Eliminating Oversaturation and Artifacts of High Guidance Scales in Diffusion Models
classifier-free guidance;diffusion models
Yes
No ethics review needed.
Please refer to the weaknesses section.
- The intuition and theory are well-balanced.
- The results are quite promising. Their guidance does not drastically alter the image content, which aligns well with their claims.
- They demonstrate robustness across various types of diffusion models.
This work aims to reduce the oversaturation in the current CFG approach. The authors decompose the CFG update term into two components—parallel and orthogonal—and both theoretically and empirically demonstrate the role of each component. Based on these observations, they redesign the weighting of each component and additionally propose an adaptive rescaling strategy.
- I do not view this as a straightforward rescaling of CFG. However, it might be open to interpretation, and I would be interested to hear the authors’ perspective on this.

- Which model was used for Figure 8? 
- Further analysis on the rescale weight would be helpful—does it show any trends with respect to t? 

- *(As a suggestion)* Including illustrations of the geometry, along with the related intuitions, would further enhance the clarity.
Yes
No ethics review needed.
Please refer to the Weakness section.
1. The paper introduces a new method, APG, that addresses a significant problem in diffusion models—oversaturation and artifacts associated with high guidance scales. The approach is innovative and directly tackles a well-known issue in the field.
2. The authors provide extensive experimental results to validate their claims. They demonstrate the effectiveness of APG across various models and samplers, showing improvements in FID, recall, and saturation scores.
3. The paper provides a clear comparison between APG and CFG, both qualitatively and quantitatively. The visual results are particularly compelling in showing the reduction in oversaturation and artifacts.
The paper introduces a novel method called Adaptive Projected Guidance (APG) to address the issue of oversaturation and unrealistic artifacts that occur when using high guidance scales in diffusion models. Specifically, the authors propose a modification to the classifier-free guidance (CFG) update rule by decomposing the update term into parallel and orthogonal components relative to the conditional model prediction. The authors conduct extensive experiments to support their claims.
1. The final example generated by APG in Figure 10 has a logical error, where the cat has only one paw.
2. For Table 1, the authors should consider adding HPSv2 and ImageReward metrics to evaluate the generation performance.
3. For Table 1, why is the guidance scale of Stable Diffusion XL so large (w=15)? When reducing the guidance scale, are the performance improvements limited? The authors should provide more quantitative results.
4. The authors claim that the orthogonal component is chiefly responsible for improvements in image quality, while the parallel component increases saturation in the generations. How many examples do the authors observe? Are there any theories to support this observation?
Yes
No ethics review needed.
See the questions in the weakness section.
1. APG is presented as a plug-and-play method with virtually no additional computational overhead, making it attractive for practical use in various diffusion models.
2. The method of down-weighting the parallel component in CFG is novel and interesting, effectively reducing oversaturation and preserving image quality at high guidance scales.
This paper presents a method called Adaptive Projected Guidance (APG) to address the issues of oversaturation and artifacts that occur when using high guidance scales in Classifier-Free Guidance (CFG) for diffusion models. The authors decompose the CFG update rule into two components: a parallel component responsible for oversaturation and an orthogonal component that enhances image quality. They propose down-weighting the parallel component to reduce oversaturation. Additionally, they introduce rescaling and reverse momentum to improve sampling. Extensive experiments demonstrate that APG can improve FID, recall, and saturation scores while maintaining precision, making it a superior alternative to standard CFG.
1. In Figure 8, could the authors explain why the proposed APG shows lower precision and higher FID compared to CFG when the guidance scale  w  is below certain values (e.g.,  w = 2.5 , where APG precision is lower than CFG)?
2. While reverse momentum is introduced, the intuition behind why it improves the image generation quality could be expanded. More detailed theoretical or experimental exploration of this component would clarify its importance.
We propose a method to mitigate oversaturation and artifacts of  high classifier-free guidance scales in diffusion models.
@inproceedings{
anonymous2024eliminating,
title={Eliminating Oversaturation and Artifacts of High Guidance Scales in Diffusion Models},
author={Anonymous},
booktitle={Submitted to The Thirteenth International Conference on Learning Representations},
year={2024},
url={https://openreview.net/forum?id=e2ONKX6qzJ},
note={under review}
}
Classifier-free guidance (CFG) is crucial for improving both generation quality and alignment between the input condition and final output in diffusion models. While a high guidance scale is generally required to enhance these aspects, it also causes oversaturation and unrealistic artifacts. In this paper, we revisit the CFG update rule and introduce modifications to address this issue. We first decompose the update term in CFG into parallel and orthogonal components with respect to the conditional model prediction and observe that the parallel component primarily causes oversaturation, while the orthogonal component enhances image quality. Accordingly, we propose down-weighting the parallel component to achieve high-quality generations without oversaturation. Additionally, we draw a connection between CFG and gradient ascent and introduce a new rescaling and momentum method for the CFG update rule based on this insight. Our approach, termed adaptive projected guidance (APG), retains the quality-boosting advantages of CFG while enabling the use of higher guidance scales without oversaturation. APG is easy to implement and introduces practically no additional computational overhead to the sampling process. Through extensive experiments, we demonstrate that APG is compatible with various conditional diffusion models and samplers, leading to improved FID, recall, and saturation scores while maintaining precision comparable to CFG, making our method a superior plug-and-play alternative to standard classifier-free guidance.
I certify that there is no URL (e.g., github page) that could be used to find authors’ identity.
I acknowledge that I and all co-authors of this work have read and commit to adhering to the ICLR Code of Ethics.
classifier-free guidance diffusion models
I certify that there is no acknowledgement section in this submission for double blind review.
/pdf/14a299b8b6663fc1d488faea186cf4fb87389180.pdf
generative models
I understand the reciprocal reviewing requirement as described on https://iclr.cc/Conferences/2025/CallForPapers. If none of the authors are registered as a reviewer, it may result in a desk rejection at the discretion of the program chairs. To request an exception, please complete this form at https://forms.gle/Huojr6VjkFxiQsUp6.
I certify that this submission complies with the submission instructions as described on https://iclr.cc/Conferences/2025/AuthorGuide.
Eliminating Oversaturation and Artifacts of High Guidance Scales in Diffusion Models
ICLR 2025 Conference Submission
ICLR.cc/2025/Conference/Submission