<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Elucidating the Design Space of Diffusion-Based Generative Models · HackerPapers discussions</title><link>https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2206.00364/</link><description>Collected HN comments and submissions linking this paper.</description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2026 11:16:22 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2206.00364/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><item><title>Elucidating the Design Space of Diffusion-Based Generative Models — mentioned by gwern</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37241407</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:2206.00364:37241407</guid><pubDate>Wed, 23 Aug 2023 20:07:51 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;No, I&amp;#x27;m not. BigGAN did fine on scaling up to JFT-300M with basically no changes beyond model size and a simple architecture. This is also what we were observing, even with a buggy BigGAN implementation. GigaGAN is the best quality, but that&amp;#x27;s mostly because it&amp;#x27;s also the biggest; as Table 1 shows most of the gains come from various kinds of additional scaling. (And this is moving the goalposts from the usual assertion that &amp;quot;GANs can&amp;#x27;t scale&amp;quot; to &amp;quot;they&amp;#x27;re harder to scale&amp;quot;; note the self-fulfilling nature of such assertions. Considering how there is next to no GAN scaling research, these…&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2206.00364/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>cs.CV</category></item></channel></rss>
