Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 44 references

Two-in-One: Unified Multi-Person Interactive Motion Generation by Latent Diffusion Transformer

T0 review · 3 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read Treating two people's motion as one data point in a shared latent space improves text-guided generation and runs about four times faster than separate-branch models.

desk verdict The unified latent idea is sensible, but the implausibly low MM Dist and weak ablations keep me from trusting the numbers. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.16670 v1 pith:S2SEQQU6 submitted 2024-12-21 cs.CV cs.GR

Boyuan Li , Xihua Wang , Ruihua Song , Wenbing Huang This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.CVcs.GR
keywords multi-personmotiongenerationinteractivelatentdiffusionmodelvariationalautoencodertext-to-motiontransformerasymmetricinteractionsInterHuman
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper aims to show that two-person interactive motion is generated better when the two motions are treated as one indivisible data point rather than as two separate outputs coordinated afterward. The authors build an interaction Variational AutoEncoder (InterVAE) that compresses a two-person motion pair into a single short latent code, and a text-conditioned latent diffusion transformer (InterLDM) that generates that code from natural language. They report that this unified design beats separate-branch baselines such as InterGen on text-following metrics (R-Precision, MM-Dist) and on distribution quality (FID, Diversity), while being roughly four times faster at inference. The practical payoff: text-to-animation systems could produce coordinated two-person scenes with asymmetric roles, such as one person bowing while the other accepts the apology, directly from one sentence.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the unified latent space produced by InterVAE, a transformer VAE that takes the normalized two-person motion sequence together with a learnable latent token and outputs a short latent code $z\in\mathbb{R}^{f\times256}$ (with $f=24$ in the best configuration), so that every latent token carries information about both persons at once. The counterpart is InterLDM, a Diffusion Transformer denoiser that operates on that entire latent code rather than on per-person sequences, using text embeddings from frozen CLIP and T5 encoders. Because the diffusion process denoises one joint latent instead of two separate ones, the model cannot drift into generating each person independently; interaction cues such as facing direction and relative offset live in the same tokens. The reconstruction objective also includes foot-contact, bone-length, and joint-velocity losses, which push the latent to retain the geometric structure of the human skeleton.

What would settle it

Measure reconstruction errors of InterVAE specifically on inter-person quantities, such as relative joint distances, contact flags, and role-swap consistency, for the $f=24$ latent code, and compare those errors directly against a two-branch VAE on the same quantities; if the unified latent does not preserve these interaction details better, the paper's central explanation falls apart.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that interaction information, including relative spatial relations, contact, and role assignment, is better preserved when both persons' motions are encoded together into one latent space than when each person is generated by a separate branch with cross-attention. InterVAE maps the concatenated two-person motion sequence to a latent variable $z\in\mathbb{R}^{24\times256}$, about a tenth of the raw sequence length, using a transformer encoder-decoder trained with reconstruction, KL, joint-velocity, bone-length, and foot-contact losses. A single Diffusion Transformer denoiser then learns to reverse a Gaussian noising process on this latent, conditioned on text via AdaLN-Zero and classifier-free guidance. On the InterHuman test set, the paper reports that this design raises R-Precision from 0.371 to 0.427, lowers FID from 5.918 to 5.619, lowers MM-Dist from 5.108 to 1.862, and runs about four times faster than InterGen, with the clearest qualitative gains on descriptions that require the two people to perform very different actions.

