Diffusion Fuzzy System (DFS) Overview

• Diffusion Fuzzy System (DFS) is a latent multi-path diffusion model that integrates fuzzy rule-based reasoning to achieve domain-specific image synthesis.
• DFS overcomes conventional diffusion model limitations by dedicating specialized paths and applying fuzzy membership normalization for diverse feature handling.
• Empirical results demonstrate DFS's faster convergence and improved fidelity metrics compared to previous methods on datasets like LSUN and MS COCO.

The Diffusion Fuzzy System (DFS) is a latent-space, multi-path diffusion model for image generation, guided by fuzzy rule-based reasoning. It is designed to address the challenges faced by conventional diffusion models—both single-path and multi-path variants—when dealing with heterogeneous image collections characterized by diverse, semantically and structurally distinct features. DFS combines the interpretability and adaptability of fuzzy logic with the generative capacity of modern diffusion techniques, introducing a coordinated, path-specialized, and computation-efficient framework for high-fidelity image synthesis (Yang et al., 1 Dec 2025).

1. Motivations and Limitations of Preceding Diffusion Models

Conventional diffusion models, such as DDPM, DDIM, and Latent Diffusion Models (LDM), operate primarily along a single denoising path. These models add Gaussian noise incrementally to an image (forward process) and learn to reverse this trajectory (reverse process), often in a perceptually compressed latent space to reduce computational requirements. However, they encounter limitations when tasked with reproducing datasets with substantial inter-image diversity (e.g., containing animals, landscapes, and humans), as a single denoising trajectory inadequately captures multi-domain feature distributions.

Multi-path diffusion models, including MD (patch-based split and attention merge), RAPHAEL (dynamic routing of complexity), and RDDM (residual multi-path denoising), improve local feature robustness. Nonetheless, these methods frequently deliver globally inconsistent results on highly heterogeneous datasets, require expensive coordination mechanisms across multiple diffusion trajectories, and involve computational overheads that scale poorly with the number of paths $K$.

DFS addresses these limitations via:

• Dedicated path specialization: Assigning each diffusion path to a distinct feature “class”.
• Fuzzy rule chain coordination: Dynamically aligning and weighting trajectory outputs using fuzzy logic.
• Fuzzy-Guided Latent Compression: Selecting the optimal encoder for workload-minimized, domain-specific latent projection.

2. Core Fuzzy Components and Rule-Driven Diffusion

DFS operationalizes fuzzy logic via two principal constructs: fuzzy memberships in latent space and rule chains for path guidance.

2.1 Fuzzy Membership in Latent Space

Given the compressed latent vector space $X = \{z \in \mathbb{R}^d\}$ (with $d=32 \times 32 \times C$), each path $k$ is associated with a prototype latent vector $d_k$ defining fuzzy set $A_k$. For any $z$, the path membership is:

$$\mu_k(z) = a \cdot S_{\text{semantic}}(z, d_k) + (1 - a) \cdot S_{\text{feature}}(z, d_k)$$

where $S_{\text{semantic}}$ and $S_{\text{feature}}$ denote cosine or Gaussian-kernel similarities in text-conditioned and visual feature spaces, respectively, and $a$ is a balancing scalar (default $a=0.5$). Memberships are normalized across all $K$ paths at each diffusion step $t$:

$$\bar{\mu}_k^t = \frac{\mu_k(z_k^t)}{\sum_{j=1}^K \mu_j(z_j^t)}$$

2.2 Fuzzy Rule Chains

Each path $k$ possesses an IF–THEN rule chain with $2T$ rules ($T$ forward, $T$ reverse). At diffusion step $t$:

• Forward:

IF $z_k^{t-1}$ is $A_{k,t}$ THEN $z_k^{t} = \text{Gen}_k^+(z_k^{t-1})$ with membership $\mu_k(z_k^{t-1})$.

• Reverse:

IF $\hat{z}_k^t$ is $A_{k,t}$ THEN $\hat{z}_k^{t-1} = \text{Gen}_k^-(\hat{z}_k^t)$ with membership $\mu_k(\hat{z}_k^t)$.

Here, $A_{k,t}$ typically reuses the fixed prototype $d_k$ but with noise-adapted contexts through the diffusion process.

3. Latent Multi-Path Diffusion Dynamics

DFS conducts both forward (sampling) and reverse (denoising) diffusion in the latent domain, incorporating path specialization and fuzzy weighting.

3.1 Forward Process with Fuzzy Weights

For path $k$:

$$z_k^{t} = \sqrt{1 - \beta_t} \cdot z_k^{t-1} + \sqrt{\beta_t} \cdot \epsilon,\quad \epsilon \sim \mathcal{N}(0, I)$$

Apply fuzzy normalization:

$\tilde{z}_k^{t} = \bar{\mu}_k^{t} \cdot z_k^{t}$

The next step receives $\tilde{z}_k^{t}$ as input.

