decision·ICLR 2025 Poster
I find the paper well-presented. The design space is clearly communicated and the ablations are convincing. These dimensions show how to squeeze the performance on these standard image generation settings.
I do not find many weaknesses in the paper, as it clearly communicates the goal and setting and explores it nicely: 1. The experimental settings of CIFAR10, AFHQv2, and FFHQ are interesting, but only a small subset of all of the other potential uses and larger applications of flow matching and diffusion models. It would be interesting to see if the improvements continue holding in these. 2. The paper is niche in the sense that it relies on wanting to do generative modeling with ReFlow, and disc
The paper provides a number of useful empirical studies of what ultimately influences the performance of the flow matching models and when they are rectified to straighter paths. As the reviewer sees it, the paper aggregates many of the design space choices that arise from the diffusion model literature and uses them to study how these knobs affect flow matching. It is nice to have them all considered in one place. The inclusion of a new high pass filter metric on the loss is nice, and could b
Thanks to the authors for their hard work on this project. *Main remarks*: - While the paper provides a number of empirical insights for training, it would be nice if there was more of an analysis of why these tricks ultimately help. The reviewer stresses this a bit because a number of the proposed innovations are directly inspired from their application in other work, e.g. the improvement of loss normalization in Karras et al (2023b), and e.g. equations (8)-(12). - The reviewer is confused b
1. The paper is well-written and easy to follow, with each step of the ablation study clearly described and the results effectively presented. 2. The final experiment results after combining all improvements show lower FID and lower straightness compared with other diffusion-based and flow-based methods.
1. The projected pairs operation, which projects the coupling $Q_{01}^1$ to $\Pi(P_0, P_1)$, complicates the training pipeline (GAN training and solving Sinkhorn) while yielding only marginal performance improvements, as indicated in Table 6 (with a maximum FID improvement of 0.02, which is not even statistically significant). 2. The authors frequently use the notation 'OT ODE' and 'OT map' throughout the paper. However, as noted in references [1] and [2], the iterative rectified flow does not
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsSimulation Techniques and Applications