Load-bearing premise

The entire method hinges on the assumption that a single 24-token latent code can faithfully preserve the interaction details between two people, such as relative positions, contact, and role assignment; if compression loses those details, no amount of diffusion training can recover them.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Text-to-motion systems can generate coordinated two-person scenes from one sentence, including descriptions with strongly asymmetric roles, such as one person bowing while the other accepts the apology.
  • The reported gains on R-Precision and MM-Dist imply that generated motions match the text better than separate-branch baselines, not just that they look plausible in isolation.
  • A single latent diffusion pass with a 24-token code runs about four times faster than two-branch generation at similar model size, making interactive motion generation more practical for real-time animation workflows.
  • The token-length ablation shows a trade-off: shorter codes speed up inference but hurt reconstruction, while longer codes hurt generation; $f=24$ is the reported sweet spot.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The paper evaluates InterVAE only through downstream generation FID; a direct reconstruction test on interaction-specific quantities such as relative joint distances, contact frames, and role-swap consistency would clarify whether the unified latent truly preserves the interaction information it is claimed to preserve.
  • If the unified latent is the mechanism behind the text-following gains, the gap between unified and two-branch models should widen as the asymmetry of the described motions increases; this could be tested by binning InterHuman descriptions by role asymmetry.
  • The same one-data-point strategy may transfer to other multi-agent generative tasks, such as hand-object interaction or group dance, where interaction coherence matters more than per-agent fidelity.
  • Because the method uses fixed CLIP and T5 text encoders and a single guidance scale, the reported quality is a lower bound on what the architecture could achieve with stronger text conditioning or tuned guidance.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a unified latent-space framework for two-person interactive motion generation from text. An interaction variational autoencoder (InterVAE) compresses two-person motion sequences into a single latent token sequence, and a diffusion transformer (InterLDM) generates latents conditioned on text, followed by decoding to full motions. Experiments on the InterHuman benchmark report improvements over prior two-branch methods in R-Precision, FID, MM Dist, and Diversity, as well as roughly 4x faster inference. The central claim is that treating two-person motions as one integrated data point in a unified latent space preserves interaction information and improves instruction-following, especially for asymmetric motions.

Significance. If the central claim is sustained, the paper makes a useful contribution: it is, to my knowledge, the first to apply a single latent VAE to multi-person interaction data, and the reported inference speedup over InterGen is practically relevant. The paper also provides quantitative comparisons on the public InterHuman benchmark with confidence intervals, and the qualitative examples in Figure 2 illustrate a plausible advantage for asymmetric interactions. However, the evidence for the central causal claim that the unified latent space is responsible for the gains is currently incomplete, and one of the headline metrics is implausible as reported. The contribution would be strengthened by isolating the VAE's contribution and by validating interaction-specific information preservation.

major comments (3)
  1. [Table I / Section III-B] The reported MM Dist for InterLDM is 1.862±0.007, which is less than half of the real-data value 3.755±0.008. This is not plausible for a text-conditioned generative model: one would not expect generated motions to be twice as close to their captions in a pretrained evaluator embedding space than the real motions paired with those captions. The most likely explanation is that the InterVAE decoder acts as a low-pass filter or moves reconstructions toward a text-conditional centroid, which would simultaneously lower MM Dist, inflate top-1 R-Precision, and reduce MModality. Because the paper reports no retrieval or MM Dist metrics on VAE reconstructions alone, the diffusion model's contribution to these gains is not isolated. I request reconstruction-only R-Precision and MM Dist, and if the VAE alone already achieves near-interpretable text-motion similarity, the claims about instruction-following need substantial revision.
  2. [Section III-C / Table II] The ablation only varies the latent token length f (18, 24, 30, 36), so it tests compression rate versus reconstruction/generation quality, but it does not test the central design choice of a unified latent space against the alternative of two separate per-person branches. Without a matched comparison to a two-branch VAE or a two-branch diffusion model under similar parameter count and compute, the paper's central claim that 'two-in-one' unified modeling drives the improvement is not directly supported. In addition, Section II-A motivates the unified latent as preserving 'full information' of individual motions and inter-human interaction, yet no interaction-specific metrics are reported (e.g., relative joint offset error, contact accuracy, or role assignment accuracy), so the claim that the compression preserves interaction details is unverified.
  3. [Section III-B] The discussion of MModality is an explicit post hoc reinterpretation: the paper writes that 'if the generated motions are not relevant to the text condition, the higher MModality means the worse instruction-following ability.' This does not resolve the per-text diversity deficit: InterLDM's MModality is 1.032±0.089 versus 7.948±0.064 for real motions and 2.141±0.063 for InterGen. The paper should either report per-text diversity restricted to text-relevant samples (e.g., by retrieval filtering) or acknowledge that the model collapses the diversity of motions for a fixed caption. As written, the text contradicts the claim in the abstract of generating 'two motions with huge differences from one text condition,' and the resolution cannot be a reinterpretation of the metric alone.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Abstract] The phrase 'performing text condition' appears to be a typo; it should likely read 'performing text conditioning' or 'performing text following.'
  2. [Section II-B] There is a duplicated word in 'Based on on the unified interaction latent space'; please correct to 'Based on the unified interaction latent space.'
  3. [Table I] The confidence interval for InterLDM's Top2 R-Precision is reported as 0.559±0.05, while all other intervals use three decimal places; this is likely 0.559±0.005 and should be corrected for consistency.
  4. [References] Reference [28], cited as the T2M baseline in Table I, appears to be 'Text2motion: from natural language instructions to feasible plans' in Autonomous Robots, which is a different line of work from the text-to-motion generation method T2M by Guo et al. Please verify and correct this citation, as incorrect attribution affects reproducibility.
  5. [Section III-A] The evaluation protocol does not specify how many generated samples are used for each metric, how the 95% confidence intervals are computed, or whether the evaluators (e.g., the motion/text encoders) are the same ones used by InterGen. Please provide these details in the experimental setup.
  6. [Figure 3] The trade-off figure uses dot size for parameter count, but the quantitative parameter counts are not given in text or caption; please provide the exact numbers for all compared methods.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the method is trained and evaluated on an external benchmark with independent baselines, and no load-bearing step reduces to its own inputs.

