DPBridge: Latent Diffusion Bridge for Dense Prediction
Extracted source text · arXiv 2412.20506
\documentclass{article}
\PassOptionsToPackage{numbers, compress}{natbib}
\pdfoutput=1
% if you need to pass options to natbib, use, e.g.:
% \PassOptionsToPackage{numbers, compress}{natbib}
% before loading neurips_2025
% % ready for submission
% \usepackage{neurips_2025}
% to compile a preprint version, e.g., for submission to arXiv, add add the
% [preprint] option:
\usepackage[preprint]{neurips_2025}
% to compile a camera-ready version, add the [final] option, e.g.:
% \usepackage[final]{neurips_2025}
% to avoid loading the natbib package, add option nonatbib:
% \usepackage[nonatbib]{neurips_2025}
\usepackage[utf8]{inputenc} % allow utf-8 input
\usepackage[T1]{fontenc} % use 8-bit T1 fonts
\usepackage{hyperref} % hyperlinks
\usepackage{url} % simple URL typesetting
\usepackage{booktabs} % professional-quality tables
\usepackage{amsfonts} % blackboard math symbols
\usepackage{nicefrac} % compact symbols for 1/2, etc.
\usepackage{microtype} % microtypography
\usepackage{xcolor} % colors
\usepackage{color}
\usepackage{colortbl}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{algorithm}
\usepackage{algorithmic}
\usepackage{multirow}
% if you use cleveref..
\usepackage[capitalize,noabbrev]{cleveref}
\usepackage{microtype}
\usepackage{graphicx}
\usepackage{subcaption}
\usepackage{caption}
\newcommand{\CL}[1]{\textcolor{blue}{[CL: #1]}}
\newcommand{\HD}[1]{\textcolor{magenta}{[HD: #1]}}
\title{DPBridge: Latent Diffusion Bridge for Dense Prediction}
% The \author macro works with any number of authors. There are two commands
% used to separate the names and addresses of multiple authors: \And and \AND.
%
% Using \And between authors leaves it to LaTeX to determine where to break the
% lines. Using \AND forces a line break at that point. So, if LaTeX puts 3 of 4
% authors names on the first line, and the last on the second line, try using
% \AND instead of \And before the third author name.
\author{%
Haorui Ji \quad Taojun Lin \quad Hongdong Li \\
The Australian National University \\
\texttt{\{haorui.ji, taojun.lin, hongdong.li\}.anu.edu.au} \\
% examples of more authors
% \And
% Coauthor \\
% Affiliation \\
% Address \\
% \texttt{email} \\
% \AND
% Coauthor \\
% Affiliation \\
% Address \\
% \texttt{email} \\
% \And
% Coauthor \\
% Affiliation \\
% Address \\
% \texttt{email} \\
% \And
% Coauthor \\
% Affiliation \\
% Address \\
% \texttt{email} \\
}
\begin{document}
\maketitle
\input{sec/0_abstract}
\input{sec/1_intro}
\input{sec/2_related_works}
\input{sec/3_method}
\input{sec/4_exp}
\input{sec/5_conclusion}
{
\bibliographystyle{ieeenat_fullname}
\bibliography{neurips_2025}
}
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\newpage
\appendix
\input{sec/X_suppl}
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
% \newpage
% \section*{NeurIPS Paper Checklist}
% \begin{enumerate}
% \item {\bf Claims}
% \item[] Question: Do the main claims made in the abstract and introduction accurately reflect the paper's contributions and scope?
% \item[] Answer: \answerYes{} % Replace by \answerYes{}, \answerNo{}, or \answerNA{}.
% \item[] Justification: The main claims made in the abstract and introduction accurately reflect the paper's contributions and scope
% \item[] Guidelines:
% \begin{itemize}
% \item The answer NA means that the abstract and introduction do not include the claims made in the paper.
% \item The abstract and/or introduction should clearly state the claims made, including the contributions made in the paper and important assumptions and limitations. A No or NA answer to this question will not be perceived well by the reviewers.
% \item The claims made should match theoretical and experimental results, and reflect how much the results can be expected to generalize to other settings.
% \item It is fine to include aspirational goals as motivation as long as it is clear that these goals are not attained by the paper.
% \end{itemize}
% \item {\bf Limitations}
% \item[] Question: Does the paper discuss the limitations of the work performed by the authors?
% \item[] Answer: \answerYes{} % Replace by \answerYes{}, \answerNo{}, or \answerNA{}.
% \item[] Justification: The paper discuss the limitations of the work in the final conclusion section in \cref{sec:conclusion}.
% \item[] Guidelines:
% \begin{itemize}
% \item The answer NA means that the paper has no limitation while the answer No means that the paper has limitations, but those are not discussed in the paper.
% \item The authors are encouraged to create a separate "Limitations" section in their paper.
% \item The paper should point out any strong assumptions and how robust the results are to violations of these assumptions (e.g., independence assumptions, noiseless settings, model well-specification, asymptotic approximations only holding locally). The authors should reflect on how these assumptions might be violated in practice and what the implications would be.
% \item The authors should reflect on the scope of the claims made, e.g., if the approach was only tested on a few datasets or with a few runs. In general, empirical results often depend on implicit assumptions, which should be articulated.
% \item The authors should reflect on the factors that influence the performance of the approach. For example, a facial recognition algorithm may perform poorly when image resolution is low or images are taken in low lighting. Or a speech-to-text system might not be used reliably to provide closed captions for online lectures because it fails to handle technical jargon.
% \item The authors should discuss the computational efficiency of the proposed algorithms and how they scale with dataset size.
% \item If applicable, the authors should discuss possible limitations of their approach to address problems of privacy and fairness.
% \item While the authors might fear that complete honesty about limitations might be used by reviewers as grounds for rejection, a worse outcome might be that reviewers discover limitations that aren't acknowledged in the paper. The authors should use their best judgment and recognize that individual actions in favor of transparency play an important role in developing norms that preserve the integrity of the community. Reviewers will be specifically instructed to not penalize honesty concerning limitations.
% \end{itemize}
% \item {\bf Theory assumptions and proofs}
% \item[] Question: For each theoretical result, does the paper provide the full set of assumptions and a complete (and correct) proof?
% \item[] Answer: \answerYes{} % Replace by \answerYes{}, \answerNo{}, or \answerNA{}.
% \item[] Justification: We carefully derive the maximum likelihood training loss in \cref{sec:train loss} and \cref{app:derivation details}.
% \item[] Guidelines:
% \begin{itemize}
% \item The answer NA means that the paper does not include theoretical results.
% \item All the theorems, formulas, and proofs in the paper should be numbered and cross-referenced.
% \item All assumptions should be clearly stated or referenced in the statement of any theorems.
% \item The proofs can either appear in the main paper or the supplemental material, but if they appear in the supplemental material, the authors are encouraged to provide a short proof sketch to provide intuition.
% \item Inversely, any informal proof provided in the core of the paper should be complemented by formal proofs provided in appendix or supplemental material.
% \item Theorems and Lemmas that the proof relies upon should be properly referenced.
% \end{itemize}
% \item {\bf Experimental result reproducibility}
% \item[] Question: Does the paper fully disclose all the information needed to reproduce the main experimental results of the paper to the extent that it affects the main claims and/or conclusions of the paper (regardless of whether the code and data are provided or not)?
% \item[] Answer: \answerYes{} % Replace by \answerYes{}, \answerNo{}, or \answerNA{}.
% \item[] Justification: The paper has included all the information needed to reproduce the main experimental results of the paper, including data and implementation details in \cref{sec:exp setup}, \cref{app:network} and \cref{app:implem details}.
% \item[] Guidelines:
% \begin{itemize}
% \item The answer NA means that the paper does not include experiments.
% \item If the paper includes experiments, a No answer to this question will not be perceived well by the reviewers: Making the paper reproducible is important, regardless of whether the code and data are provided or not.
% \item If the contribution is a dataset and/or model, the authors should describe the steps taken to make their results reproducible or verifiable.
% \item Depending on the contribution, reproducibility can be accomplished in various ways. For example, if the contribution is a novel architecture, describing the architecture fully might suffice, or if the contribution is a specific model and empirical evaluation, it may be necessary to either make it possible for others to replicate the model with the same dataset, or provide access to the model. In general. releasing code and data is often one good way to accomplish this, but reproducibility can also be provided via detailed instructions for how to replicate the results, access to a hosted model (e.g., in the case of a large language model), releasing of a model checkpoint, or other means that are appropriate to the research performed.
% \item While NeurIPS does not require releasing code, the conference does require all submissions to provide some reasonable avenue for reproducibility, which may depend on the nature of the contribution. For example
% \begin{enumerate}
% \item If the contribution is primarily a new algorithm, the paper should make it clear how to reproduce that algorithm.
% \item If the contribution is primarily a new model architecture, the paper should describe the architecture clearly and fully.
% \item If the contribution is a new model (e.g., a large language model), then there should either be a way to access this model for reproducing the results or a way to reproduce the model (e.g., with an open-source dataset or instructions for how to construct the dataset).
% \item We recognize that reproducibility may be tricky in some cases, in which case authors are welcome to describe the particular way they provide for reproducibility. In the case of closed-source models, it may be that access to the model is limited in some way (e.g., to registered users), but it should be possible for other researchers to have some path to reproducing or verifying the results.
% \end{enumerate}
% \end{itemize}
% \item {\bf Open access to data and code}
% \item[] Question: Does the paper provide open access to the data and code, with sufficient instructions to faithfully reproduce the main experimental results, as described in supplemental material?
% \item[] Answer: \answerNo{} % Replace by \answerYes{}, \answerNo{}, or \answerNA{}.
% \item[] Justification: The author will release the code upon acceptance.
% \item[] Guidelines:
% \begin{itemize}
% \item The answer NA means that paper does not include experiments requiring code.
% \item Please see the NeurIPS code and data submission guidelines (\url{https://nips.cc/public/guides/CodeSubmissionPolicy}) for more details.
% \item While we encourage the release of code and data, we understand that this might not be possible, so “No” is an acceptable answer. Papers cannot be rejected simply for not including code, unless this is central to the contribution (e.g., for a new open-source benchmark).
% \item The instructions should contain the exact command and environment needed to run to reproduce the results. See the NeurIPS code and data submission guidelines (\url{https://nips.cc/public/guides/CodeSubmissionPolicy}) for more details.
% \item The authors should provide instructions on data access and preparation, including how to access the raw data, preprocessed data, intermediate data, and generated data, etc.
% \item The authors should provide scripts to reproduce all experimental results for the new proposed method and baselines. If only a subset of experiments are reproducible, they should state which ones are omitted from the script and why.
% \item At submission time, to preserve anonymity, the authors should release anonymized versions (if applicable).
% \item Providing as much information as possible in supplemental material (appended to the paper) is recommended, but including URLs to data and code is permitted.
% \end{itemize}
% \item {\bf Experimental setting/details}
% \item[] Question: Does the paper specify all the training and test details (e.g., data splits, hyperparameters, how they were chosen, type of optimizer, etc.) necessary to understand the results?
% \item[] Answer: \answerYes{} % Replace by \answerYes{}, \answerNo{}, or \answerNA{}.
% \item[] Justification: The experimental setting and implementation details are introduced in \cref{sec:exp setup}, \cref{app:network} and \cref{app:implem details}.
% \item[] Guidelines:
% \begin{itemize}
% \item The answer NA means that the paper does not include experiments.
% \item The experimental setting should be presented in the core of the paper to a level of detail that is necessary to appreciate the results and make sense of them.
% \item The full details can be provided either with the code, in appendix, or as supplemental material.
% \end{itemize}
% \item {\bf Experiment statistical significance}
% \item[] Question: Does the paper report error bars suitably and correctly defined or other appropriate information about the statistical significance of the experiments?
% \item[] Answer: \answerNo{} % Replace by \answerYes{}, \answerNo{}, or \answerNA{}.
% \item[] Justification: While our work and baseline methods involve stochasticity, their influence on final results is not significant, so we do not include the error bars. Besides, baseline methods do not provide error bars in their papers for reference.
% \item[] Guidelines:
% \begin{itemize}
% \item The answer NA means that the paper does not include experiments.
% \item The authors should answer "Yes" if the results are accompanied by error bars, confidence intervals, or statistical significance tests, at least for the experiments that support the main claims of the paper.
% \item The factors of variability that the error bars are capturing should be clearly stated (for example, train/test split, initialization, random drawing of some parameter, or overall run with given experimental conditions).
% \item The method for calculating the error bars should be explained (closed form formula, call to a library function, bootstrap, etc.)
% \item The assumptions made should be given (e.g., Normally distributed errors).
% \item It should be clear whether the error bar is the standard deviation or the standard error of the mean.
% \item It is OK to report 1-sigma error bars, but one should state it. The authors should preferably report a 2-sigma error bar than state that they have a 96\% CI, if the hypothesis of Normality of errors is not verified.
% \item For asymmetric distributions, the authors should be careful not to show in tables or figures symmetric error bars that would yield results that are out of range (e.g. negative error rates).
% \item If error bars are reported in tables or plots, The authors should explain in the text how they were calculated and reference the corresponding figures or tables in the text.
% \end{itemize}
% \item {\bf Experiments compute resources}
% \item[] Question: For each experiment, does the paper provide sufficient information on the computer resources (type of compute workers, memory, time of execution) needed to reproduce the experiments?
% \item[] Answer: \answerYes{} % Replace by \answerYes{}, \answerNo{}, or \answerNA{}.
% \item[] Justification: We clearly provide details of computer resources for our method methods in implementation details in \cref{app:implem details}.
% \item[] Guidelines:
% \begin{itemize}
% \item The answer NA means that the paper does not include experiments.
% \item The paper should indicate the type of compute workers CPU or GPU, internal cluster, or cloud provider, including relevant memory and storage.
% \item The paper should provide the amount of compute required for each of the individual experimental runs as well as estimate the total compute.
% \item The paper should disclose whether the full research project required more compute than the experiments reported in the paper (e.g., preliminary or failed experiments that didn't make it into the paper).
% \end{itemize}
% \item {\bf Code of ethics}
% \item[] Question: Does the research conducted in the paper conform, in every respect, with the NeurIPS Code of Ethics \url{https://neurips.cc/public/EthicsGuidelines}?
% \item[] Answer: \answerYes{} % Replace by \answerYes{}, \answerNo{}, or \answerNA{}.
% \item[] Justification: Our research strictly follows the NeurIPS Code of Ethics.
% \item[] Guidelines:
% \begin{itemize}
% \item The answer NA means that the authors have not reviewed the NeurIPS Code of Ethics.
% \item If the authors answer No, they should explain the special circumstances that require a deviation from the Code of Ethics.
% \item The authors should make sure to preserve anonymity (e.g., if there is a special consideration due to laws or regulations in their jurisdiction).
% \end{itemize}
% \item {\bf Broader impacts}
% \item[] Question: Does the paper discuss both potential positive societal impacts and negative societal impacts of the work performed?
% \item[] Answer: \answerYes{} % Replace by \answerYes{}, \answerNo{}, or \answerNA{}.
% \item[] Justification: We include the discussion of broader impacts in \cref{app:impact}.
% \item[] Guidelines:
% \begin{itemize}
% \item The answer NA means that there is no societal impact of the work performed.
% \item If the authors answer NA or No, they should explain why their work has no societal impact or why the paper does not address societal impact.
% \item Examples of negative societal impacts include potential malicious or unintended uses (e.g., disinformation, generating fake profiles, surveillance), fairness considerations (e.g., deployment of technologies that could make decisions that unfairly impact specific groups), privacy considerations, and security considerations.
