Good Papers

Active Learning for Conditional Generative Compressed Sensing

For conditional generative compressed sensing, prompt-matched Christoffel sampling achieves near-optimal recovery bounds while prompt mismatch adds explicit penalties, with experiments showing prompts reshape sensing and recovery.

Alexander DeLise, Nick Dexter

Published 2026Atlanta Poster Session 5 · Fri, Dec 11, 10:00 AM–1:00 PM local time · Hall C1arXiv ↗OpenReview ↗

78%
OverallHighly rated
?
OverallHighly ratedVote to see the scoreThe exact score shows once you've voted, so every vote is your own call. The first half of each home page shelf shows its scores.
Readers
–

Only vote on papers you've read. Sign in with GitHub to vote.

AI panel11/20reviewers recommend it
lenient 3/5
medium 6/10
strict 2/5
AI panel?Vote to see what the 20 AI reviewers said

Abstract

Generative compressed sensing uses the range of a pretrained generator as a nonlinear model for recovering structured signals from limited measurements. We study a conditional version of this problem for image recovery from subsampled Fourier measurements using prompt-conditioned generative models. Our framework separates two roles of conditioning: the prompt used to design the sampling distribution and the prompt used to define the recovery model. For ReLU and Lipschitz conditional generators, we prove stable recovery bounds showing that prompt-matched Christoffel sampling retains the same Christoffel complexity constant as existing near-optimal generative compressed sensing theory, while prompt mismatch incurs an explicit compatibility penalty. Experiments with Stable Diffusion show that prompts meaningfully reshape Christoffel sampling distributions and influence image recovery. Overall, our results suggest that prompts should be treated as design variables with distinct effects on sensing, approximation, and recovery.