3.2 Reverse Process with Fuzzy Weights

A conditional U-Net predicts $\hat{\epsilon} = \epsilon_\theta(z_k^{t}, t, c)$. The denoising update is:

$$\hat{z}_k^{t-1} = \frac{1}{\sqrt{1 - \beta_t}} [z_k^{t} - \beta_t \hat{\epsilon}] + \sigma_t \cdot \eta,\quad \eta \sim \mathcal{N}(0, I)$$

Again, apply fuzzy normalization:

$$\widetilde{\hat{z}}_k^{t-1} = \bar{\mu}_k^{t} \cdot \hat{z}_k^{t-1}$$

3.3 Specialization of Paths

Each path $k$ focuses on features most aligned with its fuzzy prototype $d_k$, obtained via K-Medoids clustering on latent encoder features, supporting specialization on sub-domains such as “landscape-like”, “human-like”, or “animal-like” properties.

4. Fuzzy Membership-Based Latent Space Compression

DFS further improves efficiency via a domain-sensitive compression scheme. Given input $x \in \mathbb{R}^{256 \times 256 \times 3}$:

• Maintain $M$ pretrained encoder-decoder pairs $(\mathrm{Enc}_i, \mathrm{Dec}_i)$, each targeting a different visual domain.
• Encode $x$ with each $\mathrm{Enc}_i$ to obtain codes $R_i$.
• Compute $H_i$ (membership) for each encoded $x$.
• Select $i^* = \arg\max_i H_i$; use $z = \mathrm{Enc}_{i^*}(x)$.
• After path fusion (summed membership-weighted outputs), decode $z_{\text{fused}}$ via $\mathrm{Dec}_{i^*}$.

This mechanism achieves an 8× reduction in spatial resolution (from $256 \to 32$), diminishing computational load while preserving semantic fidelity in generation.

5. End-to-End DFS Algorithmic Workflow

DFS comprises distinct workflows for training and sampling, relying on fuzzy rule chains and encoder selection.

5.1 Training

• Encode data via fuzzy membership-driven encoder selection.
• Fix path prototypes by K-Medoids.
• For each minibatch, diffuse and add noise at a sampled step $t$.
• Compute per-path memberships and normalized weights.
• Predict noise for each path using the shared U-Net.
• Loss: $$L = \sum_{k=1}^K \bar{\mu}_k \| \epsilon - \hat{\epsilon}_k \|^2$$.
• Update model parameters by gradient descent.
• Repeat until stable convergence.

5.2 Sampling

• Initialize $z_k^T \sim \mathcal{N}(0, I)$ for all $k$.
• For $t = T \dots 1$:
  • Compute fuzzy memberships across paths.
  • Predict and denoise for each path, applying fuzzy weight.
• Fuse outputs at $t=0$: $$z_{\text{fused}} = \sum_{k=1}^K \bar{\mu}_k \cdot z_k^0$$.
• Decode fused latent with the selected domain decoder to obtain $x̂$.

6. Theoretical and Empirical Contributions of Fuzzy Guidance

Fuzzy logic in DFS mediates both resource allocation and generative specialization. Normalized memberships prevent premature mode collapse and ensure balance between paths—mitigating overrepresentation of dominant domains. Adaptive fuzzy weights focus gradient and denoising power on the most relevant feature class for each latent, facilitating rapid convergence, empirically requiring half the epochs to reach stability compared to standard path models. Fuzzy-based specialization allows soft, uncertainty-aware partitioning of the dataset, improving generative robustness in the presence of ambiguous or blended image attributes.

7. Experimental Protocols and Results

DFS was evaluated on LSUN Bedroom (3M images), LSUN Church (0.13M), and MS COCO (0.59M). The experimental set-up included 3 encoder-decoder VAE pairs (bedroom, church, generic), $K=3$ fuzzy path prototypes (K-Medoids), $T=1000$ diffusion steps, and CLIP-based textual conditioning. Evaluation relied on FID, MIFID, IS, PSNR, SSIM, MS-SSIM, Precision/Recall, and CLIPScore metrics.

Key outcomes:

• On LSUN Church: DFS FID=3.81, outperforming MD's 4.12; IS=22.8 vs. 21.2.
• On LSUN Bedroom: DFS FID=2.81, surpassing RDDM's 3.06; DFS SSIM=0.51 vs. 0.48.
• On MS COCO: DFS FID=6.29, improving on RAPHAEL's 6.61; CLIP=29.61 vs. 29.43.
• Convergence: DFS achieves stable training by epoch 4, compared to over 20 epochs for MD and LDM.
• Ablation studies: Removal of rule-chain alignment (DFS-I variant) worsens FID (+0.63); removing all but one path (DFS-IS) increases FID by +0.59.
• Friedman test $p < 0.001$ and Holm post-hoc analysis indicate significant improvement over all baselines.

Table: Benchmark Metrics on MS COCO

Method	FID	CLIP
LDM	12.63	26.32
MD	10.34	27.11
RAPHAEL	6.61	29.43
DFS	6.29	29.61

The system preserves fine-grained features and object fidelity (e.g., cars, umbrellas, small textual signs), with rule-chain and fuzzy guidance ensuring both content consistency and semantic alignment.

---

DFS synthesizes fuzzy interpretability and diffusion generative strength within a multi-path, rule-driven architecture, yielding stable, efficient, and semantically controlled image generation on heterogeneous datasets (Yang et al., 1 Dec 2025).