% \item The conference expects that many papers will be foundational research and not tied to particular applications, let alone deployments. However, if there is a direct path to any negative applications, the authors should point it out. For example, it is legitimate to point out that an improvement in the quality of generative models could be used to generate deepfakes for disinformation. On the other hand, it is not needed to point out that a generic algorithm for optimizing neural networks could enable people to train models that generate Deepfakes faster.
% \item The authors should consider possible harms that could arise when the technology is being used as intended and functioning correctly, harms that could arise when the technology is being used as intended but gives incorrect results, and harms following from (intentional or unintentional) misuse of the technology.
% \item If there are negative societal impacts, the authors could also discuss possible mitigation strategies (e.g., gated release of models, providing defenses in addition to attacks, mechanisms for monitoring misuse, mechanisms to monitor how a system learns from feedback over time, improving the efficiency and accessibility of ML).
% \end{itemize}
% \item {\bf Safeguards}
% \item[] Question: Does the paper describe safeguards that have been put in place for responsible release of data or models that have a high risk for misuse (e.g., pretrained language models, image generators, or scraped datasets)?
% \item[] Answer: \answerNA{} % Replace by \answerYes{}, \answerNo{}, or \answerNA{}.
% \item[] Justification: Our paper poses no such risks.
% \item[] Guidelines:
% \begin{itemize}
% \item The answer NA means that the paper poses no such risks.
% \item Released models that have a high risk for misuse or dual-use should be released with necessary safeguards to allow for controlled use of the model, for example by requiring that users adhere to usage guidelines or restrictions to access the model or implementing safety filters.
% \item Datasets that have been scraped from the Internet could pose safety risks. The authors should describe how they avoided releasing unsafe images.
% \item We recognize that providing effective safeguards is challenging, and many papers do not require this, but we encourage authors to take this into account and make a best faith effort.
% \end{itemize}
% \item {\bf Licenses for existing assets}
% \item[] Question: Are the creators or original owners of assets (e.g., code, data, models), used in the paper, properly credited and are the license and terms of use explicitly mentioned and properly respected?
% \item[] Answer: \answerYes{} % Replace by \answerYes{}, \answerNo{}, or \answerNA{}.
% \item[] Justification: We properly credit the original codes and datasets in our paper.
% \item[] Guidelines:
% \begin{itemize}
% \item The answer NA means that the paper does not use existing assets.
% \item The authors should cite the original paper that produced the code package or dataset.
% \item The authors should state which version of the asset is used and, if possible, include a URL.
% \item The name of the license (e.g., CC-BY 4.0) should be included for each asset.
% \item For scraped data from a particular source (e.g., website), the copyright and terms of service of that source should be provided.
% \item If assets are released, the license, copyright information, and terms of use in the package should be provided. For popular datasets, \url{paperswithcode.com/datasets} has curated licenses for some datasets. Their licensing guide can help determine the license of a dataset.
% \item For existing datasets that are re-packaged, both the original license and the license of the derived asset (if it has changed) should be provided.
% \item If this information is not available online, the authors are encouraged to reach out to the asset's creators.
% \end{itemize}
% \item {\bf New assets}
% \item[] Question: Are new assets introduced in the paper well documented and is the documentation provided alongside the assets?
% \item[] Answer: \answerYes{} % Replace by \answerYes{}, \answerNo{}, or \answerNA{}.
% \item[] Justification: We will provide a detailed readme file in the code upon release, which shows details about training, license, etc.
% \item[] Guidelines:
% \begin{itemize}
% \item The answer NA means that the paper does not release new assets.
% \item Researchers should communicate the details of the dataset/code/model as part of their submissions via structured templates. This includes details about training, license, limitations, etc.
% \item The paper should discuss whether and how consent was obtained from people whose asset is used.
% \item At submission time, remember to anonymize your assets (if applicable). You can either create an anonymized URL or include an anonymized zip file.
% \end{itemize}
% \item {\bf Crowdsourcing and research with human subjects}
% \item[] Question: For crowdsourcing experiments and research with human subjects, does the paper include the full text of instructions given to participants and screenshots, if applicable, as well as details about compensation (if any)?
% \item[] Answer: \answerNA{} % Replace by \answerYes{}, \answerNo{}, or \answerNA{}.
% \item[] Justification: Our work does not involve crowdsourcing nor research with human subjects.
% \item[] Guidelines:
% \begin{itemize}
% \item The answer NA means that the paper does not involve crowdsourcing nor research with human subjects.
% \item Including this information in the supplemental material is fine, but if the main contribution of the paper involves human subjects, then as much detail as possible should be included in the main paper.
% \item According to the NeurIPS Code of Ethics, workers involved in data collection, curation, or other labor should be paid at least the minimum wage in the country of the data collector.
% \end{itemize}
% \item {\bf Institutional review board (IRB) approvals or equivalent for research with human subjects}
% \item[] Question: Does the paper describe potential risks incurred by study participants, whether such risks were disclosed to the subjects, and whether Institutional Review Board (IRB) approvals (or an equivalent approval/review based on the requirements of your country or institution) were obtained?
% \item[] Answer: \answerNA{} % Replace by \answerYes{}, \answerNo{}, or \answerNA{}.
% \item[] Justification: Our work does not involve crowdsourcing nor research with human subjects.
% \item[] Guidelines:
% \begin{itemize}
% \item The answer NA means that the paper does not involve crowdsourcing nor research with human subjects.
% \item Depending on the country in which research is conducted, IRB approval (or equivalent) may be required for any human subjects research. If you obtained IRB approval, you should clearly state this in the paper.
% \item We recognize that the procedures for this may vary significantly between institutions and locations, and we expect authors to adhere to the NeurIPS Code of Ethics and the guidelines for their institution.
% \item For initial submissions, do not include any information that would break anonymity (if applicable), such as the institution conducting the review.
% \end{itemize}
% \item {\bf Declaration of LLM usage}
% \item[] Question: Does the paper describe the usage of LLMs if it is an important, original, or non-standard component of the core methods in this research? Note that if the LLM is used only for writing, editing, or formatting purposes and does not impact the core methodology, scientific rigorousness, or originality of the research, declaration is not required.
% %this research?
% \item[] Answer: \answerNA{} % Replace by \answerYes{}, \answerNo{}, or \answerNA{}.
% \item[] Justification: Our research does not involve LLMs as any important, original, or non-standard components.
% \item[] Guidelines:
% \begin{itemize}
% \item The answer NA means that the core method development in this research does not involve LLMs as any important, original, or non-standard components.
% \item Please refer to our LLM policy (\url{https://neurips.cc/Conferences/2025/LLM}) for what should or should not be described.
% \end{itemize}
% \end{enumerate}
\end{document}
\vspace{-2em}
\begin{abstract}
Diffusion models demonstrate remarkable capabilities in capturing complex data distributions and have achieved compelling results in many generative tasks. While they have recently been extended to dense prediction tasks such as depth estimation and surface normal prediction, their full potential in this area remains under-explored. In dense prediction settings, target signal maps and input images are pixel-wise aligned. This makes conventional noise-to-data generation paradigm inefficient, as input images can serve as more informative prior compared to pure noise. Diffusion bridge models, which support data-to-data generation between two general data distributions, offer a promising alternative, but they typically fail to exploit the rich visual priors embedded in large pretrained foundation models. To address these limitations, we integrate diffusion bridge formulation with structured visual priors and introduce DPBridge, the first latent diffusion bridge framework for dense prediction tasks. Our method presents three key contributions: (1) a tractable reverse transition kernel for diffusion bridge process, enabling maximum likelihood training scheme for better compatibility with pretrained backbones; (2) a distribution-aligned normalization technique to mitigate the discrepancies between the bridge and standard diffusion processes; and (3) an auxiliary image consistency loss to preserve fine-grained details. Experiments across extensive benchmarks validate that our method consistently achieves superior performance, demonstrating its effectiveness and generalization capability under different scenarios.
% \CL{Suggest highlighting the major advances in dense prediction tasks, e.g., x\% performance improvements in segmentation on KITTI.}
\end{abstract}
\vspace{-1.5em}
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:intro}
Dense prediction refers to a class of problems in which the goal is to assign a prediction value for every pixel in the input image. It encompasses a variety of fundamental tasks, including depth estimation~\cite{yang2024depth,ranftl2021vision,eftekhar2021omnidata}, surface normal prediction~\cite{bae2024rethinking,hu2024metric3d,bae2021estimating}, semantic segmentation~\cite{weber2021step,cheng2022masked,wang2023images}, optical flow~\cite{teed2020raft,huang2022flowformer,weinzaepfel2023croco}, etc.
Recently, image diffusion models have been applied to dense prediction tasks by framing them as conditional generation problems. Leveraging the ability to capture complex data distributions, diffusion models serve as powerful priors and yield promising results~\cite{ke2024repurposing,garcia2024fine,fu2025geowizard}. However, these approaches exhibit inherent limitations stemming from the underlying generative mechanism. Specifically, the denoising process always starts from Gaussian noise, which carries minimal information about the target signal distribution. In such cases, the distributional gap between initial Gaussian prior and target distribution remains large, necessitating more sampling steps and often reliance on manually designed post-hoc guidance~\cite{chung2022diffusion, song2023pseudoinverse,chung2022improving} or customized generation pipeline~\cite{meng2021sdedit}. This not only increases computational overhead but can also degrade performance and prolong convergence.
Instead of starting from noise, a more effective alternative is to directly initiate the generative process from the input. Since RGB images are pixel-wise aligned with their corresponding dense signal maps, they serve as informative priors. This motivates the exploration of diffusion bridge models~\cite{liu2022let,pavon2021data,de2021diffusion,liu2023learning}, another line of computational frameworks based on stochastic processes with fixed start and end states, designed to model probability flows between two given distributions. We argue that diffusion bridge models are more suitable for dense prediction tasks, as their data-to-data generation paradigm naturally leverage the structural correspondence between inputs and outputs, thereby mitigating inefficiencies inherent in conventional noise-to-data scheme. Despite theoretical feasibility, diffusion bridge-based methods~\cite{zhou2023denoising,li2023bbdm,liu20232} have not yet demonstrated competitive performance compared with standard diffusion counterparts. This performance gap largely stems from the fact that most bridge models are trained from scratch via score matching objectives, making them incompatible with commonly used pretrained diffusion backbone. As a result, they fail to exploit the embedded semantic and spatial prior knowledge, limiting their expressiveness and generalization ability in dense prediction settings.
\begin{figure*}[t]
\begin{center}
\setlength{\abovecaptionskip}{0.2cm}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{figures/teaser.jpeg}
\caption{We present \textbf{DPBridge} to tackle general dense prediction tasks by establishing conditional probability transport between RGB images and corresponding dense maps in the latent space based on a tractable diffusion bridge process. }
\label{fig:teaser}
\end{center}
\vspace{-2em}
\end{figure*}
In this paper, we propose \textbf{D}ense \textbf{P}rediction \textbf{Bridge} (\textbf{DPBridge}), the first latent diffusion bridge model tailored for general dense prediction tasks by integrating the strengths of diffusion bridge modeling with visual priors from pretrained backbones. Specifically, we derive a fully tractable bridge process to connect the latent representations of RGB images and their corresponding dense signal maps, and formulate the generation process as a sequence of transformations that progressively synthesize the target maps from input data. Furthermore, we introduce finetuning strategies to better adapt pretrained diffusion backbones for DPBridge construction. Leveraging the rich visual priors not only enhances perceptual performance and generalization capability, but also significantly accelerates training convergence. \cref{fig:teaser} provides a high-level overview of DPBridge framework and illustrates its effectiveness across three representative dense prediction tasks: depth estimation, surface normal prediction, and semantic segmentation. These results demonstrate that our framework is both theoretically general and practically adaptable to diverse dense prediction scenarios.
Contributions of this paper can be summarized as follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item We propose DPBridge, a generative framework to address dense prediction tasks by formulating them as instances of latent diffusion bridges.
\item We derive a tractable reverse transition kernel for diffusion bridge process, enabling maximum likelihood training scheme. This is compatible with pretrained backbones, thus improving both training stability and the exploitation of visual prior knowledge.
\item We introduce a distribution-aligned normalization technique that mitigates distributional discrepancies between the bridge and standard diffusion processes, allowing for more effective finetuning. In addition, by incorporating auxiliary image consistency loss, we can better preserve fine-grained spatial details often lost in latent representations, enhancing per-pixel prediction accuracy.
\item Our method exhibits competitive performance across different tasks in terms of both quantitative metrics and visual inspection.
\end{itemize}
\section{Related Works}
\label{related works}
\textbf{Dense Prediction.} Dense predictions can be characterized as conditional distribution modeling and common solutions are categorized into discriminative and generative ones. Discriminative methods directly map input data to structured outputs in a feed-forward manner. \cite{ranftl2021vision} introduces transformer architecture and fusion mechanism to better capture both local and global context feature. \cite{yang2024depth} explore the usage of large-scale synthetic and pseudo-labeled images to enhance model's capacity and robustness. \cite{bae2024rethinking} incorporates per-pixel ray directions and models the relative rotations between neighboring pixels. Recently, diffusion-based generative methods have been applied in this field and showed remarkable performance. \cite{ke2024repurposing} finetunes pretrained diffusion backbone, leveraging the rich visual knowledge within to enhance depth estimation. \cite{fu2025geowizard} takes advantage of diffusion priors to jointly estimate depth and surface normals from single image, enhancing detail preservation by decoupling complex data distributions into distinct sub-distributions. \cite{gui2024depthfm} exploits flow matching to facilitate the distribution shift between images and depth maps. Our work follow conventional generative pipeline, but instead of starting from pure noise, we establish direct connections between input image and target signal map distributions, and model conditional probability transport in iterative denoising manner.
\textbf{Diffusion and Bridge Models.} Diffusion models~\cite{ho2020denoising,song2020score} are a family of generative models that are able to capture complex data distributions through a sequence of forward and reverse processes. They accelerate the development of modern generative systems, and have consistently obtained state-of-the-art performance across various domains, such as image and video synthesis~\cite{rombach2022high, ho2022video}, controlled editing~\cite{zhang2023adding, batzolis2021conditional}, inverse problem solving~\cite{chung2022diffusion,song2023pseudoinverse}, 3D assets generation~\cite{xiang2024structured,zhang2024clay}, and human-centered applications~\cite{ji2024jade,ji2024unsupervised,ji20243d}.
Diffusion bridge models have gained increasing attention in generative modeling in recent years~\cite{pavon2021data,liu2022let,zhou2023denoising,liu2023learning,de2021diffusion}. They offer a novel perspective for translating between distributions and enable a more effective data-to-data generation paradigm. Recent works have explored different types of bridge processes and their applications. \cite{liu20232,li2023bbdm,yue2023image} develop Schrödinger bridge, Brownian bridge, and Ornstein-Uhlenbeck bridge frameworks, applying them to image restoration tasks such as inpainting, super-resolution. \cite{chung2024direct} proposes a modified inference procedure that enforces data consistency. \cite{chen2023schrodinger} introduces bridge models to text-to-speech systems, enhancing synthesis quality and sampling efficiency.
To the best of our knowledge, no prior work has explored the use of bridge models for dense prediction tasks to facilitate distribution transport between images and dense signal maps, despite their structural closeness. Our work aims to address this research gap. Conceptually, DPBridge is most related to DDBM~\cite{zhou2023denoising}, but the two differ in several key aspects: DDBM is trained from scratch using a score matching objective, whereas DPBridge is finetuned from large pretrained diffusion backbones using a maximum likelihood objective. In addition, we introduce training strategies tailored for efficient finetuning, enabling better use of visual priors and significantly improving performance on dense prediction settings.
