Learning Representations to Guide
Pixel Diffusion Transformers

Zihao Pan1,2,3 Mengting Chen2,† Cheng Shi3 Taihang Hu2 Zhengrong Yue4 Zikang Wang4 Yuan Wang2 Wei Li2 Sibei Yang1,✉

1Sun Yat-sen University 2Alibaba Group 3The University of Hong Kong 4Shanghai Jiao Tong University

†Project leader    ✉Corresponding author

Samples generated by RG at resolutions from 256 to 1024
High-quality pixel-space generation with a plain Transformer.

Samples at resolutions from $256\times256$ to $1024\times1024$.

1.55FID, ImageNet $256\times256$
1.74FID, ImageNet $512\times512$
0.89GenEval
87.1DPG-Bench

Abstract

Visual representations are largely developed for understanding, yet what makes them useful for generation remains unclear. We study this question in pixel diffusion transformers and uncover two key insights. First, better representation quality does not necessarily translate into greater generative utility, as externally aligned semantics can be progressively lost during pixel synthesis. Second, architectural separation with specialized pixel decoders mainly redistributes semantic and spatial modeling, without necessarily yielding representations better suited to generation. These insights suggest that a useful generative representation must be both properly formed and actively exploited. Motivated by these insights, we introduce Representation Guidance (RG), which directly forms and exploits internal representations while retaining a plain Transformer architecture. A low-dimensional bottleneck forces generation-relevant information into a compact representation, which is then explicitly used to guide decoder generation by modifying the flow-matching target according to its induced prediction offset. RG learns clearer semantic and spatial structure while scaling efficiently in both parameters and computation. On ImageNet $256\times256$, RG-L/16 with only 459M parameters outperforms substantially larger pixel diffusion transformers, while RG-XL/16 achieves an FID of 1.55. RG further reaches an FID of 1.74 at $512\times512$ and extends to text-to-image generation, achieving 0.89 on GenEval and 87.1 on DPG-Bench.

Motivation

Why pixel space and a plain Transformer?

Together, they offer a fully end-to-end and scalable setting, in which representations for generation are learned rather than predefined.

(a) FID versus parameters. (b) PCA and cosine-similarity maps of internal features
Our RG enables efficient scaling and better internal representations. (a) RG scales consistently from B to XL. It achieves lower FID with fewer parameters and FLOPs than plain-Transformer JiT baselines, while also outperforming pixel-specialized decoders at lower complexity. (b) RG learns clearer spatial structure and more localized semantic correspondence.

Two Key Insights

Our analysis of this setting reveals two key insights.

1Better representation quality does not necessarily translate into greater generative utility.

FID during training RMSC across layers LDS across layers Linear probing across layers
  • Baseline
  • REPA-4
  • REPA-6
  • REPA-8
REPA improves semantics and spatial structure at the aligned layer, but these gains quickly decay and do not improve final generation.

2Architectural separation mainly redistributes semantic and spatial modeling rather than yielding a representation better suited to generation.

FID during training RMSC across layers LDS across layers Linear probing across layers
  • Vanilla
  • PixelDiT
  • DiP
  • DeCo
Different pixel decoders induce different balances of global semantics and spatial structure in encoder.
Takeaways

Together, these findings motivate controlling both how the representation is formed during generation and how it is used by subsequent synthesis. A useful generative representation must be both properly formed and actively exploited.

Based on these insights, we introduce Representation Guidance (RG).

Representation Guidance

The bottleneck and guidance play complementary roles: the former governs how the representation is formed, while the latter ensures that generation actually uses it.

Architecture comparison of JiT, RG, PixelDiT, DeCo and DiP
Architecture comparison. (a) JiT and (b) RG use patch-level input and standard Transformer blocks. JiT uses a single stack, while RG conditions its decoder on the bottleneck output, which is randomly dropped during training. (c)–(e) Pixel-specialized decoders take pixel-level input.
Training pipeline of Representation Guidance
$$\mathbf{v}_{\text{RG}} = \mathbf{v} + (s-1)\,\operatorname{sg}\big(\Delta\mathbf{v}_{\text{rep}}\big), \qquad \Delta\mathbf{v}_{\text{rep}} = \mathbf{v}_{\theta}(\mathbf{z}_t,t,\mathbf{r}) - \mathbf{v}_{\theta}(\mathbf{z}_t,t,\varnothing)$$
Connection to self-supervised learning

RG also shares a core principle with self-distillation in self-supervised learning: the representation is bootstrapped from targets derived from the model's own predictions. Whereas self-distillation sharpens the teacher distribution to induce discriminative features, RG sharpens the velocity target along the representation-induced offset, which compels the representation to encode the semantic and spatial structure required for generation.