full rationale

The derivation chain is self-contained rather than circular. InterVAE is trained on the reconstruction task with an explicit loss (Eq. 1), and InterLDM is trained on the frozen latents with the standard diffusion objective (Eq. 3); neither objective defines the target metric in terms of itself. The central quantitative claims are evaluated on the public InterHuman test set against independent baselines such as InterGen, so the reported R-Precision, FID, MM Dist, and Diversity are external comparisons rather than fit values. The choice of latent length f=24 in Table II is a hyperparameter selection based on reconstruction and generation FID, not a fitted parameter renamed as a prediction. There are no load-bearing self-citations, no imported uniqueness theorems, and no ansatz smuggled in via citation. The skeptical concern about the implausibly low MM Dist is a validity or benchmark-interpretation issue, not a circularity issue, because the metric is computed on generated outputs and compared to real-data statistics, and the paper does not define the metric in a way that forces the result. The post hoc reinterpretation of MModality in Section III-B is an explanatory comment, not a step in the derivation. Therefore, no circular step is present, and the appropriate score is 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 2 invented entities

The paper introduces no new physical entities; the invented items are model components. The free parameters are hyperparameters selected on the single InterHuman benchmark, and the central assumption is that the unified latent space preserves interaction information, which is asserted but not directly measured. The method rests on standard diffusion machinery and dataset assumptions rather than on new axioms.

free parameters (4)
  • latent token length f = 24
    Selected via ablation on InterHuman reconstruction and generation FID (Table II); this compression rate trades off quality and speed.
  • classifier-free guidance scale s
    Inference-time guidance scale used in Eq. 4; the value is not reported in the paper.
  • number of denoising steps = 25
    Inference uses DPM-Solver++ with 25 steps; no ablation on step count is provided.
  • VAE loss weights for L_mse, L_kl, L_vel, L_bone, L_fc
    The composite VAE objective in Eq. 1 lists five terms but the weighting coefficients are not given.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The InterHuman dataset provides reliable text-motion pairs and is a valid benchmark for evaluating multi-person interactive motion generation.
    All experiments and ablations are performed on this single dataset; no cross-dataset validation is performed.
  • domain assumption The fixed ordering of the two persons in the input representation, combined with text that does not specify role assignment, still allows the model to correctly assign asymmetric actions.
    The model concatenates two person motions in a fixed order; a prompt like 'one person bows to the other' does not specify which slot bows, and the paper provides no mechanism to resolve this ambiguity.
  • standard math Standard DDPM equations and DPM-Solver++ are correct and applicable in the latent space.
    Eqs. 2-4 invoke established diffusion results from references [29,30,31,33].
  • domain assumption Pretrained CLIP and T5 text encoders capture sufficient semantics for text-driven motion generation.
    The text encoder features are frozen and assumed to align with motion content without fine-tuning.
invented entities (2)
  • InterVAE
    purpose: A variational autoencoder that compresses a pair of interactive motions into a unified latent token sequence.
    This is a model component introduced by the paper; there is no independent falsifiable handle outside the reported metrics.
  • InterLDM
    purpose: A text-conditioned latent diffusion transformer that generates the unified latent representation.
    This is a model component introduced by the paper; its behavior is only validated on the paper's own experiments.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Two-in-One: Unified Multi-Person Interactive Motion Generation by Latent Diffusion Transformer." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/S2SEQQU6