\section{Preliminary}
\label{preliminary}
\subsection{Diffusion Process}
\label{sec:diffusion preliminary}
A diffusion process $\mathbb{Q}=\{\mathbf{z}_t \in \mathbb{R}^d: t \in [0, T]\}$ on space $\mathbb{R}^d$ follows the stochastic differential equation of form
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:diffusion SDE}
\mathrm{d}\mathbf{z}_t = f(\mathbf{z}_t, t)\mathrm{d}t + g(t)\mathrm{d}\mathbf{w}_t
\end{equation}
where $\mathbf{w}_t$ is a standard Wiener process, $f: \mathbb{R}^d \times [0, T] \rightarrow \mathbb{R}$ and $g: [0, T] \rightarrow \mathbb{R}$ are the drift and diffusion coefficients that describe the evolution of this stochastic process. The transition kernel is specified as $q(\mathbf{z}_t | \mathbf{z}_0) = \mathcal{N}(\alpha_t\mathbf{z}_0, \sigma_t^2 \mathbf{I})$ and the noise schedule comprising differentiable functions $\alpha_t, \sigma_t$ depends on the design choice of drift and diffusion coefficients. It is also common to assess the diffusion process in terms of the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), defined as $\text{SNR}_t = \alpha_t^2 / \sigma_t^2$.
\subsection{Diffusion Bridge Process}
\label{sec:diffusion bridge preliminary}
Diffusion bridge process is a special type of diffusion process that is conditioned to end at a specified terminal point at timestep $T$. One natural way of its construction is to derive the conditioned process from a reference diffusion process given terminal constraints. We can use Doob’s h-transform technique~\cite{oksendal2013stochastic,sarkka2019applied} to modify a reference process $\mathbb{Q}$ defined in \cref{eq:diffusion SDE} to ensure that the event $\mathbf{z}_T=\mathbf{x}$ happens, where $\mathbf{x}$ is a predefined value. The conditioned process $\mathbb{Q}^{\mathbf{x}}(\cdot):=\mathbb{Q}\left(\cdot | \mathbf{z}_T=\mathbf{x}\right)$ thus follows the law of
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:diffusion bridge SDE}
\mathrm{d}\mathbf{z}_t = \left[ f(\mathbf{z}_t, t) + g^2(t) h(\mathbf{z}_t, t, \mathbf{x}, T)\right] \mathrm{d}t + g(t) \mathrm{d}\mathbf{w}_t
\end{equation}
where $h(\mathbf{z}_t, t, \mathbf{x}, T) = \nabla_{\mathbf{z}_t} \log q(\mathbf{z}_T=\mathbf{x} | \mathbf{z}_t)$. Intuitively, the additional drift term $h(\mathbf{z}_t, t, \mathbf{x}, T)$ plays the role of steering $\mathbf{z}_t$ towards the target point $\mathbf{z}_T=\mathbf{x}$, and it is ensured that $\mathbb{Q}^{\mathbf{x}}$ invariably passes $\mathbf{x}$ at timestep $T$ with probability 1 for any initial point $\mathbf{z}_0$.
The transition kernel of $\mathbb{Q}^{\mathbf{x}}$, given by $q(\mathbf{z}_t | \mathbf{z}_0, \mathbf{z}_T)$, can be subsequently derived through Kolmogorov equation:
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
\label{eqn: bridge forward kernel}
q(\mathbf{z}_t | \mathbf{z}_0, \mathbf{z}_T) &= \mathcal{N}(m_t\mathbf{z}_0 + n_t\mathbf{z}_T, \sigma_t^2 \mathbf{I}) \\
m_t = \alpha_t \left( 1 - \frac{\text{SNR}_T}{\text{SNR}_t} \right), \quad
n_t &= \frac{\text{SNR}_T}{\text{SNR}_t} \frac{\alpha_t}{\alpha_T}, \quad
\sigma_t = \sigma_t \sqrt{ 1 - \frac{\text{SNR}_T}{\text{SNR}_t}}
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
where $\text{SNR}_t, \alpha_t, \sigma_t^2$ are all ingredients defined in the reference process $\mathbb{Q}$.
\section{Method}
\label{method}
\subsection{Problem Formulation}
We formulate different dense prediction tasks as instances of image-conditioned generation problems and propose DPBridge to model the conditional distributions $p(\mathbf{y} | \mathbf{x})$, where $\mathbf{y} \in \mathbb{R}^{H \times W \times C}$ denotes the target dense signal map (e.g. depth, surface normal, segmentation map), and $\mathbf{x} \in \mathbb{R}^{H \times W \times 3}$ is the input RGB image. In the following sections, we'll elaborate the details of DPBridge framework, which is constructed based on pretrained diffusion backbone through proper finetuning.
\subsection{Dense Prediction Bridge}
Given paired training data, a straightforward approach is to construct the diffusion bridge model from scratch, following the formulation in \cref{sec:diffusion bridge preliminary}. However, this approach is extremely resource-demanding, making it hard to implement with limited computation power. What's more, it lacks the ability to harness rich visual prior embedded in the foundation models pretrained with large-scale data,which have been shown to significantly enhance both perceptual quality and generalization capability in dense prediction tasks. To address these limitations and fully exploit the visual prior, our DPBridge is build upon pretrained diffusion backbones through finetuning. We explore several strategies to handle the misalignment between bridge process and standard diffusion process, facilitating more efficient knowledge transfer. An overview of our training pipeline is provided in \cref{fig:training pipeline}, followed by a detailed explanation of each component.
\subsection{Latent Space Implementation}
We follow common practice to perform diffusion steps in a compressed yet perceptually aligned latent space, provided by an independently trained variational autoencoder (VAE). Specifically, both the dense signal map and RGB image are encoded using the VAE encoder, yielding latent representations $\mathbf{z}_0=\mathcal{E}(\mathbf{y})$ and $\mathbf{z}_T=\mathcal{E}(\mathbf{x})$, which serve as the initial and terminal points of the diffusion bridge process. In this way the diffusion bridge process is operated entirely in the latent space. To recover the original signal map, we use the VAE decoder to decode the predicted latent $\mathbf{y}=\mathcal{D}(\hat{\mathbf{z}}_0)$. For clarity, all subsequent derivations in this paper are conducted in latent space.
\begin{figure*}[t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{figures/dpbridge_pipline.png}
\caption{Overview of our training pipeline. We derive the maximum likelihood training objective of diffusion bridge process, propose a distribution-aligned normalization strategy, and assist the training with an auxiliary image consistency loss.}
\label{fig:training pipeline}
\end{center}
\vspace{-1em}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{Training Objective}
\label{sec:train loss}
\textbf{Maximum Likelihood Loss.} A widely adopted approach for learning the reverse process associated with \cref{eq:diffusion bridge SDE} follows the theoretical framework of~\cite{anderson1982reverse}, where a neural network is trained to approximate the score function~\cite{zhou2023denoising}. In contrast, we observe that in the diffusion bridge setting, the reverse transition kernel admits a tractable analytical form. This insight enables us to adopt a maximum likelihood training paradigm in place of score matching. Since widely used latent diffusion models like Stable Diffusion~\cite{rombach2022high} are pretrained under a likelihood-based loss function, finetuning with a consistent objective is more compatible, which helps preserve prior knowledge and improves training stability.
Specifically, the training process is performed by optimizing the Evidence Lower Bound (ELBO). Given the encoded training pair $\big(\mathbf{z}_0, \mathbf{z}_T\big)$, the expectation of data log-likelihood possesses the following ELBO formulation:
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
\emph{ELBO} = &\mathbb{E}_{p(\mathbf{z}_0)} \Big[ \mathbb{E}_{p(\mathbf{z}_1 \mid \mathbf{z}_0)} \big[ \log p_\theta (\mathbf{z}_0 \mid \mathbf{z}_1, \mathbf{z}_T) \big] - \\
\sum_{t=2}^{T} \mathbb{E}_{p(\mathbf{z}_t | \mathbf{z}_0)} &\big[ \mathbb{D}_{KL} \big( q(\mathbf{z}_{t-1} \mid \mathbf{z}_t, \mathbf{z}_0, \mathbf{z}_T) \,||\, p_\theta(\mathbf{z}_{t-1} \mid \mathbf{z}_t, \mathbf{z}_T) \big) \big] \Big]
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
where $q(\mathbf{z}_{t-1} | \mathbf{z}_t, \mathbf{z}_0, \mathbf{z}_T)$ and $p_\theta(\mathbf{z}_{t-1} | \mathbf{z}_t, \mathbf{z}_T)$ are the transition kernel of true reverse process and our modeled generative process. $\mathbb{D}_{KL}$ is the KL divergence. Utilizing Bayes’ theorem and Markov chain property, we can obtain:
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
\label{eqn: bridge reverse kernel}
q(\mathbf{z}_{t-1} | \mathbf{z}_t, \mathbf{z}_0, \mathbf{z}_T) &= \frac{q(\mathbf{z}_t | \mathbf{z}_{t-1}, \mathbf{z}_T)q(\mathbf{z}_{t-1} | \mathbf{z}_0, \mathbf{z}_T)}{q(\mathbf{z}_t | \mathbf{z}_0, \mathbf{z}_T)}\\
&= \mathcal{N}(\tilde{\boldsymbol{\mu}}_t(\mathbf{z}_t, \mathbf{z}_0, \mathbf{z}_T), \tilde{\sigma}_t^2\mathbf{I}) \\
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
For simplicity, we define the following notations: $a_t = m_t / m_{t-1}, b_t = n_t - a_t \cdot n_{t-1}, \delta_t^2 = \sigma_t^2 - a_t^2 \cdot \sigma_{t-1}^2$. Based on \cref{eqn: bridge forward kernel}, we further derive the mean value term:
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
\label{eqn: bridge reverse mean}
\tilde{\boldsymbol{\mu}}_t(\mathbf{z}_t, \mathbf{z}_0, \mathbf{z}_T) &= k_1 \mathbf{z}_t + k_2 \mathbf{z}_0 + k_3 \mathbf{z}_T \\
k_1 = \frac{\sigma_{t-1}^2}{\sigma_t^2} \cdot a_t, \quad
k_2 = \frac{\delta_t^2}{\sigma_t^2} \cdot &m_{t-1}, \quad
k_3 = \frac{\delta_t^2}{\sigma_t^2} \cdot n_{t-1} - \frac{\sigma_{t-1}^2}{\sigma_t^2} \cdot a_t \cdot b_t,
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
and the variance term:
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
\label{eqn: bridge reverse variance}
\tilde{\sigma}_t^2 = \frac{\sigma_{t-1}^2}{\sigma_t^2} \cdot \delta_t^2
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
Assuming $p_\theta(\mathbf{z}_{t-1} | \mathbf{z}_t, \mathbf{z}_T) \sim \mathcal{N}(\boldsymbol{\mu}_{\theta}(\mathbf{z}_t, \mathbf{z}_T, t), \boldsymbol{\Sigma}_{\theta}(\mathbf{z}_t, \mathbf{z}_T, t))$ is also a Gaussian distribution with fixed variance $\boldsymbol{\Sigma}_{\theta}(\mathbf{z}_t, \mathbf{z}_T, t)=\tilde{\sigma}_t^2$ for simplicity of derivation. Following the strategy of DDPM~\cite{ho2020denoising}, we reparameterize the model $\boldsymbol{\epsilon}_{\theta}(\mathbf{z}_t, \mathbf{z}_T, t)$ to predict noise instead of posterior mean. Under this formulation, the ELBO objective is equivalent to:
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
\label{eqn:diffusion loss}
\mathcal{L}_{elbo} &= \mathbb{E}_{t, \mathbf{z}_0, \mathbf{z}_t, \mathbf{z}_T} \left[ \frac{1}{2 \tilde{\sigma}_t^2} \left\| \tilde{\boldsymbol{\mu}}_t - \boldsymbol{\mu}_{\theta}(\mathbf{z}_t, \mathbf{z}_T, t) \right\|^2 \right] \\
&\cong \mathbb{E}_{t, \mathbf{z}_0, \mathbf{z}_t, \mathbf{z}_T} \left[ \left\| \boldsymbol{\epsilon} - \boldsymbol{\epsilon}_{\theta}(\mathbf{z}_t, \mathbf{z}_T, t) \right\|^2 \right]
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
\textbf{Image Consistency Loss.} In addition to the latent-space likelihood loss, we also incorporate an image-level consistency loss, where we first decode the latent prediction back to image space, and then evaluate its consistency with the ground truth dense map using a simple MSE.
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{L}_{ic} = \left\| \mathcal{D}(\hat{\mathbf{z}}_0) - \mathbf{y}) \right\|^2
\end{equation}
This additional supervision addresses the loss of high-frequency structures caused by latent-space compression, which can impair the model’s ability to preserve fine-grained details. By introducing this auxiliary image-space loss, we encourage the model to retain spatial information critical for accurate per-pixel prediction. This dual-loss strategy combines the efficiency of latent-space modeling with the fidelity of image-space supervision, leading to improved performance. The final training objective is given by:
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{L} = \omega_1\mathcal{L}_{elbo} + \omega_2\mathcal{L}_{ic}
\end{equation}
where $\omega_1, \omega_2$ are hyperparameters to balance the loss.
\subsection{Distribution Alignment Normalization}
A key challenge during finetuning is the misalignment between the marginal distribution $q(\mathbf{z}_t)$ of intermediate samples in DPBridge and that of the diffusion backbone, due to the difference in the forward transition kernels. This misalignment weakens the model's denoising ability and hinders effective knowledge transfer. To address this issue, we propose a distribution alignment normalization technique that transforms intermediate latents computed from our bridge process \cref{eqn: bridge forward kernel} to match the distributional form of a standard diffusion process.
\begin{equation}
\label{eqn:normalization}
\mathbf{z}_t' = \frac{\mathbf{z}_t - m_t \mathbf{z}_T}{\sqrt{n_t^2 + \sigma_t^2}} = \frac{n_t}{\sqrt{n_t^2 + \sigma_t^2}} \mathbf{z}_0 + \frac{\sigma_t}{\sqrt{n_t^2 + \sigma_t^2}} \boldsymbol{\epsilon}_t
\end{equation}
Since the square sum of coefficients is equal to 1, the normalized bridge process $\{\mathbf{z}_t': t \in [0, T]\}$ is the same as a standard VP process, making the marginal distribution of these two aligned. Therefore by feeding the normalized sample $\mathbf{z}_t'$ in the network $\boldsymbol{\epsilon}_{\theta}$, we can fully exploit the denoising capability from pretrained diffusion backbone. We note that a similar strategy was independently proposed in FrameBridge~\cite{wang2024framebridge}, where it is applied in the context of image-to-video generation. Our method, developed concurrently, is specifically designed to facilitate adaptation in dense prediction tasks under the DPBridge framework. An overview of the full training and inference procedures are summarized in \cref{alg:training} \cref{alg:inference}. For more derivation details, please refer to \cref{app:derivation details}.
\section{Experiments}
We conduct evaluation primarily on two representative dense prediction tasks: depth estimation and surface normal prediction. We begin with a brief overview of experimental settings, followed by both quantitative and qualitative analyses. Next, we present ablation studies to investigate the contribution of each design component. Implementation details are presented in \cref{app:implem details} for reference.
\subsection{Experiments Setup}
\label{sec:exp setup}
\noindent\textbf{Datasets.} The basic setting for depth estimation and surface normal prediction experiments are similar. We use two synthetic datasets, HyperSim~\cite{roberts2021hypersim} and Virtual KITTI~\cite{cabon2020virtual}, for training, which cover both indoor and outdoor scenes with high-quality ground-truth annotations. To comprehensively evaluate the model performance and demonstrate its generalization capability, we conduct zero-shot evaluations on real-world datasets. For depth estimation, this includes NYUv2~\cite{silberman2012indoor}, KITTI~\cite{geiger2012we}, ScanNet~\cite{dai2017scannet}, ETH3D~\cite{schops2017multi} and DIODE~\cite{vasiljevic2019diode}. For surface normal prediction, we additionally incorporate iBims~\cite{koch2018evaluation} and Sintel~\cite{butler2012naturalistic} datasets. For fair comparison, we use the same validation split as in previous methods~\cite{ke2024repurposing}.
