pith. sign in

arxiv: 2606.13381 · v1 · pith:4NW3QJ5Snew · submitted 2026-06-11 · 💻 cs.LG

H\"older++: Improving the Quality-Coherence Trade-off in Multimodal VAEs

Huyen Vo , Mar\'ia Mart\'inez-Garc\'ia , Isabel Valera This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-27 07:03 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 💻 cs.LG
keywords multimodal VAEHölder poolinggenerative qualitycoherence trade-offshared representationsprivate representationshierarchical inferencedisentanglement
0
0 comments X

The pith

Hölder++ uses exact Hölder pooling, shared-private representations, and hierarchical inference to improve the quality-coherence trade-off in multimodal VAEs.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

Multimodal variational autoencoders often face a trade-off where improving coherence across modalities reduces sample quality and diversity. The paper proposes Hölder++ to mitigate this by implementing the first exact version of Hölder pooling for these models, extending the architecture to include both shared and modality-specific private representations, and adding hierarchical inference to enhance disentanglement. This combination is tested against baselines like MMVAE+ and approximated Hölder methods. The results indicate consistent gains in balancing realistic generation with semantic consistency, along with more structured latent spaces and useful shared features for other tasks.

Core claim

By replacing approximated Hölder pooling with its exact implementation, modeling explicit shared and private representations, and applying hierarchical inference, Hölder++ achieves better generative quality and coherence simultaneously in multimodal VAEs, while producing more structured latent spaces and informative shared representations for downstream tasks.

What carries the argument

Exact Hölder pooling as the aggregation method for combining multimodal information, combined with shared-plus-private latent factorization and hierarchical inference for disentanglement.

If this is right

  • Improved balance between realistic diverse samples and cross-modal semantic consistency.
  • More structured latent spaces that better separate shared and private factors.
  • Shared representations that perform well on downstream tasks.
  • Consistent outperformance on the quality-coherence trade-off metric.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Exact Hölder pooling could be applied to other multimodal generative frameworks beyond VAEs to similar effect.
  • The hierarchical inference structure might scale effectively to models with more than two modalities.
  • Downstream task performance suggests potential for using the shared latents in transfer learning scenarios.

Load-bearing premise

That implementing exact Hölder pooling together with shared and private representations plus hierarchical inference will lead to measurable improvements in the quality-coherence trade-off and disentanglement.

