PapersWithELO
← ICLR 2024 leaderboard

AlignDiff: Aligning Diffusion Models for General Few-Shot Segmentation

Ri-Zhao Qiu, Yu-Xiong Wang, Kris Hauser

representation learningFew-shot learningimage segmentationimage synthesistraining synthesis
73.30100
Fused
band ≈ ±15 pct pts (from σ = 0.30)
75.00100
Mimo
band ≈ ±21 pct pts (from σ = 0.43)
65.00100
DeepSeek
band ≈ ±22 pct pts (from σ = 0.44)

OpenReview ground truth

Rejected

Abstract

Text-to-image diffusion models have shown remarkable success in synthesizing photo-realistic images. Apart from creative applications, can we use such models to synthesize samples that aid the few-shot training of discriminative models? In this work, we propose AlignDiff, a general framework for synthesizing training images and associated mask annotations for few-shot segmentation. We identify three levels of misalignments that arise when utilizing pre-trained diffusion models in segmentation tasks. These misalignments need to be addressed to create realistic training samples and align the synthetic data distribution with the real training distribution: 1) instance-level misalignment, where generated samples fail to be consistent with the target task (e.g., specific texture or out-of-distribution generation of rare categories); 2) scene-level misalignment, where synthetic samples are object-centric and fail to represent realistic scene layouts with multiple objects; and 3) annotation-level misalignment, where diffusion models are limited to generating images without pixel-level annotations. AlignDiff overcomes these challenges by leveraging a few real samples to guide the generation, thus improving novel IoU over baseline methods in generalized few-shot semantic segmentation on Pascal-5i and COCO-20i by up to 80%. In addition, AlignDiff is capable of augmenting the learning of out-of-distribution categories on FSS-1000, while naive diffusion model generates samples that hurt the training process. The code will be released.

Author context

Most prolific author: 8 submissions (credibility 1.00).

No mass-submission penalty for this paper (authors within normal submission volume).

Aggregate statistics only — no individual author rankings.

Ranking trajectory

Percentile by tournament round — convergence indicates rating stability.

Judge assessments

Mean overall score 0.0 ± 0.0 (n = 34)