\noindent\textbf{Evaluation Metrics.} For depth estimation, we follow the affine-invariant evaluation protocol, where we first align the prediction results to the ground truth with least squares fitting, and then use Absolute Mean Relative Error (AbsRel) and $\delta_1$ accuracy to assess the performance. Denote the ground truth depth $\mathbf{d}$, predicted depth $\hat{\mathbf{d}}$, and the number of valid pixels $N$, the AbsRel is calculated as $\frac{1}{N}\sum_{i=1}^N\|\mathbf{d}_i-\hat{\mathbf{d}}_i\| / \mathbf{d}_i$, and $\delta_1$ accuracy is measured using the ratio
of pixels satisfying $\text{max}(\mathbf{d}_i/\hat{\mathbf{d}}_i, \hat{\mathbf{d}}_i/\mathbf{d}_i) < 1.25$. For the metrics of surface normal task, we report the commonly used mean angular error between the ground-truth normal vectors and the prediction results, as well as the percentage of pixels with an angular error below 11.25 degrees.
\begin{table*}[t]
\centering
\resizebox{\linewidth}{!}{%
\begin{tabular}{lcccccccccccccc}
\toprule
\textbf{Method} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{\textbf{Model Type}} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{\textbf{NYUv2}} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{\textbf{KITTI}} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{\textbf{ETH3D}} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{\textbf{ScanNet}} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{\textbf{DIODE}} & \textbf{Avg.}\\
& FF & DM & BM & AbsRel$\downarrow$ & $\delta_1\uparrow$ & AbsRel$\downarrow$ & $\delta_1\uparrow$ & AbsRel$\downarrow$ & $\delta_1\uparrow$ & AbsRel$\downarrow$ & $\delta_1\uparrow$ & AbsRel$\downarrow$ & $\delta_1\uparrow$ & \textbf{Rank}\\
\midrule
DiverseDepth~\cite{yin2020diversedepth} & \checkmark & & & 11.7 & 87.5 & 19.0 & 70.4 & 22.8 & 69.4 & 10.9 & 88.2 & 37.6 & 63.1 & 12.2 \\
MiDaS~\cite{ranftl2020towards} & \checkmark & & & 11.1 & 88.5 & 23.6 & 63.0 & 18.4 & 75.2 & 12.1 & 84.6 & 33.2 & 71.5 & 11.8 \\
LeReS~\cite{yin2021learning} & \checkmark & & & 9.0 & 91.6 & 14.9 & 78.4 & 17.1 & 77.7 & 9.1 & 91.1 & 27.1 & 76.6 & 9.5 \\
Omnidata~\cite{eftekhar2021omnidata} & \checkmark & & & 7.4 & 94.5 & 14.9 & 83.5 & 16.6 & 77.8 & 7.5 & 93.2 & 33.9 & 74.2 & 9.2 \\
HDN~\cite{zhang2022hierarchical} & \checkmark & & & 6.9 & 94.8 & 11.5 & 86.7 & 12.1 & 83.3 & 8.0 & 93.6 & 24.6 & 78.0 & 7.2 \\
DPT~\cite{ranftl2021vision} & \checkmark & & & 9.8 & 90.3 & 10.0 & 90.1 & 7.8 & 94.6 & 8.2 & 93.8 & 18.2 & 75.8 & 7.0 \\
Depth Anything V2~\cite{yang2024depth} & \checkmark & & & \textbf{4.4} & \textbf{97.9} & \textbf{7.5} & \textbf{94.8} & 13.2 & 84.2 & \textbf{4.4} & \textbf{98.0} & \textbf{6.5} & \textbf{95.4} & \textbf{2.3} \\
\midrule
Marigold~\cite{ke2024repurposing} & & \checkmark & & 6.0 & 95.9 & 10.5 & 90.4 & 7.1 & \underline{95.1} & 6.9 & 94.5 & 31.0 & 71.2 & 6.0 \\
DepthFM~\cite{gui2024depthfm} & & \checkmark & & 6.5 & 95.6 & \underline{8.3} & \underline{93.4} & - & - & - & - & \underline{22.5} & 80.0 & 3.8 \\
Geowizard~\cite{fu2025geowizard} & & \checkmark & & 5.7 & 96.2 & 14.4 & 82.0 & 7.5 & 94.3 & 6.1 & 95.8 & 31.4 & 77.1 & 6.2 \\
E2E-FT~\cite{garcia2024fine} & & \checkmark & & 5.4 & 96.4 & 9.6 & 92.1 & \textbf{6.4} & \textbf{95.9} & 5.8 & 96.5 & 30.3 & 77.6 & 3.6 \\
\midrule
I2SB~\cite{liu20232} & & & \checkmark & 23.5 & 63.6 & 35.1 & 46.4 & 53.4 & 40.5 & 21.1 & 67.4 & 55.5 & 58.2 & 14.0 \\
BBDM~\cite{li2023bbdm} & & & \checkmark & 33.2 & 49.6 & 58.6 & 25.6 & 52.0 & 40.6 & 25.2 & 61.2 & 70.1 & 46.9 & 15.2\\
DDBM~\cite{zhou2023denoising} & & & \checkmark & 26.4 & 62.2 & 55.1 & 27.6 & 69.5 & 33.8 & 23.2 & 65.6 & 52.3 & 56.9 & 14.5 \\
\midrule
\rowcolor[gray]{0.9}
\textbf{DPBridge (SD1.5)} & & & \checkmark & 6.9 & 95.7 & 11.2 & 87.3 & 8.1 & 93.2 & 7.5 & 94.7 & 29.7 & 78.6 & 5.4 \\
\rowcolor[gray]{0.9}
\textbf{DPBridge (SD2.1)} & & & \checkmark & \textbf{4.4} & \underline{97.6} & 9.8 & 91.6 & \underline{6.9} & 94.9 & \underline{4.5} & \underline{97.4} & 23.8 & \underline{84.0} & \underline{2.7} \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
}
\caption{Quantitative comparison on affine-invariant depth estimation benchmarks. All metrics are presented in percentage terms. FF, DM, and BM correspond to feed-forward, diffusion models, and bridge models. The best and second-best results are highlighted in \textbf{bold} and \underline{underline} formats.}
\label{tab:depth estimation}
\end{table*}
\begin{table*}[t]
\centering
\resizebox{\linewidth}{!}{%
\begin{tabular}{lcccccccccccc}
\toprule
\textbf{Method} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{\textbf{Model Type}} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{\textbf{NYUv2}} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{\textbf{ScanNet}} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{\textbf{iBims-1}} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{\textbf{Sintel}} & \textbf{Avg.}\\
& FF & DM & BM & Mean$\downarrow$ & $11.25^{\circ}\uparrow$ & Mean$\downarrow$ & $11.25^{\circ}\uparrow$ & Mean$\downarrow$ & $11.25^{\circ}\uparrow$ & Mean$\downarrow$ & $11.25^{\circ}\uparrow$ & \textbf{Rank}\\
\midrule
EESNU~\cite{bae2021estimating} & \checkmark & & & \underline{16.2} & 58.6 & - & - & 20.0 & 58.5 & 42.1 & 11.5 & 6.8 \\
Omnidata v1~\cite{eftekhar2021omnidata} & \checkmark & & & 23.1 & 45.8 & 22.9 & 47.4 & 19.0 & 62.1 & 41.5 & 11.4 & 8.8 \\
Omnidata v2~\cite{kar20223d} & \checkmark & & & 17.2 & 55.5 & 16.2 & 60.2 & 18.2 & 63.9 & 40.5 & 14.7 & 6.2 \\
DSINE~\cite{bae2024rethinking} & \checkmark & & & 16.4 & 59.6 & 16.2 & 61.0 & 17.1 & 67.4 & 34.9 & 21.5 & 3.5 \\
\midrule
Marigold~\cite{ke2024repurposing} & & \checkmark & & 18.8 & 55.9 & 17.7 & 58.8 & 18.4 & 64.3 & 39.1 & 14.9 & 6.4 \\
Geowizard~\cite{fu2025geowizard} & & \checkmark & & 17.0 & 56.5 & 15.4 & 61.6 & \textbf{13.0} & 65.3 & 40.4 & 13.2 & 4.2 \\
E2E-FT~\cite{garcia2024fine} & & \checkmark & & 16.5 & \underline{60.4} & \underline{14.7} & \underline{66.1} & \underline{16.1} & \textbf{69.7} & \underline{33.5} & \underline{22.3} & \underline{2.1} \\
StableNormal~\cite{ye2024stablenormal} & & \checkmark & & 17.7 & 55.9 & 15.8 & 61.2 & 17.2 & 66.6 & - & - & 5.0 \\
\midrule
\rowcolor[gray]{0.9}
\textbf{DPBridge (SD1.5)} & & & \checkmark & 18.1 & 54.2 & 18.0 & 54.5 & 24.3 & 51.2 & 41.2& 19.4 & 8.0 \\
\rowcolor[gray]{0.9}
\textbf{DPBridge (SD2.1)} & & & \checkmark & \textbf{14.8} & \textbf{65.3} & \textbf{13.4} & \textbf{68.5} & 17.1 & \underline{68.0} & \textbf{25.0} & \textbf{46.3} & \textbf{1.4} \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
}
\caption{Quantitative comparison on surface normal prediction benchmarks. All metrics are presented in percentage terms. FF, DM, and BM correspond to feed-forward, diffusion models, and bridge models. The best and second-best results are highlighted in \textbf{bold} and \underline{underline} formats.}
\label{tab:surface normal prediction}
\vspace{-1.5em}
\end{table*}
\begin{figure*}[!t]
\begin{subfigure}{\linewidth}
\centering
\begin{minipage}[]{0.195\linewidth}\centering \fontsize{8pt}{9.6pt}\selectfont
Input Image
\end{minipage}\hfill
\begin{minipage}[]{0.195\linewidth}\centering \fontsize{8pt}{9.6pt}\selectfont
DPBridge
\end{minipage}\hfill
\begin{minipage}[]{0.195\linewidth}\centering \fontsize{8pt}{9.6pt}\selectfont
Marigold
\end{minipage}\hfill
\begin{minipage}[]{0.195\linewidth}\centering \fontsize{8pt}{9.6pt}\selectfont
Geowizard
\end{minipage}\hfill
\begin{minipage}[]{0.195\linewidth}\centering \fontsize{8pt}{9.6pt}\selectfont
DepthFM
\end{minipage}\vfill %
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% Beef %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\begin{subfigure}[]{0.195\linewidth}\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{figures/depth_in_the_wild/input/beef.pdf}
\end{subfigure}\hfill
\begin{subfigure}[]{0.195\linewidth}\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{figures/depth_in_the_wild/dpbridge/beef_pred_colored.png}
\end{subfigure}\hfill
\begin{subfigure}[]{0.195\linewidth}\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{figures/depth_in_the_wild/marigold/beef_pred_colored.png}
\end{subfigure}\hfill
\begin{subfigure}[]{0.195\linewidth}\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{figures/depth_in_the_wild/geowizard/beef_pred_colored.png}
\end{subfigure}\hfill
\begin{subfigure}[]{0.195\linewidth}\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{figures/depth_in_the_wild/depthfm/beef_depth.png}
\end{subfigure}\vfill
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% Living Room %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\begin{subfigure}[]{0.195\linewidth}\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{figures/depth_in_the_wild/input/living_room.jpg}
\end{subfigure}\hfill
\begin{subfigure}[]{0.195\linewidth}\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{figures/depth_in_the_wild/dpbridge/living_room_pred_colored.png}
\end{subfigure}\hfill
\begin{subfigure}[]{0.195\linewidth}\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{figures/depth_in_the_wild/marigold/living_room_pred_colored.png}
\end{subfigure}\hfill
\begin{subfigure}[]{0.195\linewidth}\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{figures/depth_in_the_wild/geowizard/living_room_pred_colored.png}
\end{subfigure}\hfill
\begin{subfigure}[]{0.195\linewidth}\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{figures/depth_in_the_wild/depthfm/living_room_depth.png}
\end{subfigure}\vfill
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% City %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\begin{subfigure}[]{0.195\linewidth}\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{figures/depth_in_the_wild/input/city.jpeg}
\end{subfigure}\hfill
\begin{subfigure}[]{0.195\linewidth}\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{figures/depth_in_the_wild/dpbridge/city_pred_colored.png}
\end{subfigure}\hfill
\begin{subfigure}[]{0.195\linewidth}\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{figures/depth_in_the_wild/marigold/city_pred_colored.png}
\end{subfigure}\hfill
\begin{subfigure}[]{0.195\linewidth}\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{figures/depth_in_the_wild/geowizard/city_pred_colored.png}
\end{subfigure}\hfill
\begin{subfigure}[]{0.195\linewidth}\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{figures/depth_in_the_wild/depthfm/city_depth.png}
\end{subfigure}\vfill
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% Dog %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\begin{subfigure}[]{0.195\linewidth}\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{figures/depth_in_the_wild/input/dog.jpeg}
\end{subfigure}\hfill
\begin{subfigure}[]{0.195\linewidth}\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{figures/depth_in_the_wild/dpbridge/dog_pred_colored.png}
\end{subfigure}\hfill
\begin{subfigure}[]{0.195\linewidth}\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{figures/depth_in_the_wild/marigold/dog_pred_colored.png}
\end{subfigure}\hfill
\begin{subfigure}[]{0.195\linewidth}\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{figures/depth_in_the_wild/geowizard/dog_pred_colored.png}
\end{subfigure}\hfill
\begin{subfigure}[]{0.195\linewidth}\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{figures/depth_in_the_wild/depthfm/dog_depth.png}
\end{subfigure}\vfill
\end{subfigure}
\caption{Qualitative comparison with diffusion-based depth estimation methods on in-the-wild images. DPBridge can generate depth maps with sharper boundaries and more coherent scene geometry.}
\label{fig:depth vis}
\vspace{5pt}
\begin{subfigure}{\linewidth} \centering
\begin{minipage}[]{0.195\linewidth}\centering \fontsize{8pt}{9.6pt}\selectfont
Input Image
\end{minipage}\hfill
\begin{minipage}[]{0.195\linewidth}\centering \fontsize{8pt}{9.6pt}\selectfont
DPBridge
\end{minipage}\hfill
\begin{minipage}[]{0.195\linewidth}\centering \fontsize{8pt}{9.6pt}\selectfont
Marigold
\end{minipage}\hfill
\begin{minipage}[]{0.195\linewidth}\centering \fontsize{8pt}{9.6pt}\selectfont
Geowizard
\end{minipage}\hfill
\begin{minipage}[]{0.195\linewidth}\centering \fontsize{8pt}{9.6pt}\selectfont
StableNormal
\end{minipage}\vfill %
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% Colosseo %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\begin{subfigure}[]{0.195\linewidth}\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{figures/normal_in_the_wild/input/Colosseo.jpg}
\end{subfigure}\hfill
\begin{subfigure}[]{0.195\linewidth}\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{figures/normal_in_the_wild/dpbridge/Colosseo_pred_colored.jpeg}
\end{subfigure}\hfill
\begin{subfigure}[]{0.195\linewidth}\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{figures/normal_in_the_wild/marigold/Colosseo_pred_colored.jpeg}
\end{subfigure}\hfill
\begin{subfigure}[]{0.195\linewidth}\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{figures/normal_in_the_wild/geowizard/Colosseo_pred_colored.png}
\end{subfigure}\hfill
\begin{subfigure}[]{0.195\linewidth}\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{figures/normal_in_the_wild/stable-normal/Colosseo.jpg}
\end{subfigure}\vfill
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% Coral %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\begin{subfigure}[]{0.195\linewidth}\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{figures/normal_in_the_wild/input/Coral.jpg}
\end{subfigure}\hfill
\begin{subfigure}[]{0.195\linewidth}\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{figures/normal_in_the_wild/dpbridge/Coral_pred_colored.jpeg}
\end{subfigure}\hfill
\begin{subfigure}[]{0.195\linewidth}\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{figures/normal_in_the_wild/marigold/Coral_pred_colored.jpeg}
\end{subfigure}\hfill
\begin{subfigure}[]{0.195\linewidth}\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{figures/normal_in_the_wild/geowizard/Coral_pred_colored.png}
\end{subfigure}\hfill