What would settle it

Running the same experiments and finding no improvement or a worse trade-off in quality-coherence metrics for Hölder++ versus the approximated Hölder or MMVAE+ baselines would falsify the central claim.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2606.13381 by Huyen Vo, Isabel Valera, Mar\'ia Mart\'inez-Garc\'ia.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: A graphical-model view of the unimodal and pairwise components used by Holder++ (top) and the resulting training objective ¨ (bottom). Gray circles denote observed variables, white circles denote latent variables, and non-circled symbols denote model parameters. Solid arrows indicate the generative process, while dashed arrows indicate amortized posterior inference. The objective is a weighted sum of unimo… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Trade-offs on PolyMNIST between generative coherence (↑) and log-likelihood estimation (↑), as well as between generative coherence (↑) and generative quality (FID ↓), with β ∈ {1, 2.5, 5, 10}. For each model, the Pareto front (dashed line) connects the non-dominated points that achieve the best trade-offs. Optimal region: upper-right for all plots. MMVAE+ CMVAE Hölder+ Hölder++ [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/f… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Trade-offs on MNIST-SVHN between conditional gen￾erative coherence (↑) and conditional generative quality (FID ↓). For each model, non-dominated points are larger, and dominated points have low opacity. Optimal region: upper-right for both. Finally, we assess representation quality via downstream clustering on the shared latent space using K-means and report accuracy (ACC), normalized mutual information (N… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Clustering performance on CUBICC using latent representations, with each model evaluated at its best configuration. Per model, each point corresponds to a different seed (10 seeds total). The optimal region is the upper-right in both plots. 12.5% 25% 50% 75% 100% 0.80 0.85 0.90 Conditional coherence 12.5% 25% 50% 75% 100% 100 120 140 160 Conditional FID 12.5% 25% 50% 75% 100% 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 Unconditional … view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Generative coherence (↑), generative quality (FID ↓), and log-likelihood (↑) on PolyMNIST as a function of modality-specific latent capacity. The x-axis percentages denote the relative size of the private subspace w.r.t the shared subspace. 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 C o h ere n c e SVHN to MNIST 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 20 40 60 80 100 FID SVHN to MNIST 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 C o h… view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Generative coherence (↑) and generative quality (FID ↓) across cross-generation tasks on MNIST-SVHN as a function of modality-specific latent capacity. The x-axis percentages denote the relative size of the private subspace w.r.t. the shared subspace. C.4. Additional results: PolyMNIST Qualitative results [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p020_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Five samples of the third modality conditioned on the first modality on PolyMNIST, generated by varying only the modality￾specific latent variables. Each column corresponds to a ground-truth digit label from 0 to 9, so all samples within a column share the same digit information. As expected, all three models preserve the class label while changing the private factors. C.5. Additional results: MNIST-SVHN Q… view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Five MNIST samples generated from SVHN on MNIST-SVHN by varying only the modality-specific latent variables. Each column corresponds to a ground-truth digit label from 0 to 9, so all samples within a column share the same digit information. C.6. Additional results: CUBICC Disentanglement of shared and private subspaces [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_9.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Five SVHN samples generated from MNIST on MNIST-SVHN by varying only the modality-specific latent variables. Each column corresponds to a ground-truth digit label from 0 to 9, so all samples within a column share the same digit information [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p022_10.png] view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Qualitative results for MMVAE+, Holder+ and H ¨ older++ for image-to-caption generation on CUBICC. ¨ C.7. Additional results: CelebAMask-HQ Qualitative results. To further improve the image quality of our methods, we apply a diffusion model as a post-hoc refinement step [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p023_11.png] view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p023_12.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Existing approaches for multimodal variational autoencoders (VAEs) face a trade-off between generative quality and coherence-i.e., they struggle to generate realistic and diverse samples that, at the same time, are semantically consistent across modalities. A recent work shows that using a simple approximation to H\"older pooling as an aggregation method improves coherence over the SOTA MMVAE+, despite assuming a single shared representation across all modalities. Yet, it slightly compromises sample diversity. Inspired by this insight, we propose H\"older++, a novel multimodal VAE that improves the generative quality-coherence trade-off through: (i) the first implementation of H\"older pooling without any approximation for multimodal VAEs; (ii) an extended architecture that models distinct shared and private (i.e., modality-specific) representations (H\"older+); and (iii) hierarchical inference that further enhances the disentanglement between the shared and private representations (H\"older++). Our experiments corroborate that H\"older++ consistently improves the generative quality-coherence trade-off, yields more structured latent spaces, and learns shared representations that are informative for downstream tasks.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper proposes Hölder++, a multimodal VAE architecture that (i) implements exact (non-approximated) Hölder pooling for the first time in this setting, (ii) extends the model to separate shared and private (modality-specific) latent representations (Hölder+), and (iii) adds hierarchical inference to improve disentanglement (Hölder++). It claims these changes together yield consistent improvements in the generative quality-coherence trade-off over prior MMVAE+ baselines, more structured latent spaces, and shared representations that are useful for downstream tasks.

Significance. If the empirical results hold after proper controls, the work would offer a concrete architectural recipe for balancing sample quality and cross-modal coherence in multimodal VAEs, with the exact Hölder pooling step being a potentially reusable technical contribution. The incremental variants (Hölder, Hölder+, Hölder++) provide a natural testbed for isolating the value of each mechanism.

major comments (2)
  1. [Experiments] Experiments section: the reported gains for Hölder++ are presented as incremental over Hölder and Hölder+, yet no ablation holds total capacity and architecture fixed while toggling only the pooling operator (exact Hölder vs. its approximation) or only the shared+private split. Without these controls, improvements cannot be confidently attributed to the claimed mechanisms rather than added parameters or hierarchical depth, directly testing the central claim that the combination produces measurable quality-coherence gains.
  2. [Method] Method section (description of Hölder pooling): the paper states it provides the first exact (non-approximated) implementation, but does not include a derivation or complexity analysis showing how the exact operator is computed tractably inside the VAE ELBO; if the implementation still relies on any Monte-Carlo or variational approximation for the pooling step, the distinction from prior work is weakened.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: the notation "H"older" contains an escaped quote that should be rendered as the proper umlaut character throughout the manuscript.
  2. [Abstract] The abstract claims downstream-task informativeness of the shared representations but does not specify which tasks or metrics are used; this should be stated explicitly when the results are presented.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

