What FID Hides: Detecting, Ranking, and Diagnosing Deviations in Generative Evaluation

Engineering notes

Engineering notes will be added by the aipentium editorial team.

Chinese explanation / 中文解读

中文解读待补充：本站会优先为大语言模型、生成式AI、ChatGPT相关技术、计算机视觉、深度学习等高价值论文补充中文说明。

Original abstract

Generative models are commonly ranked by Fréchet Inception Distance (FID) and Kernel Inception Distance (KID), yet FID's first-two-moment summary can miss distributional differences, and a reported scalar gap alone is not a calibrated test against sampling variation. FID's moment restriction has concrete consequences: on ImageNet, visually unrecognizable images optimized only to match the reference Inception mean and covariance obtain FID $24.7$ versus $58.6$ for held-out real images (lower is better). Moreover, FID and KID are scalar discrepancies that are unchanged when the two samples are exchanged and therefore do not encode the direction of a dispersion change: under-dispersion, as can occur in mode collapse, versus over-dispersion. We introduce \textbf{ZID} (\emph{Z-resolved Integrated Diagnostic}), which combines six standardized location- and dispersion-sensitive arms from a rank graph (RISE) and Gaussian kernels (GPK at two bandwidths). Rather than asking one scalar to serve incompatible roles, ZID reports three linked outputs: an index for ranking departure magnitude, a permutation $p$-value for testing distributional equality, and a signed dispersion readout for diagnosis. In controlled experiments, ZID detects a broad range of departures, and its score tracks increasing severity along the corresponding sweeps, including cases in which FID is flat or reversed. On DiT-XL/2 and SiT-XL/2 guidance sweeps, ZID detects departure from real data, and its signed readout labels the high-guidance diversity collapse as under-dispersion.

Links and sources

• Official / arXiv page
• PDF from original source

Comments