\begin{subfigure}[]{0.195\linewidth}\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{figures/normal_in_the_wild/stable-normal/Coral.jpg}
\end{subfigure}\vfill
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% Lavinia %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\begin{subfigure}[]{0.195\linewidth}\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{figures/normal_in_the_wild/input/Lavinia.jpg}
\end{subfigure}\hfill
\begin{subfigure}[]{0.195\linewidth}\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{figures/normal_in_the_wild/dpbridge/Lavinia_pred_colored.jpeg}
\end{subfigure}\hfill
\begin{subfigure}[]{0.195\linewidth}\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{figures/normal_in_the_wild/marigold/Lavinia_pred_colored.jpeg}
\end{subfigure}\hfill
\begin{subfigure}[]{0.195\linewidth}\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth
]{figures/normal_in_the_wild/geowizard/Lavinia_pred_colored.png}
\end{subfigure}\hfill
\begin{subfigure}[]{0.195\linewidth}\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth
]{figures/normal_in_the_wild/stable-normal/Lavinia.jpg}
\end{subfigure}\vfill
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% Wall-E %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\begin{subfigure}[]{0.195\linewidth}\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{figures/normal_in_the_wild/input/Wall-E.jpeg}
\end{subfigure}\hfill
\begin{subfigure}[]{0.195\linewidth}\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{figures/normal_in_the_wild/dpbridge/Wall-E_pred_colored.jpeg}
\end{subfigure}\hfill
\begin{subfigure}[]{0.195\linewidth}\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{figures/normal_in_the_wild/marigold/Wall-E_pred_colored.jpeg}
\end{subfigure}\hfill
\begin{subfigure}[]{0.195\linewidth}\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{figures/normal_in_the_wild/geowizard/Wall-E_pred_colored.png}
\end{subfigure}\hfill
\begin{subfigure}[]{0.195\linewidth}\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{figures/normal_in_the_wild/stable-normal/Wall-E.jpg}
\end{subfigure}\vfill
\end{subfigure}
\caption{Qualitative comparison with diffusion-based surface normal prediction methods on in-the-wild images. DPBridge's results exhibit more fine-grained geometric details, such as the curvature of architectural structures, the contour of coral and reef, and the fur texture of the cat.}
\label{fig:normal_map vis}
\vspace{-2em}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{Quantitative and Qualitative Results}
\cref{tab:depth estimation} and \cref{tab:surface normal prediction} summarize the quantitative results of DPBridge on zero-shot benchmarks across depth estimation and surface normal prediction tasks. We evaluate two variants of our model—DPBridge (SD1.5) and DPBridge (SD2.1)—built on top of Stable Diffusion v1.5 and v2.1-base~\cite{rombach2022high}, respectively. For depth estimation, DPBridge (SD2.1) achieves an AbsRel of 4.4 and $\delta_1$ accuracy of 97.6\% on NYUv2, and 4.5 AbsRel / 97.4\% $\delta_1$ on ScanNet, both among the best in class. Across all five datasets, it achieves an average ranking of 2.7—second only to Depth Anything V2 (rank 2.3), which is trained on over 1,000 times more data. For surface normal prediction, DPBridge also delivers state-of-the-art performance with a mean angular error of 14.8° and $65.3\%$ accuracy under $11.25^{\circ}$ on NYUv2, outperforming both feed-forward and diffusion-based methods. It also maintains strong results on iBims-1 ($17.1$, $68.0\%$) and Sintel ($25.0$, $46.3\%$). These results highlight DPBridge's versatility to generalize well across tasks and benchmarks. Notably, compared to prior bridge models such as I2SB, BBDM, and DDBM, DPBridge reduces average error by a large margin (e.g., 4.4 vs. 23.5 AbsRel in NYUv2 depth), underscoring the benefits and importance of incorporating pretrained visual priors to bridge construction. Furthermore, among diffusion-based approaches, DPBridge consistently achieves the best or second-best scores, validating our core hypothesis that bridge formulation provides clear advantages over standard diffusion frameworks in dense prediction tasks, and combining bridge modeling with pretrained visual prior offers a more efficient and generalizable framework.
\cref{fig:depth vis} and \cref{fig:normal_map vis} present qualitative comparisons of DPBridge with SOTA diffusion-based methods on in-the-wild images for depth estimation and surface normal prediction, respectively. As shown in \cref{fig:depth vis}, DPBridge generates depth maps with sharper object boundaries and more coherent scene geometry, particularly in challenging cases such as urban scenes or complex foreground objects like animals, grass and flowers. In contrast, competing methods like Geowizard and DepthFM often produce over-smoothed outputs or fail to preserve depth discontinuities. In \cref{fig:normal_map vis}, DPBridge demonstrates stronger fidelity in fine-grained geometric details, such as the curvature of architectural structures, the contour of coral and reef, and the fur texture of the cat. Competing methods like Marigold tends to focus on the center object in the image and ignore the environment, while StableNormal produces unreliable outputs. These visual results reinforce the quantitative findings and highlight the effectiveness of DPBridge in modeling structured output distributions with both global coherence and fine details.
\begin{minipage}{0.48\linewidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.9\linewidth]{figures/fig5.png}
\captionof{figure}{Ablation of sampling steps. The performance improves as the number of steps increases, while observing saturation after 10 steps.}
\label{fig:ablation on steps}
\end{minipage}%
\hfill
\begin{minipage}{0.48\linewidth}
\centering
\setlength{\abovecaptionskip}{0.2cm}
\resizebox{\linewidth}{!}{%
\begin{tabular}{cccccccc}
\toprule
\multicolumn{3}{c}{\textbf{Design Components}} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{\textbf{NYUv2}} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{\textbf{KITTI}}\\
\textit{FT} & \textit{DAN} & \textit{IC} & AbsRel$\downarrow$ & $\delta_1\uparrow$ & AbsRel$\downarrow$ & $\delta_1\uparrow$ \\
\midrule
& \checkmark & \checkmark & 21.8 & 83.7 & 30.6 & 62.7 \\
\checkmark & & & 6.4 & 94.0 & 11.2 & 87.0 \\
\checkmark & & \checkmark & 6.2 & 95.8 & 11.0 & 87.5 \\
\checkmark & \checkmark & & 4.7 & 97.1 & 10.0 & 91.0 \\
\midrule
\checkmark & \checkmark & \checkmark & 4.4 & 97.6 & 9.8 & 91.6 \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
}
\captionof{table}{Ablation studies regarding different design components. \textit{FT} stands for finetuning pretrained backbone. \textit{DAN} denotes distribution aligned normalization technique. \textit{IC} indicates image consistency loss.}
\label{tab:ablation studies on design components}
\end{minipage}
\subsection{Ablation Studies}
To evaluate the effectiveness of each design component and training setting, we conduct ablation studies using depth estimation tasks on the NYUv2 and KITTI datasets. The results are summarized in \cref{tab:ablation studies on design components} and \cref{fig:ablation on steps}, with detailed discussions provided below.
\noindent\textbf{Visual Prior Exploitation.} To evaluate the usage of visual priors, we compare finetuning with training from scratch. As shown in the first row of \cref{tab:ablation studies on design components}, finetuning yields significantly better results under identical settings. This is attributed to stronger visual priors from foundation models and faster convergence. Additionally, the last rows of \cref{tab:depth estimation} and \cref{tab:surface normal prediction} show that SD2.1 outperforms SD1.5, highlighting that higher-quality priors further boost performance. These results confirm the advantage of building DPBridge on strong pretrained backbones.
\noindent\textbf{Distribution Alignment Normalization.} We next assess the benefit of aligning marginal distributions between the diffusion bridge and standard diffusion processes. As shown in the second and fourth rows of \cref{tab:ablation studies on design components}, adding a distribution alignment normalization step before the noise prediction network consistently improves performance.
\noindent\textbf{Image Consistency Loss.} As shown in the third and fourth rows of \cref{tab:ablation studies on design components}, the auxiliary image consistency loss improves performance but has a smaller impact than distribution alignment. This is likely because it mainly affects the boundaries or overlapping regions between masked and valid areas, which are limited in scope. Nonetheless, when combined with other components, it contributes to a notable overall performance gain.
\noindent\textbf{Number of Sampling Steps.} We evaluate performance under varying sampling steps during inference. As shown in \cref{fig:ablation on steps}, perception quality improves rapidly with more steps and saturates after 10. Notably, compared to \cref{tab:depth estimation}, where other diffusion-based methods use 50 steps, DPBridge achieves comparable results with significantly fewer steps, highlighting its efficiency.
\vspace{-0.5em}
\section{Conclusion}
\vspace{-0.5em}
\label{sec:conclusion}
In this paper, we propose DPBridge, a latent diffusion bridge framework for dense prediction tasks through integrating the strengths of diffusion bridge modeling with visual priors from pretrained foundation models. We derive a fully tractable bridge process to establish direct probability transport in the latent space, and propose finetuning strategies to better adapt pretrained diffusion backbones in bridge construction. While DPBridge achieves competitive performance across different tasks and benchmarks, several limitations remain. First, our method still requires iterative sampling, which makes it slower than feed-forward approaches. Exploring acceleration strategies such as distillation or single-step bridge solvers could further improve practical deployment, especially in real-time settings. Second, our formulation is restricted to certain bridge parameterization, and exploring alternatives to adapt to more advanced pretrained backbone is a promising future direction.
% \clearpage
% \setcounter{page}{1}
% \setcounter{table}{4}
% \setcounter{equation}{13}
% \setcounter{figure}{4}
% \appendix
% \noindent In the supplementary material, we'll provide contents that are not included in the main paper due to page limitations. We first fill in the derivation details of the loss function. Afterwards we will provide the additional quantitative comparisons with more baseline methods. Finally, we will present qualitative examples that apply DPBridge on more dense prediction tasks.
\section{Derivation Details}
\label{app:derivation details}
In this section, we'll provide derivation details of the maximum likelihood loss presented in \cref{sec:train loss}. Its core is the posterior distribution $q(\mathbf{z}_{t-1} | \mathbf{z}_t, \mathbf{z}_0, \mathbf{z}_T)$ as in \cref{eqn: bridge reverse kernel}, whose calculation involves three terms: $q(\mathbf{z}_t | \mathbf{z}_{t-1}, \mathbf{z}_T)$, $q(\mathbf{z}_{t-1} | \mathbf{z}_0, \mathbf{z}_T)$, and $q(\mathbf{z}_{t} | \mathbf{z}_0, z\mathbf{z}_T)$. The last two term of the posterior can be retrieved directly through the marginal distribution of diffusion bridge's forward process, but further derivation is required for the first term. Specifically, as specified in \cref{eqn: bridge forward kernel}:
\begin{align}
\label{eqn:z_t}
\begin{split}
q(\mathbf{z}_t | \mathbf{z}_0, \mathbf{z}_T) &= \mathcal{N}(m_t\mathbf{z}_0 + n_t\mathbf{z}_T, \sigma_t^2 \mathbf{I}) \\
\mathbf{z}_t &= m_t\mathbf{z}_0 + n_t\mathbf{z}_T + \sigma_t\boldsymbol{\epsilon}_t
\end{split}
\\[2ex]
\label{eqn:z_t-1}
\begin{split}
q(\mathbf{z}_{t-1} | \mathbf{z}_0, \mathbf{z}_T) &= \mathcal{N}(m_{t-1}\mathbf{z}_0 + n_{t-1}\mathbf{z}_T, \sigma_{t-1}^2 \mathbf{I}) \\
\mathbf{z}_{t-1} &= m_{t-1}\mathbf{z}_0 + n_{t-1}\mathbf{z}_T + \sigma_{t-1}\boldsymbol{\epsilon}_{t-1}
\end{split}
\end{align}
To derive the transition probability $q(\mathbf{z}_t | \mathbf{z}_{t-1}, \mathbf{z}_T)$, we substitute $\mathbf{z}_0$ in \cref{eqn:z_t} with derivation from \cref{eqn:z_t-1}, obtain
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
\mathbf{z}_t &= a_t\mathbf{z}_{t-1} + b_t\mathbf{z}_T + \delta_t\boldsymbol{\epsilon} \\
a_t &= \frac{m_t}{m_{t-1}} \\
b_t &= n_t - \frac{m_t}{m_{t-1}} n_{t-1} = n_t - a_t n_{t-1} \\
\delta_t^2 &= \sigma_t^2 - \frac{m_t}{m_{t-1}} n_{t-1}^2\sigma_{t-1}^2 = \sigma_t^2 - a_t^2\sigma_{t-1}^2
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
Thus, we can get $q(\mathbf{z}_t | \mathbf{z}_{t-1}, \mathbf{z}_T) = \mathcal{N}(a_t\mathbf{z}_{t-1} + b_t\mathbf{z}_T, \delta_t^2 \mathbf{I})$, which is also a Gaussian distribution.
\noindent Putting all these terms back to \cref{eqn: bridge reverse kernel}, we'll have:
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
&q(\mathbf{z}_{t-1} | \mathbf{z}_t, \mathbf{z}_0, \mathbf{z}_T) \sim \mathcal{N}(\tilde{\boldsymbol{\mu}}_t(\mathbf{z}_t, \mathbf{z}_0, \mathbf{z}_T), \tilde{\sigma}_t^2\mathbf{I}) \\
= &\frac{q(\mathbf{z}_t | \mathbf{z}_{t-1}, \mathbf{z}_T)q(\mathbf{z}_{t-1} | \mathbf{z}_0, \mathbf{z}_T)}{q(\mathbf{z}_t | \mathbf{z}_0, \mathbf{z}_T)} \\
\propto &\exp \bigg[
-\frac{1}{2} \bigg(
\frac{(\mathbf{z}_t - a_t\mathbf{z}_{t-1} - b_t\mathbf{z}_T)^2}{\delta_t^2}
+ \frac{(\mathbf{z}_{t-1} - m_{t-1}\mathbf{z}_0 - n_{t-1}\mathbf{z}_T^2}{\sigma_{t-1}^2}
- \frac{(\mathbf{z}_t - m_t\mathbf{z}_0 - n_t\mathbf{z}_T^2}{\sigma_t^2}
\bigg)
\bigg] \\
= &\exp \bigg[
-\frac{1}{2} \bigg(
\bigg(\frac{a_t^2}{\delta_t^2} + \frac{1}{\sigma_{t-1}^2}\bigg) \mathbf{z}_{t-1}^2
- 2 \bigg(\frac{a_t\mathbf{z}_t - a_tb_t\mathbf{z}_T}{\delta_t^2} + \frac{m_{t-1}\mathbf{z}_0 + n_{t-1}\mathbf{z}_T}{\sigma_{t-1}^2}\bigg) \mathbf{z}_{t-1}
+ C(\mathbf{z}_t, \mathbf{z}_0, \mathbf{z}_T)
\bigg)
\bigg].