Thank you for the constructive feedback. We will revise the manuscript to strengthen the experimental controls and provide additional methodological details as requested.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Experiments] Experiments section: the reported gains for Hölder++ are presented as incremental over Hölder and Hölder+, yet no ablation holds total capacity and architecture fixed while toggling only the pooling operator (exact Hölder vs. its approximation) or only the shared+private split. Without these controls, improvements cannot be confidently attributed to the claimed mechanisms rather than added parameters or hierarchical depth, directly testing the central claim that the combination produces measurable quality-coherence gains.

    Authors: We agree that the current set of experiments does not include ablations that hold total model capacity and architecture fixed while isolating only the pooling operator or the shared-private split. In the revised manuscript we will add these controls (e.g., by matching parameter counts across variants and reporting results for exact Hölder vs. approximated pooling under identical architectures) to better attribute the observed gains to the proposed mechanisms. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Method] Method section (description of Hölder pooling): the paper states it provides the first exact (non-approximated) implementation, but does not include a derivation or complexity analysis showing how the exact operator is computed tractably inside the VAE ELBO; if the implementation still relies on any Monte-Carlo or variational approximation for the pooling step, the distinction from prior work is weakened.

    Authors: The exact (non-approximated) Hölder pooling is obtained via a closed-form expression for the Hölder mean that is substituted directly into the joint ELBO; this step does not introduce additional Monte-Carlo sampling beyond the standard reparameterized latent sampling already present in the VAE. To make this explicit we will insert a short derivation of the exact operator together with a complexity analysis (showing the pooling remains O(1) per sample) in the revised Method section. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: empirical architecture proposal with no derivations

full rationale

The paper proposes Hölder++ as an incremental multimodal VAE architecture relying on exact (non-approximated) Hölder pooling, shared+private latents, and hierarchical inference. All claims are framed as experimental outcomes rather than closed-form derivations or predictions. No equations, fitted parameters renamed as predictions, or self-citation load-bearing steps appear in the abstract or described content. The work is therefore self-contained against external benchmarks with no reduction of results to inputs by construction.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

Abstract-only review supplies no equations, no modeling assumptions, and no experimental protocol, so the ledger cannot be populated with concrete free parameters, axioms, or invented entities.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5737 in / 1128 out tokens · 19137 ms · 2026-06-27T07:03:34.837897+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

14 extracted references · 5 canonical work pages · 3 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Importance Weighted Autoencoders

    Burda, Y ., Grosse, R., and Salakhutdinov, R. Importance weighted autoencoders.arXiv preprint arXiv:1509.00519,

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  2. [2]

    Kingma, D. P. and Ba, J. Adam: A method for stochastic optimization. In3rd International Conference on Learn- ing Representations, ICLR 2015, San Diego, CA, USA, May 7-9, 2015, Conference Track Proceedings,

    2015

  3. [3]

    Kingma, D. P. and Welling, M. Auto-encoding variational bayes.arXiv preprint arXiv:1312.6114,

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  4. [4]

    and Pavlovic, V

    Lee, M. and Pavlovic, V . Private-Shared Disentangled Mul- timodal V AE for Learning of Hybrid Latent Representa- tions.arXiv preprint arXiv:2012.13024,

    work page arXiv 2012

  5. [5]

    Deep Variational Canonical Correlation Analysis

    Wang, W., Yan, X., Lee, H., and Livescu, K. Deep Vari- ational Canonical Correlation Analysis.arXiv preprint arXiv:1610.03454,