Results

Without introducing specialized pixel modules, RG achieves a substantially stronger parameter–quality and compute–quality trade-off, scales consistently with model size, and develops markedly clearer semantic and spatial organization in its internal representations.

Faster convergence

FID during training for RG-B, JiT-B and JiT-B with REPA
FID during training. RG-B matches the 600-epoch FID of JiT-B (3.66) after only 150 epochs (3.64), a 4× training speed-up. REPA accelerates JiT-B early but is overtaken by the baseline, whereas RG-B keeps improving, reaching 2.64 at 600 epochs.

Layer-wise representations

Layer-wise PCA visualization of JiT-B, JiT-B with REPA, and RG-B
PCA visualization of layer-wise features. While REPA-induced structure in JiT-B degrades in later layers, RG-B keeps clear semantic contours in encoder layers 3–8, with high-frequency patterns in decoder layers 9–12, indicating functional specialization.

ImageNet $256\times256$

MethodEpochParamsPre-traininggFID↓IS↑Precision↑Recall↑
Latent-space Generative Models
DiT-XL1400675MSD-VAE2.27278.20.830.57
SiT-XL1400675MSD-VAE2.06270.30.820.59
REPA800675MSD-VAE, DINOv21.42305.70.800.65
Lightning DiT800675MVA-VAE1.35295.30.790.65
DDT-XL400675MSD-VAE, DINOv21.26310.60.790.65
RAE-XL800839MRAE1.13262.60.780.67
Pixel-space Generative Models
RIN480410M-3.42182.0--
VDM++---2.12267.7--
JetFormer-2.8B-6.64-0.690.56
Simple Diffusion8002.0B-2.44256.3--
FARMER3201.9B-3.60269.20.810.51
EPG-XXL/16600789M-1.81294.60.800.61
PixelFlow-XL320677M-1.98282.10.810.60
PixNerd-XL320700MDINOv21.93298.00.800.60
JiT-G/166002B-1.82292.60.790.62
PixelGen-XL/16160676MVGG, DINOv21.83293.60.790.63
PixelREPA-H/16600953MDINOv21.81317.2--
DeCo-XL/16600682MDINOv21.693040.790.63
DiP-XL/16600631MDINOv21.79281.90.800.63
PixelDiT-XL320797MDINOv21.61292.70.780.64
PixelU-H/166001168MDINOv21.63305.90.790.64
RG-L/16600459MDINOv21.79285.60.790.64
RG-XL/16600725MDINOv21.55293.80.800.64

Bold = best in column.

ImageNet $512\times512$

MethodgFID↓IS↑Prec.↑Rec.↑
Latent-space Generative Models
SiT-XL2.62252.20.840.57
REPA2.08274.60.830.58
Pixel-space Generative Models
JiT-H/321.94309.1--
DeCo-XL/162.22290.00.800.60
PixelDiT-XL1.81278.60.780.67
PixelU-H/321.92322.10.800.58
RG-XL/161.74287.50.790.65

Text-to-image, $512\times512$

MethodParamsGenEval↑DPG↑
Latent-space Generative Models
SD38B0.6884.1
FLUX.1-dev12B0.6783.8
Pixel-space Generative Models
PixelDiT-T2I1.3+2.6B0.7883.7
PixelGen-XXL/161.1+1.7B0.79–
DeCo-XXL/161.1+1.7B0.8681.4
MiniT2I-L/16912+341M0.8885.9
RG-T2I-L/16912+341M0.8987.1

Reported parameter counts include both the generator and the text encoder.

BibTeX

@article{pan2026learning,
  title   = {Learning Representations to Guide Pixel Diffusion Transformers},
  author  = {Pan, Zihao and Chen, Mengting and Shi, Cheng and Hu, Taihang and
             Yue, Zhengrong and Wang, Zikang and Wang, Yuan and Li, Wei and Yang, Sibei},
  journal = {arXiv preprint arXiv:2610.12978},
  year    = {2026}
}