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
where $C(\mathbf{z}_t, \mathbf{z}_0, \mathbf{z}_T)$ indicates the constant term that is independent of $\mathbf{z}_{t-1}$. Since the Gaussian distribution probability density $\mathbf{z}_{t-1} \sim \mathcal{N}(\tilde{\boldsymbol{\mu}}_t, \tilde{\sigma}_t^2\mathbf{I})$ can be expressed in the following form:
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
\exp\left(-\frac{(\mathbf{z}_{t-1} - \tilde{\boldsymbol{\mu}}_t)^2}{2 \tilde{\sigma}_t^2}\right)
= \exp\left[
-\frac{1}{2} \left(
\frac{1}{\tilde{\sigma}_t^2}\mathbf{z}_{t-1}^2 - \frac{2\tilde{\boldsymbol{\mu}}_t}{\tilde{\sigma}_t^2}\mathbf{z}_{t-1} + \frac{\tilde{\boldsymbol{\mu}}_t^2}{\tilde{\sigma}_t^2}
\right)\right].
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
We can thus derive:
\begin{align}
\label{eqn:sigma_t'}
\frac{1}{\tilde{\sigma}_t^2} &= \frac{a_t^2}{\delta_t^2} + \frac{1}{\sigma_{t-1}^2} \nonumber\\
\Rightarrow \tilde{\sigma}_t^2 &= \frac{\sigma_{t-1}^2(\sigma_t^2 - a_t^2\sigma_{t-1}^2)}{\sigma_t^2} = \frac{\sigma_{t-1}^2}{\sigma_t^2}\delta_t^2 \\
\frac{\tilde{\boldsymbol{\mu}}_t}{\tilde{\sigma}_t^2} &= \frac{a_t\mathbf{z}_t - a_tb_t\mathbf{z}_T}{\delta_t^2} + \frac{m_{t-1}\mathbf{z}_0 + n_{t-1}\mathbf{z}_T}{\sigma_{t-1}^2} \nonumber\\
\Rightarrow \tilde{\boldsymbol{\mu}}_t &= \bigg[\frac{\sigma_{t-1}^2\big(a_t\mathbf{z}_t - a_tb_t\mathbf{z}_T\big) + \delta_t^2\big(m_{t-1}\mathbf{z}_0 + n_{t-1}\mathbf{z}_T\big)}{\delta_t^2\sigma_{t-1}^2}\bigg]\frac{\sigma_{t-1}^2}{\sigma_t^2}\delta_t^2 \nonumber\\
&= \frac{\sigma_{t-1}^2}{\sigma_t^2} a_t \mathbf{z}_t + \frac{\delta_t^2}{\sigma_t^2} m_{t-1} \mathbf{z}_0 + \bigg(\frac{\delta_t^2}{\sigma_t^2} n_{t-1} - \frac{\sigma_{t-1}^2}{\sigma_t^2} a_t b_t\bigg) \mathbf{z}_T \label{eqn:mu_t'}
\end{align}
whose results are equivalent to \cref{eqn: bridge reverse mean} and \cref{eqn: bridge reverse variance}.
Accordingly, maximizing the Evidence Lower Bound (ELBO) is equivalent to minimizing the KL divergence between ground truth and predicted posterior:
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
&KL \left( q(\mathbf{z}_{t-1} | \mathbf{z}_0, \mathbf{z}_t, \mathbf{z}_T) \,||\, p_\theta(\mathbf{z}_{t-1} \mid \mathbf{z}_t, \mathbf{z}_T) \right) \\
= &\mathbb{E}_{q(\mathbf{z}_{t-1} | \mathbf{z}_0, \mathbf{z}_t, \mathbf{z}_T)} \left[
\log \frac{
\frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi}\tilde{\sigma}_{t-1}} e^{-\frac{(\mathbf{z}_{t-1} - \tilde{\boldsymbol{\mu}}_{t-1})^2}{2\tilde{\sigma}_{t-1}^2}}
}{
\frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi}\tilde{\sigma}_{\theta, t-1}} e^{-\frac{(\mathbf{z}_{t-1} - \tilde{\boldsymbol{\mu}}_{\theta, t-1})^2}{2\tilde{\sigma}_{\theta, t-1}^2}}
}
\right] \\
= &\mathbb{E}_{q(\mathbf{z}_{t-1} | \mathbf{z}_0, \mathbf{z}_t, \mathbf{z}_T)} \left[
\log \tilde{\sigma}_{\theta, t-1} - \log \tilde{\sigma}_{t-1}
- \frac{(x_{t-1} - \tilde{\boldsymbol{\mu}}_{t-1})^2}{2\tilde{\sigma}_{t-1}^2}
+ \frac{(x_{t-1} - \tilde{\boldsymbol{\mu}}_{\theta, t-1})^2}{2\tilde{\sigma}_{\theta, t-1}^2}
\right] \\
= &\log \frac{\tilde{\sigma}_{\theta, t-1}}{\tilde{\sigma}_{t-1}} - \frac{1}{2}
+ \frac{\tilde{\sigma}_{t-1}^2}{2\tilde{\sigma}_{\theta, t-1}^2}
+ \frac{(\tilde{\boldsymbol{\mu}}_{t-1} - \tilde{\boldsymbol{\mu}}_{\theta, t-1})^2}{2\tilde{\sigma}_{\theta, t-1}^2}
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
If we assume that only the mean term is learnable during training, and $\tilde{\sigma}_{\theta, t-1} = \tilde{\sigma}_{t-1}$, we can ignore all the unlearnable constants and arrive at the final training objective:
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
\mathcal{L} &= \mathbb{E}_{t, \mathbf{z}_0, \mathbf{z}_t, \mathbf{z}_T} \left[ \frac{1}{2 \tilde{\sigma}_t^2} \left\| \tilde{\boldsymbol{\mu}}_{t-1} - \tilde{\boldsymbol{\mu}}_{\theta, t-1}(\mathbf{z}_t, \mathbf{z}_T, t) \right\|^2 \right] \\
&= \mathbb{E}_{t, \mathbf{z}_0, \mathbf{z}_t, \mathbf{z}_T} \left[ \left\| \boldsymbol{\epsilon} - \boldsymbol{\epsilon}_{\theta}(\mathbf{z}_t, \mathbf{z}_T, t) \right\|^2 \right]
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
which is the same as in \cref{eqn:diffusion loss}. This concludes our derivation.
\section{Training and Inference Pipeline}
\subsection{Pipeline Pseudo-code}
\begin{algorithm}[!h]
\caption{Training}
\label{alg:training}
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\REQUIRE
Encoder $\mathcal{E}$; Decoder $\mathcal{D}$; Loss weights $\omega_1, \omega_2$
\REPEAT
\STATE Retrieve paired data $(\mathbf{x}, \mathbf{y})$
\STATE $\mathbf{z}_0=\mathcal{E}(\mathbf{y})$, $\mathbf{z}_T=\mathcal{E}(\mathbf{x})$
\STATE $t \sim \text{Uniform}(\{1, \dots, T\})$, $\boldsymbol{\epsilon} \sim \mathcal{N}(\mathbf{0}, \mathbf{I})$
\STATE $\mathbf{z}_t = m_t\mathbf{z}_0 + n_t\mathbf{z}_T + \sigma_t\boldsymbol{\epsilon}$
\STATE $\mathbf{z}_t' = \frac{1}{\sqrt{n_t^2 + \sigma_t^2}}(\mathbf{z}_t - n_t \mathbf{z}_T)$
\STATE $\mathcal{L}_{elbo} = \left\| \boldsymbol{\epsilon} - \boldsymbol{\epsilon}_{\theta}(\mathbf{z}_t', \mathbf{z}_T, t) \right\|^2,$
\STATE $\hat{\mathbf{z}}_0 = \frac{1}{m_t}(\mathbf{z}_t - n_t \mathbf{z}_T - \sigma_t \boldsymbol{\epsilon}_{\theta}(\mathbf{z}_t', \mathbf{z}_T, t))$
\STATE $\mathcal{L}_{ic} = \left\| \mathcal{D}(\hat{\mathbf{z}}_0) - \mathbf{y} \right\|^2$
\STATE Take gradient step on $\nabla_\theta \left( \omega_1\mathcal{L}_{elbo} + \omega_2\mathcal{L}_{ic} \right)$
\UNTIL \textbf{Converged}
\end{algorithmic}
\end{algorithm}
\vspace{-0.5em}
\begin{algorithm}[!h]
\caption{Inference}
\label{alg:inference}
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\REQUIRE
Encoder $\mathcal{E}$; Decoder $\mathcal{D}$; Trained $\boldsymbol{\epsilon}_{\theta}(\cdot, \cdot, \cdot)$
\STATE $\mathbf{z}_T=\mathcal{E}(\mathbf{x})$
\FOR{$t = T, \dots, 1$}
\STATE $\boldsymbol{\epsilon} \sim \mathcal{N}(\mathbf{0}, \mathbf{I})$ if $t > 1$, else $\boldsymbol{\epsilon} = \mathbf{0}$
\STATE $\mathbf{z}_t' = \frac{1}{\sqrt{n_t^2 + \sigma_t^2}}(\mathbf{z}_t - n_t \mathbf{z}_T)$
\STATE $\hat{\mathbf{z}}_0 = \frac{1}{m_t}(\mathbf{z}_t - n_t \mathbf{z}_T - \sigma_t \boldsymbol{\epsilon}_{\theta}(\mathbf{z}_t', \mathbf{z}_T, t))$
\STATE $\mathbf{z}_{t-1} = k_1 \mathbf{z}_t + k_2 \hat{\mathbf{z}}_0 + k_3 \mathbf{z}_T + \tilde{\sigma}_t \boldsymbol{\epsilon}$
\ENDFOR
\STATE $\mathbf{y} = \mathcal{D}(\hat{\mathbf{z}}_0)$ \\
\STATE \textbf{return} $\mathbf{y}$
\end{algorithmic}
\end{algorithm}
\subsection{Accelerate Inference}
Similar to DDIM~\cite{song2020denoising} and DBIM~\cite{zheng2024diffusion}, the inference process of DPBridge can be accelerated using non-Markovian sampling scheme that preserves the marginal distributions of intermediate states. Specifically, we perform sampling over a reduced set of timesteps $\{t_i\}_{i=1}^N$, where $0 = t_0 < t_1 < \cdots < t_{N-1} < t_N = T$, allowing the number of inference steps $N$ to be decoupled from the total number of training steps $T$. The accelerated inference process is given by:
\begin{equation}
\label{eqn: accelerate inference}
\begin{split}
\mathbf{z}_{t_n} &= m_{t_n} \hat{\mathbf{z}}_0 + n_{t_n} \mathbf{z}_T + \\
&\sqrt{\sigma_{t_n}^2 - g_n^2} \frac{\mathbf{z}_{t_{n+1}} - m_{t_{n+1}} \hat{\mathbf{z}}_0 - n_{t_{n+1}} \mathbf{z}_T}{\sigma_{t_{n+1}}} + g_n \boldsymbol{\epsilon}
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where $g_n$ denotes variance parameter that governs the stochasticity of the reverse sampling process. Notably, when $g_n=\tilde{\sigma}_t^2$, as defined \cref{eqn: bridge reverse kernel}, the process becomes a Markovian bridge.
\section{Network Architecture}
\label{app:network}
The basic structure of our network follows the original design of Stable Diffusion. To better utilize visual information ($\mathbf{z}_T$ in our case), we concatenating both intermediate samples and input image along the feature dimension and send in the noise prediction network as a whole. To address the dimension incompatibility with pretrained backbone, the input channels of the network are thus doubled to accommodate the concatenated input. In addition, as suggested by~\cite{ke2024repurposing}, we duplicate the weight tensor of these accommodated layers and divide the values by two to preserve the input magnitude to subsequent layers. As DPBridge is an image-conditioned generative framework, we employ null-text embedding for all cross-attention layers to eliminate the impact of text prompts.
\section{Implementation Details}
\label{app:implem details}
During training, the number of timesteps of is set to be 1000, and we use 50 sampling steps during inference with considerations of both quality and efficiency. Training our method takes 30K iterations using the Adam optimizer with a base learning rate of $3\times10^{-5}$ and an exponential decay strategy after 100-step warm-up. The batch size is 2, but with 8 steps gradient accumulation, the effective batch size is equivalent to 16. We also apply random horizontal flipping augmentation during training. The whole process takes approximately 3 days to complete on a single Nvidia RTX 3090Ti GPU.
\section{Experiments}
\subsection{Additional Quantitative Results}
In this section, we further evaluate the robustness of DPBridge system by perturbing the input image with different types and different level intensities of noise. In this experiment setting, we use Stable Diffusion 1.5 as pretrained backbone. The evaluation is conducted using under both depth estimation and surface normal prediction tasks. We use NYUv2 and KITTI to report the depth estimation results, as for surface normal prediction, we report the results on NYUv2 and iBims-1. \cref{tab:robustness eval} reveals that the model's performance degrades as noise intensity increases, but the model performance remains acceptable under moderate-level-intensity noise. Among noise types, uniform noise shows the mildest effect on degradation, while salt \& pepper and high-intensity gaussian noise cause the most significant performance decline. In addition, the noise intensity has more impact on surface normal prediction than depth estimation, showcasing the inherent characteristics between different tasks. These results emphasize the model's robustness under moderate noise but still expose its vulnerability to extreme or specific types of noise.