@misc{pith2026241216670,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Two-in-One: Unified Multi-Person Interactive Motion Generation by Latent Diffusion Transformer},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/S2SEQQU6}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.16670}
}
read the original abstract

Multi-person interactive motion generation, a critical yet under-explored domain in computer character animation, poses significant challenges such as intricate modeling of inter-human interactions beyond individual motions and generating two motions with huge differences from one text condition. Current research often employs separate module branches for individual motions, leading to a loss of interaction information and increased computational demands. To address these challenges, we propose a novel, unified approach that models multi-person motions and their interactions within a single latent space. Our approach streamlines the process by treating interactive motions as an integrated data point, utilizing a Variational AutoEncoder (VAE) for compression into a unified latent space, and performing a diffusion process within this space, guided by the natural language conditions. Experimental results demonstrate our method's superiority over existing approaches in generation quality, performing text condition in particular when motions have significant asymmetry, and accelerating the generation efficiency while preserving high quality.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.16670 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Left: Our proposed framework, which uses an interaction Variational AutoEncoder (InterVAE) to encode two-person [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Comparison of inference time, FID and quantity of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

44 extracted references · 13 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Intergen: Diffusion- based multi-human motion generation under complex interactions,

    H. Liang, W. Zhang, W. Li, J. Yu, and L. Xu, “Intergen: Diffusion- based multi-human motion generation under complex interactions,” International Journal of Computer Vision , vol. 132, no. 9, p. 3463–3483, Mar. 2024. [Online]. Available: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/ s11263-024-02042-6

    work page 2024

  2. [2]

    Human motion diffusion model,

    G. Tevet, S. Raab, B. Gordon, Y . Shafir, D. Cohen-Or, and A. H. Bermano, “Human motion diffusion model,” 2022. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/2209.14916

    arXiv 2022

  3. [3]

    Human motion diffusion as a generative prior,

    Y . Shafir, G. Tevet, R. Kapon, and A. H. Bermano, “Human motion diffusion as a generative prior,” 2023. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/2303.01418

    arXiv 2023

  4. [4]

    Intercontrol: Generate hu- man motion interactions by controlling every joint,

    Z. Wang, J. Wang, D. Lin, and B. Dai, “Intercontrol: Generate hu- man motion interactions by controlling every joint,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2311.15864, 2023

    arXiv 2023

  5. [5]

    High- resolution image synthesis with latent diffusion models,

    R. Rombach, A. Blattmann, D. Lorenz, P. Esser, and B. Ommer, “High- resolution image synthesis with latent diffusion models,” in Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition , 2022, pp. 10 684–10 695

    2022

  6. [6]

    Diffusion models beat gans on image synthesis,

    P. Dhariwal and A. Nichol, “Diffusion models beat gans on image synthesis,” Advances in neural information processing systems , vol. 34, pp. 8780–8794, 2021

    2021

  7. [7]

    Motiondiffuse: Text-driven human motion generation with diffusion model,

    M. Zhang, Z. Cai, L. Pan, F. Hong, X. Guo, L. Yang, and Z. Liu, “Motiondiffuse: Text-driven human motion generation with diffusion model,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2208.15001 , 2022

    arXiv 2022

  8. [8]

    Physdiff: Physics- guided human motion diffusion model,

    Y . Yuan, J. Song, U. Iqbal, A. Vahdat, and J. Kautz, “Physdiff: Physics- guided human motion diffusion model,” inProceedings of the IEEE/CVF international conference on computer vision , 2023, pp. 16 010–16 021

    2023

Show all 44 references
  1. [9]

    Emdm: Efficient motion diffusion model for fast, high-quality motion generation,

    W. Zhou, Z. Dou, Z. Cao, Z. Liao, J. Wang, W. Wang, Y . Liu, T. Komura, W. Wang, and L. Liu, “Emdm: Efficient motion diffusion model for fast, high-quality motion generation,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2312.02256 , vol. 2, 2023

    2023 arXiv

  2. [10]

