Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Tuomas Kynkäänniemi

dblp:239/6466 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
5ranked-venue papers
3as first author
4since 2021 · last 2024
—ORCID · none

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 4 · 3 first-author · 3 since 2021Graphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 1 · 1 since 2021

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Artificial intelligence
5 papers
Generative modeling · 74% Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning · 14% Image recognition and object detection · 12%
Computer graphics and multimedia
1 paper
Computational photography and imaging · 100%

Topics — the 6 heaviest of 8, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Machine learning › Generative modeling
diffusion model
1.522024
Applying Guidance in a Limited Interval Improves Sample and Distribution Quality in Diffusion Models · NeurIPS 2024
Guiding a Diffusion Model with a Bad Version of Itself · NeurIPS 2024
Machine learning › Generative modeling
generative model evaluation
1.022023
The Role of ImageNet Classes in Fréchet Inception Distance · ICLR 2023
Improved Precision and Recall Metric for Assessing Generative Models · NeurIPS 2019
Machine learning › Generative modeling › diffusion model › guided diffusion
classifier-free guidance
0.812024
Guiding a Diffusion Model with a Bad Version of Itself · NeurIPS 2024
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning
sampling
0.812024
Applying Guidance in a Limited Interval Improves Sample and Distribution Quality in Diffusion Models · NeurIPS 2024
Machine learning › Generative modeling › generative model evaluation
fréchet inception distance
0.712023
The Role of ImageNet Classes in Fréchet Inception Distance · ICLR 2023
Machine learning › Generative modeling
generative adversarial network
0.212022
Disentangling random and cyclic effects in time-lapse sequences · ACM Trans. Graph. 2022

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

latent space modeling · 1.1generative adversarial network · 1.1fourier features · 1.1self-guidance with less-trained model · 0.8diffusion sampling · 0.8classifier-free guidance · 0.8fréchet inception distance · 0.7truncation analysis · 0.4non-parametric manifold estimation · 0.4
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2024 Guiding a Diffusion Model with a Bad Version of Itself
abstract
The primary axes of interest in image-generating diffusion models are image quality, the amount of variation in the results, and how well the results align with a given condition, e.g., a class label or a text prompt. The popular classifier-free guidance approach uses an unconditional model to guide a conditional model, leading to simultaneously better prompt alignment and higher-quality images at the cost of reduced variation. These effects seem inherently entangled, and thus hard to control. We make the surprising observation that it is possible to obtain disentangled control over image quality without compromising the amount of variation by guiding generation using a smaller, less-trained version of the model itself rather than an unconditional model. This leads to significant improvements in ImageNet generation, setting record FIDs of 1.01 for 64x64 and 1.25 for 512x512, using publicly available networks. Furthermore, the method is also applicable to unconditional diffusion models, drastically improving their quality.
Tero Karras, Miika Aittala, Tuomas Kynkäänniemi, Jaakko Lehtinen, Timo Aila, Samuli Laine
NeurIPS3
2024 Applying Guidance in a Limited Interval Improves Sample and Distribution Quality in Diffusion Models
abstract
Guidance is a crucial technique for extracting the best performance out of image-generating diffusion models. Traditionally, a constant guidance weight has been applied throughout the sampling chain of an image. We show that guidance is clearly harmful toward the beginning of the chain (high noise levels), largely unnecessary toward the end (low noise levels), and only beneficial in the middle. We thus restrict it to a specific range of noise levels, improving both the inference speed and result quality. This limited guidance interval improves the record FID in ImageNet-512 significantly, from 1.81 to 1.40. We show that it is quantitatively and qualitatively beneficial across different sampler parameters, network architectures, and datasets, including the large-scale setting of Stable Diffusion XL. We thus suggest exposing the guidance interval as a hyperparameter in all diffusion models that use guidance.
Tuomas Kynkäänniemi, Miika Aittala, Tero Karras, Samuli Laine, Timo Aila, Jaakko Lehtinen
NeurIPS1
2023 The Role of ImageNet Classes in Fréchet Inception Distance
Tuomas Kynkäänniemi, Tero Karras, Miika Aittala, Timo Aila, Jaakko Lehtinen
ICLR1
2022 Disentangling random and cyclic effects in time-lapse sequences
abstract
Time-lapse image sequences offer visually compelling insights into dynamic processes that are too slow to observe in real time. However, playing a long time-lapse sequence back as a video often results in distracting flicker due to random effects, such as weather, as well as cyclic effects, such as the day-night cycle. We introduce the problem of disentangling time-lapse sequences in a way that allows separate, after-the-fact control of overall trends, cyclic effects, and random effects in the images, and describe a technique based on data-driven generative models that achieves this goal. This enables us to "re-render" the sequences in ways that would not be possible with the input images alone. For example, we can stabilize a long sequence to focus on plant growth over many months, under selectable, consistent weather. Our approach is based on Generative Adversarial Networks (GAN) that are conditioned with the time coordinate of the time-lapse sequence. Our architecture and training procedure are designed so that the networks learn to model random variations, such as weather, using the GAN's latent space, and to disentangle overall trends and cyclic variations by feeding the conditioning time label to the model using Fourier features with specific frequencies. We show that our models are robust to defects in the training data, enabling us to amend some of the practical difficulties in capturing long time-lapse sequences, such as temporary occlusions, uneven frame spacing, and missing frames.
Erik Härkönen, Miika Aittala, Tuomas Kynkäänniemi, Samuli Laine, Timo Aila, Jaakko Lehtinen
ACM Trans. Graph.3
2019 Improved Precision and Recall Metric for Assessing Generative Models
abstract
The ability to automatically estimate the quality and coverage of the samples produced by a generative model is a vital requirement for driving algorithm research. We present an evaluation metric that can separately and reliably measure both of these aspects in image generation tasks by forming explicit, non-parametric representations of the manifolds of real and generated data. We demonstrate the effectiveness of our metric in StyleGAN and BigGAN by providing several illustrative examples where existing metrics yield uninformative or contradictory results. Furthermore, we analyze multiple design variants of StyleGAN to better understand the relationships between the model architecture, training methods, and the properties of the resulting sample distribution. In the process, we identify new variants that improve the state-of-the-art. We also perform the first principled analysis of truncation methods and identify an improved method. Finally, we extend our metric to estimate the perceptual quality of individual samples, and use this to study latent space interpolations.
Tuomas Kynkäänniemi, Tero Karras, Samuli Laine, Jaakko Lehtinen, Timo Aila
NeurIPS1