\begin{table*}[h]
\centering
\resizebox{\linewidth}{!}{%
\begin{tabular}{lccccccccc}
\toprule
% \multirow{2}{*}{ \textbf{Noise Type} } & \multirow{2}{*}{ \textbf{Noise Level} } & \multicolumn{2}{c}{\textbf{NYUv2}} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{\textbf{KITTI}} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{\textbf{NYUv2}} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{\textbf{iBims-1}}\\ & & AbsRel$\downarrow$ & $\delta_1\uparrow$ & AbsRel$\downarrow$ & $\delta_1\uparrow$ & Mean$\downarrow$ & $11.25^{\circ}\uparrow$ & Mean$\downarrow$ & $11.25^{\circ}\uparrow$ \\
\multirow{3}{*}{ \textbf{Noise Type} } & \multirow{3}{*}{ \textbf{Noise Level} } & \multicolumn{4}{c}{\textbf{Depth Estimation}} & \multicolumn{4}{c}{\textbf{Surface Normal Prediction}}\\
& & \multicolumn{2}{c}{\textbf{NYUv2}} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{\textbf{KITTI}} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{\textbf{NYUv2}} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{\textbf{iBims-1}}\\
& & AbsRel$\downarrow$ & $\delta_1\uparrow$ & AbsRel$\downarrow$ & $\delta_1\uparrow$ & Mean$\downarrow$ & $11.25^{\circ}\uparrow$ & Mean$\downarrow$ & $11.25^{\circ}\uparrow$ \\
\midrule
\textbf{Original Version} & - & 6.9 & 95.7 & 11.2 & 87.3 & 18.1 & 54.2 & 24.3 & 51.2 \\
\midrule
\multirow{4}{*}{ \textbf{Gaussian} }
& $\mathcal{N}(0, 0.05)$ & 7.2 & 94.4 & 11.8 & 86.0 & 18.6 & 52.2 & 25.6 & 45.1 \\
& $\mathcal{N}(0, 0.1)$ & 8.4 & 92.7 & 12.1 & 85.3 & 20.3 & 49.4 & 27.4 & 40.4 \\
& $\mathcal{N}(0, 0.2)$ & 10.3 & 90.0 & 15.7 & 78.6 & 24.6 & 43.7 & 37.0 & 25.4 \\
& $\mathcal{N}(0, 0.5)$ & 15.9 & 77.2 & 22.5 & 67.1 & 41.3 & 22.5 & 50.0 & 13.2 \\
\midrule
\multirow{4}{*}{ \textbf{Uniform} }
& $\mathcal{U}(-0.05, 0.05)$ & 7.0 & 95.0 & 11.4 & 86.5 & 18.3 & 53.6 & 24.5 & 50.7 \\
& $\mathcal{U}(-0.1, 0.1)$ & 7.2 & 94.7 & 11.5 & 85.4 & 18.7 & 53.0 & 24.8 & 49.4 \\
& $\mathcal{U}(-0.2, 0.2)$ & 7.6 & 94.0 & 12.0 & 85.0 & 19.5 & 50.5 & 26.0 & 46.1 \\
& $\mathcal{U}(-0.5, 0.5)$ & 9.3 & 91.1 & 16.3 & 76.1 & 22.4 & 42.2 & 30.2 & 31.6 \\
\midrule
\multirow{2}{*}{ \textbf{Poisson} }
& \textit{Poisson}($\lambda=0.05$) & 10.2 & 90.2 & 13.1 & 82.5 & 21.3 & 45.6 & 28.1 & 38.9 \\
& \textit{Poisson}($\lambda=0.1$) & 11.8 & 88.9 & 15.4 & 79.3 & 23.2 & 40.3 & 34.9 & 24.8\\
\midrule
\multirow{2}{*}{ \textbf{Salt \& Pepper} }
& \textit{Probability}=5\% & 12.0 & 85.4 & 13.3 & 81.7 & 26.3 & 28.8 & 31.8 & 29.6 \\
& \textit{Probability}=10\% & 14.3 & 82.2 & 16.0 & 76.2 & 28.6 & 26.3 & 35.3 & 21.4\\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
}
\caption{Robustness evaluation on depth estimation and surface normal prediction tasks with different types and different intensities of noise. During all experiments, the input images are normalized between -1 to 1.}
\label{tab:robustness eval}
\end{table*}
\subsection{Additional Qualitative Results}
To further evaluate the effectiveness and generalization capability of DPBridge, we extend the framework to additional dense prediction tasks, including semantic segmentation, optical flow estimation, and style transfer. Qualitative results are shown in \cref{fig:segm_cityscape}, \cref{fig:segm_celeba}, \cref{fig:flow_sintel}, and \cref{fig:face2comics}. These extensions are implemented by framing each task as a continuous-valued image-to-image translation problem, and replacing the paired ground truth data accordingly. For semantic segmentation, we convert discrete labels into color maps and train the bridge model to predict colors in RGB space rather than class indices. For optical flow, we define the bridge process between the flow image and the first frame of the input RGB pair. To accommodate this, we modify the UNet architecture to condition on both RGB frames during inference and represent flow as a color-encoded image, enabling prediction in RGB space rather than raw uv coordinates. Across all tasks, DPBridge produces visually compelling results, demonstrating its versatility as a unified framework that can be easily adapted to a range of dense prediction scenarios. We note that these results are qualitative; quantitative evaluation and task-specific architectural refinements are left for future work.
\begin{figure*}[!htbp]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{figures/supplementary/segm_cityscape.jpeg}
\caption{Qualitative examples of applying DPBridge to semantic segmentation task on CityScape~\cite{cordts2016cityscapes} dataset. We transform discrete labels into color maps and us our bridge model to predict colors in RGB space instead of categorical labels.}
\label{fig:segm_cityscape}
\end{center}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}[!htbp]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.6\linewidth]{figures/supplementary/segm_celeba.jpeg}
\caption{Qualitative examples of applying DPBridge to semantic segmentation task on CelebAMask-HQ~\cite{lee2020maskgan} dataset. We transform discrete labels into color maps and us our bridge model to predict colors in RGB space instead of categorical labels.}
\label{fig:segm_celeba}
\end{center}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}[!htbp]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{figures/supplementary/flow_sintel.jpeg}
\caption{Qualitative examples of applying DPBridge to optical flow prediction task on MPI-Sintel~\cite{butler2012naturalistic} dataset. The input image is the overlayed RGB pair, and we transform the flow map into RGB space so that the diffusion bridge process can be constructed accordingly.}
\label{fig:flow_sintel}
\end{center}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}[!htbp]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.6\linewidth]{figures/supplementary/face2comics.jpeg}
\caption{Qualitative examples of applying DPBridge to style transfer task on Face-to-Comics~\cite{face2comics} dataset.}
\label{fig:face2comics}
\end{center}
\end{figure*}
\section{Broader Impacts}
\label{app:impact}
DPBridge aims to advance the field of dense prediction through a generative modeling perspective, integrating the strengths of diffusion bridge formulation with visual priors from pretrained backbones. Our proposed method is a unified framework that can be easily extend to different tasks, including depth prediction, surface normal estimation, semantic segmentation, optical flow, etc., which will benefit the whole dense prediction research community. In addition, improved generalization and precision in dense prediction can also benefit a wide range of real-world applications, such as autonomous driving, augmented reality, and digital content creation.
\begin{thebibliography}{65}
\providecommand{\natexlab}[1]{#1}
\providecommand{\url}[1]{\texttt{#1}}
\expandafter\ifx\csname urlstyle\endcsname\relax
\providecommand{\doi}[1]{doi: #1}\else
\providecommand{\doi}{doi: \begingroup \urlstyle{rm}\Url}\fi
\bibitem[Anderson(1982)]{anderson1982reverse}
Brian~DO Anderson.
\newblock Reverse-time diffusion equation models.
\newblock \emph{Stochastic Processes and their Applications}, 12\penalty0 (3):\penalty0 313--326, 1982.
\bibitem[Bae and Davison(2024)]{bae2024rethinking}
Gwangbin Bae and Andrew~J Davison.
\newblock Rethinking inductive biases for surface normal estimation.
\newblock In \emph{Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition}, pages 9535--9545, 2024.
\bibitem[Bae et~al.(2021)Bae, Budvytis, and Cipolla]{bae2021estimating}
Gwangbin Bae, Ignas Budvytis, and Roberto Cipolla.
\newblock Estimating and exploiting the aleatoric uncertainty in surface normal estimation.
\newblock In \emph{Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision}, pages 13137--13146, 2021.
\bibitem[Batzolis et~al.(2021)Batzolis, Stanczuk, Sch{\"o}nlieb, and Etmann]{batzolis2021conditional}
Georgios Batzolis, Jan Stanczuk, Carola-Bibiane Sch{\"o}nlieb, and Christian Etmann.
\newblock Conditional image generation with score-based diffusion models.
\newblock \emph{arXiv preprint arXiv:2111.13606}, 2021.
\bibitem[Butler et~al.(2012)Butler, Wulff, Stanley, and Black]{butler2012naturalistic}
Daniel~J Butler, Jonas Wulff, Garrett~B Stanley, and Michael~J Black.
\newblock A naturalistic open source movie for optical flow evaluation.
\newblock In \emph{Computer Vision--ECCV 2012: 12th European Conference on Computer Vision, Florence, Italy, October 7-13, 2012, Proceedings, Part VI 12}, pages 611--625. Springer, 2012.
\bibitem[Cabon et~al.(2020)Cabon, Murray, and Humenberger]{cabon2020virtual}
Yohann Cabon, Naila Murray, and Martin Humenberger.
\newblock Virtual kitti 2.
\newblock \emph{arXiv preprint arXiv:2001.10773}, 2020.
\bibitem[Chen et~al.(2023)Chen, He, Zheng, Tan, and Zhu]{chen2023schrodinger}
Zehua Chen, Guande He, Kaiwen Zheng, Xu Tan, and Jun Zhu.
\newblock Schrodinger bridges beat diffusion models on text-to-speech synthesis.
\newblock \emph{arXiv preprint arXiv:2312.03491}, 2023.
\bibitem[Cheng et~al.(2022)Cheng, Misra, Schwing, Kirillov, and Girdhar]{cheng2022masked}
Bowen Cheng, Ishan Misra, Alexander~G Schwing, Alexander Kirillov, and Rohit Girdhar.
\newblock Masked-attention mask transformer for universal image segmentation.
\newblock In \emph{Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition}, pages 1290--1299, 2022.
\bibitem[Chung et~al.(2022{\natexlab{a}})Chung, Kim, Mccann, Klasky, and Ye]{chung2022diffusion}
Hyungjin Chung, Jeongsol Kim, Michael~T Mccann, Marc~L Klasky, and Jong~Chul Ye.
\newblock Diffusion posterior sampling for general noisy inverse problems.
\newblock \emph{arXiv preprint arXiv:2209.14687}, 2022{\natexlab{a}}.
\bibitem[Chung et~al.(2022{\natexlab{b}})Chung, Sim, Ryu, and Ye]{chung2022improving}
Hyungjin Chung, Byeongsu Sim, Dohoon Ryu, and Jong~Chul Ye.
\newblock Improving diffusion models for inverse problems using manifold constraints.
\newblock \emph{Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems}, 35:\penalty0 25683--25696, 2022{\natexlab{b}}.
\bibitem[Chung et~al.(2024)Chung, Kim, and Ye]{chung2024direct}
Hyungjin Chung, Jeongsol Kim, and Jong~Chul Ye.
\newblock Direct diffusion bridge using data consistency for inverse problems.
\newblock \emph{Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems}, 36, 2024.
\bibitem[Cordts et~al.(2016)Cordts, Omran, Ramos, Rehfeld, Enzweiler, Benenson, Franke, Roth, and Schiele]{cordts2016cityscapes}
Marius Cordts, Mohamed Omran, Sebastian Ramos, Timo Rehfeld, Markus Enzweiler, Rodrigo Benenson, Uwe Franke, Stefan Roth, and Bernt Schiele.
\newblock The cityscapes dataset for semantic urban scene understanding.
\newblock In \emph{Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition}, pages 3213--3223, 2016.
\bibitem[Dai et~al.(2017)Dai, Chang, Savva, Halber, Funkhouser, and Nie{\ss}ner]{dai2017scannet}
Angela Dai, Angel~X Chang, Manolis Savva, Maciej Halber, Thomas Funkhouser, and Matthias Nie{\ss}ner.
\newblock Scannet: Richly-annotated 3d reconstructions of indoor scenes.
\newblock In \emph{Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition}, pages 5828--5839, 2017.
\bibitem[De~Bortoli et~al.(2021)De~Bortoli, Thornton, Heng, and Doucet]{de2021diffusion}
Valentin De~Bortoli, James Thornton, Jeremy Heng, and Arnaud Doucet.
\newblock Diffusion schr{\"o}dinger bridge with applications to score-based generative modeling.
\newblock \emph{Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems}, 34:\penalty0 17695--17709, 2021.
\bibitem[Eftekhar et~al.(2021)Eftekhar, Sax, Malik, and Zamir]{eftekhar2021omnidata}
Ainaz Eftekhar, Alexander Sax, Jitendra Malik, and Amir Zamir.
\newblock Omnidata: A scalable pipeline for making multi-task mid-level vision datasets from 3d scans.
\newblock In \emph{Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision}, pages 10786--10796, 2021.
\bibitem[Fu et~al.(2025)Fu, Yin, Hu, Wang, Ma, Tan, Shen, Lin, and Long]{fu2025geowizard}
Xiao Fu, Wei Yin, Mu Hu, Kaixuan Wang, Yuexin Ma, Ping Tan, Shaojie Shen, Dahua Lin, and Xiaoxiao Long.
\newblock Geowizard: Unleashing the diffusion priors for 3d geometry estimation from a single image.
\newblock In \emph{European Conference on Computer Vision}, pages 241--258. Springer, 2025.
\bibitem[Garcia et~al.(2024)Garcia, Zeid, Schmidt, de~Geus, Hermans, and Leibe]{garcia2024fine}
Gonzalo~Martin Garcia, Karim~Abou Zeid, Christian Schmidt, Daan de Geus, Alexander Hermans, and Bastian Leibe.
\newblock Fine-tuning image-conditional diffusion models is easier than you think.
\newblock \emph{arXiv preprint arXiv:2409.11355}, 2024.
\bibitem[Geiger et~al.(2012)Geiger, Lenz, and Urtasun]{geiger2012we}
Andreas Geiger, Philip Lenz, and Raquel Urtasun.
\newblock Are we ready for autonomous driving? the kitti vision benchmark suite.
\newblock In \emph{2012 IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition}, pages 3354--3361. IEEE, 2012.
\bibitem[Gui et~al.(2024)Gui, Fischer, Prestel, Ma, Kotovenko, Grebenkova, Baumann, Hu, and Ommer]{gui2024depthfm}
Ming Gui, Johannes~S Fischer, Ulrich Prestel, Pingchuan Ma, Dmytro Kotovenko, Olga Grebenkova, Stefan~Andreas Baumann, Vincent~Tao Hu, and Bj{\"o}rn Ommer.
\newblock Depthfm: Fast monocular depth estimation with flow matching.
\newblock \emph{arXiv preprint arXiv:2403.13788}, 2024.
\bibitem[Ho et~al.(2020)Ho, Jain, and Abbeel]{ho2020denoising}
Jonathan Ho, Ajay Jain, and Pieter Abbeel.
\newblock Denoising diffusion probabilistic models.
\newblock \emph{Advances in neural information processing systems}, 33:\penalty0 6840--6851, 2020.
\bibitem[Ho et~al.(2022)Ho, Salimans, Gritsenko, Chan, Norouzi, and Fleet]{ho2022video}
Jonathan Ho, Tim Salimans, Alexey Gritsenko, William Chan, Mohammad Norouzi, and David~J Fleet.
\newblock Video diffusion models.
\newblock \emph{arXiv:2204.03458}, 2022.
\bibitem[Hu et~al.(2024)Hu, Yin, Zhang, Cai, Long, Chen, Wang, Yu, Shen, and Shen]{hu2024metric3d}
Mu Hu, Wei Yin, Chi Zhang, Zhipeng Cai, Xiaoxiao Long, Hao Chen, Kaixuan Wang, Gang Yu, Chunhua Shen, and Shaojie Shen.
\newblock Metric3d v2: A versatile monocular geometric foundation model for zero-shot metric depth and surface normal estimation.
\newblock \emph{arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.15506}, 2024.
\bibitem[Huang et~al.(2022)Huang, Shi, Zhang, Wang, Cheung, Qin, Dai, and Li]{huang2022flowformer}
Zhaoyang Huang, Xiaoyu Shi, Chao Zhang, Qiang Wang, Ka~Chun Cheung, Hongwei Qin, Jifeng Dai, and Hongsheng Li.
\newblock Flowformer: A transformer architecture for optical flow.
\newblock In \emph{European conference on computer vision}, pages 668--685. Springer, 2022.
\bibitem[Ji and Li(2024)]{ji20243d}
Haorui Ji and Hongdong Li.
\newblock 3d human pose analysis via diffusion synthesis.
\newblock \emph{arXiv preprint arXiv:2401.08930}, 2024.
\bibitem[Ji et~al.(2024{\natexlab{a}})Ji, Deng, Dai, and Li]{ji2024unsupervised}
Haorui Ji, Hui Deng, Yuchao Dai, and Hongdong Li.
\newblock Unsupervised 3d pose estimation with non-rigid structure-from-motion modeling.
\newblock In \emph{Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Winter Conference on Applications of Computer Vision}, pages 3314--3323, 2024{\natexlab{a}}.
\bibitem[Ji et~al.(2024{\natexlab{b}})Ji, Wang, Lin, and Li]{ji2024jade}
Haorui Ji, Rong Wang, Taojun Lin, and Hongdong Li.
\newblock Jade: Joint-aware latent diffusion for 3d human generative modeling.
\newblock \emph{arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.20470}, 2024{\natexlab{b}}.
\bibitem[Kar et~al.(2022)Kar, Yeo, Atanov, and Zamir]{kar20223d}
O{\u{g}}uzhan~Fatih Kar, Teresa Yeo, Andrei Atanov, and Amir Zamir.