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  6. [6]

    and Rooshenas, P

    Wesego, D. and Rooshenas, P. Multimodal elbo with diffu- sion decoders.arXiv preprint arXiv:2408.16883, 2024a. Wesego, D. and Rooshenas, P. Score-based multimodal au- toencoder.Transactions on Machine Learning Research, 2024b. Wolff, J., Krishnan, R. G., Ruff, L., Morshuis, J. N., Klein, T., Nakajima, S., and Nabi, M. Hierarchical multi- modal variational...

    work page arXiv

  7. [7]

    12 A.2 Lower-bound guarantee of the H ¨older+ and H¨older++ objectives

    11 H¨older++: Improving the Quality-Coherence Trade-off in Multimodal V AEs Supplementary Material Table of Contents A Proofs 12 A.1 Derivations of H ¨older, H¨older+, and H¨older++ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 A.2 Lower-bound guarantee of the H ¨older+ and H¨older++ objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...

    2026

  8. [8]

    pθj(xj|z,w j)p(wj) qϕwj (wj|xj,z) # ≥E qϕwj (wj |xj ,z)

    introduces auxiliary distributions over private latent variables for unobserved modalities when estimating cross-modal reconstruction terms. Concretely, when z is sampled from expert j, we draw wj ∼q ϕwj (wj|xj) for the observed modality and draw ˜wn ∼r n(wn) for each modalityn̸=j. The resulting objective can be written as LMMVAE+(x1:M) = 1 M MX j=1 E qϕz...

    2023

  9. [9]

    provides atightervariational lower bound than the ELBO in Eq. (5) by using a properly weighted multi-sample importance estimator, given by LIWAE(x1:M) =E z1:K ∼qΦ(z|x1:M) " log KX k=1 1 K pΘ(X,z k) qΦ(zk|X) # ,(15) with K is the number of samples. In multimodal V AEs, IWAE estimator is often preferred because it typically yields higher-entropy variational...

    2019

  10. [10]

    log KX k=1 1 K pΘ(X,z k) qΦ(zk|X) # + MX i=1 MX j>i πijEz1:K ∼q(1/2) ij (z|xi,xj)

    over theMmodalities as follows LMoE IWAE(x1:M) = 1 M MX j=1 Ez1:K ∼qϕj (z|xj) " log KX k=1 1 K pΘ(X,z k) qΦ(zk|X) # , which is a valid ELBO. In our case, under a H ¨older mixture with α= 0.5 in Eq. (6), we extend LIWAE in Eq. (15) via stratified sampling over theMmodalities to obtainL H¨ older IWAE as follows LH¨older IW AE(x1:M) = MX j=1 πjEz1:K ∼qϕj (z|...

    2017

  11. [11]

    on NVIDIA A100-PCIE-80GB GPUs. Following prior work, we weight the KL term in the ELBO by a coefficient β (Higgins et al., 2017), i.e., βKL(qΦ(z|X)∥p(z)) , and select β via cross-validation over {1.0,2.5,5.0,10.0} for PolyMNIST and {1.0,2.5,5.0} for MNIST-SVHN, CUBICC, and CelebAMask-HQ. For DCMEM, we choose the method-specific parameter α over {0.1,0.5,1...

    2017

  12. [12]

    For MMV AE+, CMV AE, H¨older+, and H¨older++, we use shared and modality-specific subspaces of 32 dimensions each. We train MMV AE, MMV AE+, and CMV AE withK= 1 for 150, 150, 250 epochs, respectively, and batch size 256, whereas H¨older+ and H¨older++ are trained with a multi-sample objective with K= 10 for 50 epochs and batch size32. For CMV AE, we set t...

    2026

  13. [13]

    18 H¨older++: Improving the Quality-Coherence Trade-off in Multimodal V AEs CUBICC.The encoder and decoder architectures follow Palumbo et al

    Finally, all models are trained with batch size 100 and learning rate 5e−4.Note that, for this dataset, we do not rescale likelihood terms by modality dimensionality; instead, we set the likelihood weights to50.0for MNIST and1.0for SVHN. 18 H¨older++: Improving the Quality-Coherence Trade-off in Multimodal V AEs CUBICC.The encoder and decoder architecture...

    2024

  14. [14]

    0.0501 0.1940 0.2884 CMV AE (K=

    1940