Attribute Based Interpretable Evaluation Metrics for Generative Models

Overview

• Existing metrics do not provide interpretability beyond diversity for generative models
• Propose a new evaluation protocol to measure the divergence of generated images from the training set distribution
• Introduce Single-attribute Divergence (SaD) and Paired-attribute Divergence (PaD) to identify which attributes models struggle with
• Propose Heterogeneous CLIPScore (HCS) to measure attribute strengths in images

Plain English Explanation

Generative models are AI systems that can create new images, text, or other content by learning from a training dataset. When the training data has an equal number of dogs and cats, a good generative model should produce an equal number of dogs and cats as well. However, existing evaluation metrics don't tell us much about how well the model has captured the underlying distribution of the training data.

To address this, the researchers propose a new way to evaluate generative models. They introduce two new metrics: Single-attribute Divergence (SaD) and Paired-attribute Divergence (PaD). These metrics measure how much the distribution of attributes (like color, texture, or object size) in the generated images differs from the training data.

For example, if the training data has a wide range of colors but the generated images only have a few colors, the SaD metric would capture this mismatch. The PaD metric would look at how well the model captures relationships between attributes, like the size of an object and its color.

To measure these attribute strengths, the researchers also introduce a new method called Heterogeneous CLIPScore (HCS). This uses a neural network to compare the visual and textual representations of an image and assess how well they match.

By using SaD, PaD, and HCS, the researchers were able to uncover interesting insights about existing generative models. For instance, they found that Projected GAN can generate images with implausible attribute relationships, like a baby with a beard. They also discovered that diffusion models struggle to capture diverse colors and that larger sampling steps in latent diffusion models result in the generation of smaller objects like earrings and necklaces.

These new evaluation metrics provide a more detailed and interpretable way to assess the performance of generative models, going beyond just looking at overall image quality or diversity.

Technical Explanation

The researchers propose a new evaluation protocol to measure the divergence of a set of generated images from the training set regarding the distribution of attribute strengths. They introduce two new metrics:

1. Single-attribute Divergence (SaD): Measures the divergence regarding the probability density functions (PDFs) of a single attribute, such as color or texture.
2. Paired-attribute Divergence (PaD): Measures the divergence regarding the joint PDFs of a pair of attributes, such as the relationship between object size and color.

To measure the attribute strengths of an image, the researchers propose a new method called Heterogeneous CLIPScore (HCS). HCS measures the cosine similarity between image and text vectors with heterogeneous initial points, providing a way to assess how well the visual and textual representations of an image match.

Using SaD and PaD, the researchers reveal several insights about existing generative models:

• Projected GAN generates implausible attribute relationships, such as a baby with a beard, despite having competitive scores on existing metrics.
• Diffusion models struggle to capture diverse colors in the datasets.
• The larger sampling timesteps of latent diffusion models generate smaller objects, including earrings and necklaces.
• Stable Diffusion v1.5 better captures the attributes than v2.1.

Critical Analysis

The researchers have proposed a novel and promising approach to evaluating generative models that goes beyond traditional metrics like image quality and diversity. By focusing on the distribution of attribute strengths, their new metrics provide valuable insights into the specific strengths and weaknesses of different models.

However, one potential limitation of the approach is the reliance on the Heterogeneous CLIPScore (HCS) to measure attribute strengths. While CLIP-based methods have shown promise, they may still have biases or limitations that could impact the reliability of the results.

Additionally, the researchers only tested their approach on a limited set of generative models. It would be interesting to see how well the SaD and PaD metrics perform when applied to a broader range of models, including those from different architectures or training approaches.

Overall, the researchers have made a valuable contribution to the field of generative model evaluation. By shifting the focus towards interpretable metrics that capture the underlying distribution of attributes, they have laid the groundwork for more insightful and actionable assessments of these powerful AI systems.

Conclusion

The researchers have proposed a new evaluation protocol that measures the divergence of generated images from the training set distribution regarding the distribution of attribute strengths. This approach, consisting of the Single-attribute Divergence (SaD) and Paired-attribute Divergence (PaD) metrics, along with the Heterogeneous CLIPScore (HCS) for measuring attribute strengths, provides a more interpretable and comprehensive way to assess the performance of generative models.

By applying these new metrics, the researchers have uncovered interesting insights about the strengths and weaknesses of various generative models, such as the ability to capture diverse colors and the generation of plausible attribute relationships. This lays a foundation for more explainable evaluations of generative models, which can inform the development of improved AI systems in the future.