StyleGAN Texture Synthesis

• StyleGAN-based texture synthesis is a generative method that uses hierarchical, disentangled latent spaces and adaptive instance normalization (AdaIN) to control both micro and macro texture details.
• It incorporates innovations like texton broadcasting and per-pixel noise injection to overcome challenges such as inter- and intra-texture mode collapse in periodic patterns.
• Applications span microstructure modeling, pose-conditioned synthesis, and semantic-guided 3D texture generation, enabling robust control and high-fidelity replication of textures.

StyleGAN-based texture synthesis refers to the use of style-based generative adversarial networks—predominantly the StyleGAN family—for statistical modeling, high-fidelity generation, and manipulation of textures in two and three dimensions. This class of methods exploits the hierarchical, disentangled latent spaces and adaptive instance normalization (AdaIN) mechanisms of StyleGAN architectures to synthesize a wide spectrum of textures, replicating both stochastic microstructure and periodic macrostructure, potentially with control over semantic or structural input. Applications span microstructure modeling, spatially homogeneous texture generation, pose-conditioned detail synthesis, and semantic texture transfer for 3D objects. The following sections cover the architectural foundations of StyleGAN for texture synthesis, key advances for regular and stochastic textures, conditional and semantic control frameworks, technical evaluation, and exemplary use cases.

1. StyleGAN Architectures for Texture Synthesis

The original StyleGAN generator operates by mapping a latent vector $z \sim \mathcal{N}(0, I)$ through a dense mapping network $f: z \mapsto w \in \mathbb{R}^W$, where $w$ modulates the convolutional layers at every spatial scale via AdaIN:

$$\mathrm{AdaIN}(x)_i = s_i \frac{x_i - \mu(x_i)}{\sigma(x_i)} + b_i$$

with $(s, b)^T = A w + b$. This style modulation allows for hierarchical, disentangled control over textural appearance across resolutions. Per-pixel noise is injected at each layer to provide stochastic detail. The discriminator mirrors the generator with progressive up/downsampling and a minibatch standard deviation feature to stabilize training. Progressive growing enables training at gradually increasing resolutions, ensuring both micro- and macro-structures are learnable in data-limited scenarios (Fokina et al., 2019).

Later iterations such as StyleGAN2 and StyleGAN3 introduced improved alias-free synthesis, better entanglement properties, and refined style injection for enhanced control over stationarity and local statistics—critical for faithful texture synthesis (Lin et al., 2022).

2. Addressing Regular, Stochastic, and Multi-Scale Texture Synthesis

Standard StyleGANs—while effective for photographic image generation—exhibit deficiencies in modeling highly periodic or spatially regular textures. Two dominant pathologies arise:

• Inter-texture mode collapse: inability to represent diverse global patterns.
• Intra-texture mode collapse: periodic structures become spatially anchored, failing to shift under different noise draws.

To address these, Lin et al. (Lin et al., 2022) introduced the Texton Broadcasting module at multiple scales, explicitly incorporating sinusoidal modulation fields with random global phase into the synthesis path. For layer $l$, $P$ learnable texton vectors $v_i$ are broadcast using modulation

$$\mathrm{BM}_i(h, w) = A_i \sin(2\pi f_i^T [h, w]^T + \phi_i + \Delta) + B_i$$

where $f_i$, $A_i$, $B_i$, $\phi_i$ are trainable, and $\Delta \sim \mathrm{Uniform}[0,2\pi)$ is a per-sample random phase. This, in combination with standard noise injection, decouples spatial periodicity ("where") from microstructure ("what"), allowing for universal modeling of stochastic to highly regular textures. Empirically, LPIPS diversity increases (0.18 vs. 0.05), and FID drops below vanilla StyleGAN-2 (70.1 vs. 72.5) on high-resolution datasets (Lin et al., 2022).

StyleGAN3 further enhances spatial stationarity and alias-free synthesis, supporting multi-crop sampling and latent-domain inversion with high-fidelity recovery of local and global texture properties (Lin et al., 2022).

3. Conditional and Semantic Texture Synthesis

Advances in conditional and semantic-guided StyleGANs have facilitated detail-preserving control and spatial supervision:

• Pose-guided synthesis ("Pose with Style" (AlBahar et al., 2021)): The StyleGAN2 generator is extended to accept spatially variable modulation maps derived from warped local feature encoders and pose-conditioned embeddings. Dense correspondence fields between source and target images are learned and inpainted with human body symmetry priors, allowing the generator's normalization parameters to be modulated by spatially warped feature pyramids. This architecture achieves state-of-the-art FID and LPIPS, with preservation of fine-scale identity and dynamic details under large pose changes.
• Semantic-guided 3D texture generation (CTGAN) (Pan et al., 8 Feb 2024): StyleGAN2-ADA is repurposed to operate in a W$^+$ (per-layer code) space, with a two-stream encoder—one for coarse-to-fine segmentation-based structure control, one for style—whose outputs are fused to form the input to the generator. Parameterization into UV atlases and per-view semantic maps enable texture synthesis conditioned on both geometry and semantic part labels, producing view-consistent, high-fidelity textures for 3D shapes. CTGAN attains notable FID improvements over previous approaches, e.g. 39.41 for car textures versus 139.63 (TextureFields) and 149.82 (LTG) in conditional settings.

