core
GenFirst: Generation Before Reconstruction for Stable End-to-End Latent Generative Modeling
· 2026-08 · arXiv:2608.29335
Why it matters
Attacks the same latent-collapse problem as the representation-latent line but from the opposite direction: instead of freezing a semantic encoder, it trains generation-first under weak reconstruction pressure. Reports gFID 0.97 on ImageNet 256. Worth watching precisely because it is a competing answer rather than a follow-on.
What this paper does
read: abstract onlyBefore this
Standard latent generative modeling trains a variational autoencoder for reconstruction first, then trains a generative model on that frozen latent space, even though reconstruction-optimized latents are not necessarily the latents generation learns best from.
The problem
Direct end-to-end joint training of the autoencoder and the generative model is appealing but has proven difficult in practice, since it is prone to latent collapse and to a generation-reconstruction conflict where the two objectives compete for control of the latent space.
The idea
Two mechanisms explain and fix that instability. The entropy term in the KL-divergence objective is what prevents posterior collapse, because reconstruction and prior-fitting alone tend to shrink the posterior while entropy preserves non-degenerate latent uncertainty, and because reconstruction is fast and strongly supervised while generation is slower and harder to optimize, letting the generative objective shape the latent first, under deliberately weak reconstruction pressure, and only strengthening reconstruction afterward, avoids the conflict.
How it works
According to the abstract, this generation-before-reconstruction curriculum, GenFirst, produces the first direct end-to-end training without latent collapse. It is validated with continuous autoregressive priors that have exact likelihoods and with SiT priors that have implicit likelihoods, and the authors extend the framework to shared visual latents for combined generation and representation learning and to continuous unified text-image generation. The atlas could not confirm further architectural detail, including whether any frozen foundation encoder such as DINO, SigLIP, or MAE is used anywhere in the pipeline, since only the abstract was fetched; the abstract itself does not mention one.
Evidence
With the end-to-end objective and the generation-before-reconstruction curriculum, a SiT prior reaches gFID 0.97 with classifier-free guidance and 1.45 without it on ImageNet-256, and an MMDiT prior reaches a GenEval score of 0.90 on text-to-image generation.
Why it matters
If joint end-to-end training of a tokenizer and its generator can be made stable, it removes the two-stage pipeline every other paper in this cluster still assumes, including the frozen-encoder RAE line, and reopens the question of whether a frozen semantic encoder is necessary at all rather than merely a good current solution.
Abstract, in the authors' own words
Latent generative models typically follow a two-stage pipeline, training a variational autoencoder for reconstruction and then a generative model on the frozen latent space. Since reconstruction-optimized latents are not necessarily generation-friendly, jointly training both models is an appealing alternative. However, direct end-to-end training remains challenging, as it is prone to latent collapse and faces a generation-reconstruction conflict. We revisit this problem by analyzing how different objectives shape the latent space and identify two key insights. First, the entropy term in the Kullback-Leibler divergence objective is essential for preventing collapse: reconstruction and prior fitting tend to shrink the posterior, while entropy preserves non-degenerate latent uncertainty. Second, reconstruction and generation exhibit asymmetric learning dynamics: reconstruction is fast and strongly supervised, whereas generation is slower and harder to optimize. Based on these insights, we achieve the first direct end-to-end training without latent collapse and propose GenFirst, a simple generation-before-reconstruction strategy. The generative objective first shapes the latent space under weak reconstruction pressure, after which reconstruction is progressively strengthened to recover visual details. We validate GenFirst with continuous autoregressive priors with exact likelihoods and SiT priors with implicit likelihoods. With our end-to-end objective and GenFirst, SiT achieves a gFID of 0.97 with CFG and 1.45 without CFG on ImageNet-256, while MMDiT reaches a GenEval score of 0.90 on text-to-image generation. Beyond image generation, we extend the framework to shared visual latents for generation and representation learning, and to continuous unified text-image generation. These results demonstrate the generality of stable end-to-end latent learning across generative priors and modalities.
Research line
Problem
- A single latent space optimized for pixel-reconstruction fidelity is often a poor space for a generative prior to learn in, and pushing on one side tends to hurt the other.
Method note — the shared flow-matching interpolation
Every flow-matching / rectified-flow paper in this atlas trains toward a straight-line path between a noise sample x₀ and a data sample x₁:
Builds on
Nothing recorded yet.
Built on by
Nothing recorded yet.