\newblock 3d common corruptions and data augmentation.
\newblock In \emph{Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition}, pages 18963--18974, 2022.
\bibitem[Ke et~al.(2024)Ke, Obukhov, Huang, Metzger, Daudt, and Schindler]{ke2024repurposing}
Bingxin Ke, Anton Obukhov, Shengyu Huang, Nando Metzger, Rodrigo~Caye Daudt, and Konrad Schindler.
\newblock Repurposing diffusion-based image generators for monocular depth estimation.
\newblock In \emph{Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition}, pages 9492--9502, 2024.
\bibitem[Koch et~al.(2018)Koch, Liebel, Fraundorfer, and Korner]{koch2018evaluation}
Tobias Koch, Lukas Liebel, Friedrich Fraundorfer, and Marco Korner.
\newblock Evaluation of cnn-based single-image depth estimation methods.
\newblock In \emph{Proceedings of the European Conference on Computer Vision (ECCV) Workshops}, pages 0--0, 2018.
\bibitem[Lee et~al.(2020)Lee, Liu, Wu, and Luo]{lee2020maskgan}
Cheng-Han Lee, Ziwei Liu, Lingyun Wu, and Ping Luo.
\newblock Maskgan: Towards diverse and interactive facial image manipulation.
\newblock In \emph{Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition}, pages 5549--5558, 2020.
\bibitem[Li et~al.(2023)Li, Xue, Liu, and Lai]{li2023bbdm}
Bo Li, Kaitao Xue, Bin Liu, and Yu-Kun Lai.
\newblock Bbdm: Image-to-image translation with brownian bridge diffusion models.
\newblock In \emph{Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern Recognition}, pages 1952--1961, 2023.
\bibitem[Liu et~al.(2023)Liu, Vahdat, Huang, Theodorou, Nie, and Anandkumar]{liu20232}
Guan-Horng Liu, Arash Vahdat, De-An Huang, Evangelos~A Theodorou, Weili Nie, and Anima Anandkumar.
\newblock I$^2$sb: Image-to-image schr{\"o}dinger bridge.
\newblock \emph{arXiv preprint arXiv:2302.05872}, 2023.
\bibitem[Liu and Wu(2023)]{liu2023learning}
Xingchao Liu and Lemeng Wu.
\newblock Learning diffusion bridges on constrained domains.
\newblock In \emph{international conference on learning representations (ICLR)}, 2023.
\bibitem[Liu et~al.(2022)Liu, Wu, Ye, and Liu]{liu2022let}
Xingchao Liu, Lemeng Wu, Mao Ye, and Qiang Liu.
\newblock Let us build bridges: Understanding and extending diffusion generative models.
\newblock \emph{arXiv preprint arXiv:2208.14699}, 2022.
\bibitem[Meng et~al.(2021)Meng, He, Song, Song, Wu, Zhu, and Ermon]{meng2021sdedit}
Chenlin Meng, Yutong He, Yang Song, Jiaming Song, Jiajun Wu, Jun-Yan Zhu, and Stefano Ermon.
\newblock Sdedit: Guided image synthesis and editing with stochastic differential equations.
\newblock \emph{arXiv preprint arXiv:2108.01073}, 2021.
\bibitem[Oksendal(2013)]{oksendal2013stochastic}
Bernt Oksendal.
\newblock \emph{Stochastic differential equations: an introduction with applications}.
\newblock Springer Science \& Business Media, 2013.
\bibitem[Pavon et~al.(2021)Pavon, Trigila, and Tabak]{pavon2021data}
Michele Pavon, Giulio Trigila, and Esteban~G Tabak.
\newblock The data-driven schr{\"o}dinger bridge.
\newblock \emph{Communications on Pure and Applied Mathematics}, 74\penalty0 (7):\penalty0 1545--1573, 2021.
\bibitem[Ranftl et~al.(2020)Ranftl, Lasinger, Hafner, Schindler, and Koltun]{ranftl2020towards}
Ren{\'e} Ranftl, Katrin Lasinger, David Hafner, Konrad Schindler, and Vladlen Koltun.
\newblock Towards robust monocular depth estimation: Mixing datasets for zero-shot cross-dataset transfer.
\newblock \emph{IEEE transactions on pattern analysis and machine intelligence}, 44\penalty0 (3):\penalty0 1623--1637, 2020.
\bibitem[Ranftl et~al.(2021)Ranftl, Bochkovskiy, and Koltun]{ranftl2021vision}
Ren{\'e} Ranftl, Alexey Bochkovskiy, and Vladlen Koltun.
\newblock Vision transformers for dense prediction.
\newblock In \emph{Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF international conference on computer vision}, pages 12179--12188, 2021.
\bibitem[Roberts et~al.(2021)Roberts, Ramapuram, Ranjan, Kumar, Bautista, Paczan, Webb, and Susskind]{roberts2021hypersim}
Mike Roberts, Jason Ramapuram, Anurag Ranjan, Atulit Kumar, Miguel~Angel Bautista, Nathan Paczan, Russ Webb, and Joshua~M Susskind.
\newblock Hypersim: A photorealistic synthetic dataset for holistic indoor scene understanding.
\newblock In \emph{Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF international conference on computer vision}, pages 10912--10922, 2021.
\bibitem[Rombach et~al.(2022)Rombach, Blattmann, Lorenz, Esser, and Ommer]{rombach2022high}
Robin Rombach, Andreas Blattmann, Dominik Lorenz, Patrick Esser, and Bj{\"o}rn Ommer.
\newblock High-resolution image synthesis with latent diffusion models.
\newblock In \emph{Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition}, pages 10684--10695, 2022.
\bibitem[S{\"a}rkk{\"a} and Solin(2019)]{sarkka2019applied}
Simo S{\"a}rkk{\"a} and Arno Solin.
\newblock \emph{Applied stochastic differential equations}.
\newblock Cambridge University Press, 2019.
\bibitem[Schops et~al.(2017)Schops, Schonberger, Galliani, Sattler, Schindler, Pollefeys, and Geiger]{schops2017multi}
Thomas Schops, Johannes~L Schonberger, Silvano Galliani, Torsten Sattler, Konrad Schindler, Marc Pollefeys, and Andreas Geiger.
\newblock A multi-view stereo benchmark with high-resolution images and multi-camera videos.
\newblock In \emph{Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition}, pages 3260--3269, 2017.
\bibitem[Silberman et~al.(2012)Silberman, Hoiem, Kohli, and Fergus]{silberman2012indoor}
Nathan Silberman, Derek Hoiem, Pushmeet Kohli, and Rob Fergus.
\newblock Indoor segmentation and support inference from rgbd images.
\newblock In \emph{Computer Vision--ECCV 2012: 12th European Conference on Computer Vision, Florence, Italy, October 7-13, 2012, Proceedings, Part V 12}, pages 746--760. Springer, 2012.
\bibitem[Song et~al.(2020{\natexlab{a}})Song, Meng, and Ermon]{song2020denoising}
Jiaming Song, Chenlin Meng, and Stefano Ermon.
\newblock Denoising diffusion implicit models.
\newblock \emph{arXiv preprint arXiv:2010.02502}, 2020{\natexlab{a}}.
\bibitem[Song et~al.(2023)Song, Vahdat, Mardani, and Kautz]{song2023pseudoinverse}
Jiaming Song, Arash Vahdat, Morteza Mardani, and Jan Kautz.
\newblock Pseudoinverse-guided diffusion models for inverse problems.
\newblock In \emph{International Conference on Learning Representations}, 2023.
\bibitem[Song et~al.(2020{\natexlab{b}})Song, Sohl-Dickstein, Kingma, Kumar, Ermon, and Poole]{song2020score}
Yang Song, Jascha Sohl-Dickstein, Diederik~P Kingma, Abhishek Kumar, Stefano Ermon, and Ben Poole.
\newblock Score-based generative modeling through stochastic differential equations.
\newblock \emph{arXiv preprint arXiv:2011.13456}, 2020{\natexlab{b}}.
\bibitem[Sxela(2021)]{face2comics}
Sxela.
\newblock https://github.com/sxela/face2comics.
\newblock \url{https://github.com/Sxela/face2comics}, 2021.
\bibitem[Teed and Deng(2020)]{teed2020raft}
Zachary Teed and Jia Deng.
\newblock Raft: Recurrent all-pairs field transforms for optical flow.
\newblock In \emph{Computer Vision--ECCV 2020: 16th European Conference, Glasgow, UK, August 23--28, 2020, Proceedings, Part II 16}, pages 402--419. Springer, 2020.
\bibitem[Vasiljevic et~al.(2019)Vasiljevic, Kolkin, Zhang, Luo, Wang, Dai, Daniele, Mostajabi, Basart, Walter, et~al.]{vasiljevic2019diode}
Igor Vasiljevic, Nick Kolkin, Shanyi Zhang, Ruotian Luo, Haochen Wang, Falcon~Z Dai, Andrea~F Daniele, Mohammadreza Mostajabi, Steven Basart, Matthew~R Walter, et~al.
\newblock Diode: A dense indoor and outdoor depth dataset.
\newblock \emph{arXiv preprint arXiv:1908.00463}, 2019.
\bibitem[Wang et~al.(2023)Wang, Wang, Cao, Shen, and Huang]{wang2023images}
Xinlong Wang, Wen Wang, Yue Cao, Chunhua Shen, and Tiejun Huang.
\newblock Images speak in images: A generalist painter for in-context visual learning.
\newblock In \emph{Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition}, pages 6830--6839, 2023.
\bibitem[Wang et~al.(2024)Wang, Chen, Chen, Zhu, and Chen]{wang2024framebridge}
Yuji Wang, Zehua Chen, Xiaoyu Chen, Jun Zhu, and Jianfei Chen.
\newblock Framebridge: Improving image-to-video generation with bridge models.
\newblock \emph{arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.15371}, 2024.
\bibitem[Weber et~al.(2021)Weber, Xie, Collins, Zhu, Voigtlaender, Adam, Green, Geiger, Leibe, Cremers, et~al.]{weber2021step}
Mark Weber, Jun Xie, Maxwell Collins, Yukun Zhu, Paul Voigtlaender, Hartwig Adam, Bradley Green, Andreas Geiger, Bastian Leibe, Daniel Cremers, et~al.
\newblock Step: Segmenting and tracking every pixel.
\newblock \emph{arXiv preprint arXiv:2102.11859}, 2021.
\bibitem[Weinzaepfel et~al.(2023)Weinzaepfel, Lucas, Leroy, Cabon, Arora, Br{\'e}gier, Csurka, Antsfeld, Chidlovskii, and Revaud]{weinzaepfel2023croco}
Philippe Weinzaepfel, Thomas Lucas, Vincent Leroy, Yohann Cabon, Vaibhav Arora, Romain Br{\'e}gier, Gabriela Csurka, Leonid Antsfeld, Boris Chidlovskii, and J{\'e}r{\^o}me Revaud.
\newblock Croco v2: Improved cross-view completion pre-training for stereo matching and optical flow.
\newblock In \emph{Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision}, pages 17969--17980, 2023.
\bibitem[Xiang et~al.(2024)Xiang, Lv, Xu, Deng, Wang, Zhang, Chen, Tong, and Yang]{xiang2024structured}
Jianfeng Xiang, Zelong Lv, Sicheng Xu, Yu Deng, Ruicheng Wang, Bowen Zhang, Dong Chen, Xin Tong, and Jiaolong Yang.
\newblock Structured 3d latents for scalable and versatile 3d generation.
\newblock \emph{arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.01506}, 2024.
\bibitem[Yang et~al.(2024)Yang, Kang, Huang, Zhao, Xu, Feng, and Zhao]{yang2024depth}
Lihe Yang, Bingyi Kang, Zilong Huang, Zhen Zhao, Xiaogang Xu, Jiashi Feng, and Hengshuang Zhao.
\newblock Depth anything v2.
\newblock \emph{arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.09414}, 2024.
\bibitem[Ye et~al.(2024)Ye, Qiu, Gu, Zuo, Wu, Dong, Bo, Xiu, and Han]{ye2024stablenormal}
Chongjie Ye, Lingteng Qiu, Xiaodong Gu, Qi Zuo, Yushuang Wu, Zilong Dong, Liefeng Bo, Yuliang Xiu, and Xiaoguang Han.
\newblock Stablenormal: Reducing diffusion variance for stable and sharp normal.
\newblock \emph{ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG)}, 43\penalty0 (6):\penalty0 1--18, 2024.
\bibitem[Yin et~al.(2020)Yin, Wang, Shen, Liu, Tian, Xu, Sun, and Renyin]{yin2020diversedepth}
Wei Yin, Xinlong Wang, Chunhua Shen, Yifan Liu, Zhi Tian, Songcen Xu, Changming Sun, and Dou Renyin.
\newblock Diversedepth: Affine-invariant depth prediction using diverse data.
\newblock \emph{arXiv preprint arXiv:2002.00569}, 2020.
\bibitem[Yin et~al.(2021)Yin, Zhang, Wang, Niklaus, Mai, Chen, and Shen]{yin2021learning}
Wei Yin, Jianming Zhang, Oliver Wang, Simon Niklaus, Long Mai, Simon Chen, and Chunhua Shen.
\newblock Learning to recover 3d scene shape from a single image.
\newblock In \emph{Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition}, pages 204--213, 2021.
\bibitem[Yue et~al.(2023)Yue, Peng, Ma, Du, Wei, and Zhang]{yue2023image}
Conghan Yue, Zhengwei Peng, Junlong Ma, Shiyan Du, Pengxu Wei, and Dongyu Zhang.
\newblock Image restoration through generalized ornstein-uhlenbeck bridge.
\newblock \emph{arXiv preprint arXiv:2312.10299}, 2023.
\bibitem[Zhang et~al.(2022)Zhang, Yin, Wang, Yu, Fu, and Shen]{zhang2022hierarchical}
Chi Zhang, Wei Yin, Billzb Wang, Gang Yu, Bin Fu, and Chunhua Shen.
\newblock Hierarchical normalization for robust monocular depth estimation.
\newblock \emph{Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems}, 35:\penalty0 14128--14139, 2022.
\bibitem[Zhang et~al.(2023)Zhang, Rao, and Agrawala]{zhang2023adding}
Lvmin Zhang, Anyi Rao, and Maneesh Agrawala.
\newblock Adding conditional control to text-to-image diffusion models.
\newblock In \emph{Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision}, pages 3836--3847, 2023.
\bibitem[Zhang et~al.(2024)Zhang, Wang, Zhang, Qiu, Pang, Jiang, Yang, Xu, and Yu]{zhang2024clay}
Longwen Zhang, Ziyu Wang, Qixuan Zhang, Qiwei Qiu, Anqi Pang, Haoran Jiang, Wei Yang, Lan Xu, and Jingyi Yu.
\newblock Clay: A controllable large-scale generative model for creating high-quality 3d assets.
\newblock \emph{ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG)}, 43\penalty0 (4):\penalty0 1--20, 2024.
\bibitem[Zheng et~al.(2024)Zheng, He, Chen, Bao, and Zhu]{zheng2024diffusion}
Kaiwen Zheng, Guande He, Jianfei Chen, Fan Bao, and Jun Zhu.
\newblock Diffusion bridge implicit models.
\newblock \emph{arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.15885}, 2024.
\bibitem[Zhou et~al.(2023)Zhou, Lou, Khanna, and Ermon]{zhou2023denoising}
Linqi Zhou, Aaron Lou, Samar Khanna, and Stefano Ermon.
\newblock Denoising diffusion bridge models.
\newblock \emph{arXiv preprint arXiv:2309.16948}, 2023.
\end{thebibliography}