4. Training Data, Methodology, and Loss Functions

StyleGAN-based texture synthesis models require carefully curated datasets with high spatial homogeneity and adequate coverage of the desired textural set:

• Patch-based training: Texture datasets typically consist of ≥ 256×256 patches, either as random crops from large texture exemplars or as tiles from aligned fields (e.g. microstructures, rocks, faces) (Fokina et al., 2019, Lin et al., 2022).
• Losses: Baseline training uses non-saturating logistic GAN loss with R1 regularization (or WGAN-GP (Lin et al., 2022)). For inversion and encoder training, latent-domain reconstruction consistency (L2 in latent space for generated images) is used. High-fidelity inversion of real (out-of-manifold) textures employs Gram matrix (style) loss between VGG feature layer pairwise products. Conditional architectures combine adversarial, L1, LPIPS (perceptual), and identity losses with weighting schedules (AlBahar et al., 2021, Pan et al., 8 Feb 2024).
• Architectural scheduling: Progressive resolution growing, batch discipline, and judicious use of path-length and mixing regularization are tailored by application domain and empirical necessity.

5. Evaluation Metrics and Quantitative Results

Comprehensive evaluation of StyleGAN-based texture synthesis utilizes both perceptual and statistical measures:

• Statistical inheritance: For microstructure synthesis, distributions of Minkowski functionals (area density, perimeter, Euler characteristic), effective material properties (e.g., Young's modulus, Poisson's ratio), and morphological fidelity to the training patches are compared (Fokina et al., 2019).
• Perceptual metrics: Frechet Inception Distance (FID), LPIPS, PSNR, and SSIM for measuring fidelity and diversity in natural textures, fashion, and faces (AlBahar et al., 2021, Lin et al., 2022, Pan et al., 8 Feb 2024).
• Texture similarity: STSIM-1/2 for homogeneity and structural retention after inversion (Lin et al., 2022).
• Human evaluation: Subjective retrieval, perceptual indistinguishability, and latent space coverage via t-SNE and nearest neighbors (Slossberg et al., 2018, Lin et al., 2022).
• Ablation studies: Quantitative impact of progressive growing, texton broadcasting, TB module placements, and phase randomization on anchoring and diversity (Lin et al., 2022).

6. Applications and Notable Use Cases

Table: Select StyleGAN-based Texture Synthesis Applications

Method & Source	Domain(s)	Unique Contribution
Fokina et al. (Fokina et al., 2019)	Microstructure, digital rocks	Image quilting for field-scale tiling, evaluates mechanics invariants
Lin et al. (Lin et al., 2022)	Homogeneous textures	StyleGAN3 inversion, Gram loss for real texture alignment, generalization analysis
Lin et al. (Lin et al., 2022)	Natural & artificial textures	Multi-scale texton broadcasting, addresses periodic mode collapse
CTGAN (Pan et al., 8 Feb 2024)	3D object textures	Semantic, multi-view consistency in 3D mesh texturing
PWS (AlBahar et al., 2021)	Pose-guided image/textures	Dense correspondence inpainting, local appearance modulation for pose transfer

StyleGAN-based texture synthesis has enabled precise reproduction of fine structural details in porous media and digital rocks (matching effective Young's modulus up to $\Delta E < 0.001$), spatially diverse, alias-free natural textures (FID $<$ 71 on challenging datasets), and semantically-controllable, consistent textures for 3D assets in entertainment and industrial modeling.

7. Limitations and Open Challenges

While StyleGAN-based algorithms represent a significant advance in controllable, high-fidelity texture synthesis, several challenges remain:

• Fixed patch resolution: Vanilla architectures are constrained to the generator's output resolution, requiring strategies such as image quilting for seamless field-scale synthesis (Fokina et al., 2019).
• Semantic misalignment and view dependency: For 3D mesh applications, UV parameterization and semantic mask precision limit consistency, and explicit view parameters may be absent or require cumbersome atlas management (Pan et al., 8 Feb 2024).
• Mode collapse in highly periodic structures: Despite architectural augmentations, capturing all forms of long-range periodicity remains nuanced (Lin et al., 2022).
• Limited inversion for non-training textures: Real texture inversion is reliant on the expressive power of the latent space and style encoder; Gram loss optimization remains computationally intensive and may not fully recover idiosyncratic texture instances (Lin et al., 2022).
• Data and annotation requirements: Conditional methods often require meticulously aligned datasets (semantic masks, UV mappings), raising annotation and preprocessing costs.

Future extensions include integrating neural implicit fields for seamless parameterization, advancing text-driven texture specification, and distillation for real-time synthesis (Pan et al., 8 Feb 2024).

---

StyleGAN-based texture synthesis constitutes a flexible, expressive paradigm for modeling, generating, and controlling texture distributions, with applications extending from scientific imaging to semantic-driven graphics and animation. The modular nature of StyleGAN’s architecture, combined with domain-specific modifications such as texton broadcasting and semantic encoders, positions this methodology as a core tool for texture processing within both academic and applied computational imaging contexts.