Abstract
Finite Scalar Quantization with improved activation mapping enables unified modeling of discrete and continuous image generation approaches, revealing optimal representation balance and performance characteristics.
The field of image generation is currently bifurcated into autoregressive (AR) models operating on discrete tokens and diffusion models utilizing continuous latents. This divide, rooted in the distinction between VQ-VAEs and VAEs, hinders unified modeling and fair benchmarking. Finite Scalar Quantization (FSQ) offers a theoretical bridge, yet vanilla FSQ suffers from a critical flaw: its equal-interval quantization can cause activation collapse. This mismatch forces a trade-off between reconstruction fidelity and information efficiency. In this work, we resolve this dilemma by simply replacing the activation function in original FSQ with a distribution-matching mapping to enforce a uniform prior. Termed iFSQ, this simple strategy requires just one line of code yet mathematically guarantees both optimal bin utilization and reconstruction precision. Leveraging iFSQ as a controlled benchmark, we uncover two key insights: (1) The optimal equilibrium between discrete and continuous representations lies at approximately 4 bits per dimension. (2) Under identical reconstruction constraints, AR models exhibit rapid initial convergence, whereas diffusion models achieve a superior performance ceiling, suggesting that strict sequential ordering may limit the upper bounds of generation quality. Finally, we extend our analysis by adapting Representation Alignment (REPA) to AR models, yielding LlamaGen-REPA. Codes is available at https://github.com/Tencent-Hunyuan/iFSQ
Community
AR or Diffusion?
It’s been hard to judge because different tokenizers (VQ vs. VAE) Enter iFSQ with just 1 line of code! We found: (1) AR wins on efficiency, but Diffusion hits a higher quality ceiling. (2) The sweet spot for representations is ~4 bits.
We brought REPA to LlamaGen and solved the missing piece: Where to align?
It turns out there’s no fixed layer, but a Golden Ratio!
We found the optimal alignment depth is consistently 1/3 of total layers for both AR & Diffusion.
Models citing this paper 0
No model linking this paper
Datasets citing this paper 0
No dataset linking this paper
Spaces citing this paper 0
No Space linking this paper