    Listen, denoise, action! audio-driven motion synthesis with diffusion models,

    S. Alexanderson, R. Nagy, J. Beskow, and G. E. Henter, “Listen, denoise, action! audio-driven motion synthesis with diffusion models,” ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG) , vol. 42, no. 4, pp. 1–20, 2023

    2023

  3. [11]

    Executing your commands via motion diffusion in latent space,

    X. Chen, B. Jiang, W. Liu, Z. Huang, B. Fu, T. Chen, and G. Yu, “Executing your commands via motion diffusion in latent space,” in Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2023, pp. 18 000–18 010

    2023

  4. [12]

    Action2motion: Conditioned generation of 3d human motions,

    C. Guo, X. Zuo, S. Wang, S. Zou, Q. Sun, A. Deng, M. Gong, and L. Cheng, “Action2motion: Conditioned generation of 3d human motions,” in Proceedings of the 28th ACM International Conference on Multimedia, 2020, pp. 2021–2029

    2020

  5. [13]

    Action-conditioned 3d human motion synthesis with transformer vae,

    M. Petrovich, M. J. Black, and G. Varol, “Action-conditioned 3d human motion synthesis with transformer vae,” in Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision , 2021, pp. 10 985–10 995

    2021

  6. [14]

    Text2action: Generative adversarial synthesis from language to action,

    H. Ahn, T. Ha, Y . Choi, H. Yoo, and S. Oh, “Text2action: Generative adversarial synthesis from language to action,” in 2018 IEEE Interna- tional Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA) . IEEE, 2018, pp. 5915–5920

    2018

  7. [15]

    Temos: Generating diverse human motions from textual descriptions,

    M. Petrovich, M. J. Black, and G. Varol, “Temos: Generating diverse human motions from textual descriptions,” in European Conference on Computer Vision. Springer, 2022, pp. 480–497

    2022

  8. [16]

    Tm2t: Stochastic and tokenized modeling for the reciprocal generation of 3d human motions and texts,

    C. Guo, X. Zuo, S. Wang, and L. Cheng, “Tm2t: Stochastic and tokenized modeling for the reciprocal generation of 3d human motions and texts,” in European Conference on Computer Vision . Springer, 2022, pp. 580–597

    2022

  9. [17]

    Generating human motion from textual descriptions with discrete representations,

    J. Zhang, Y . Zhang, X. Cun, Y . Zhang, H. Zhao, H. Lu, X. Shen, and Y . Shan, “Generating human motion from textual descriptions with discrete representations,” in Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition , 2023, pp. 14 730–14 740

    2023

  10. [18]

    Ai choreographer: Music conditioned 3d dance generation with aist++,

    R. Li, S. Yang, D. A. Ross, and A. Kanazawa, “Ai choreographer: Music conditioned 3d dance generation with aist++,” in Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision , 2021, pp. 13 401–13 412

    2021

  11. [19]

    Generating diverse and natural 3d human motions from text,

    C. Guo, S. Zou, X. Zuo, S. Wang, W. Ji, X. Li, and L. Cheng, “Generating diverse and natural 3d human motions from text,” in Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2022, pp. 5152–5161

    2022

  12. [20]

    Bailando: 3d dance generation by actor-critic gpt with choreographic memory,

    L. Siyao, W. Yu, T. Gu, C. Lin, Q. Wang, C. Qian, C. C. Loy, and Z. Liu, “Bailando: 3d dance generation by actor-critic gpt with choreographic memory,” in Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition , 2022, pp. 11 050–11 059

    2022

  13. [21]

    Audio2gestures: Generating diverse gestures from speech audio with conditional variational autoencoders,

    J. Li, D. Kang, W. Pei, X. Zhe, Y . Zhang, Z. He, and L. Bao, “Audio2gestures: Generating diverse gestures from speech audio with conditional variational autoencoders,” in Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision , 2021, pp. 11 293–11 302

    2021

  14. [22]

    Beat: A large-scale semantic and emotional multi-modal dataset for conversational gestures synthesis,

    H. Liu, Z. Zhu, N. Iwamoto, Y . Peng, Z. Li, Y . Zhou, E. Bozkurt, and B. Zheng, “Beat: A large-scale semantic and emotional multi-modal dataset for conversational gestures synthesis,” in European conference on computer vision . Springer, 2022, pp. 612–630

    2022

  15. [23]

    Action-conditioned on-demand motion generation,

    Q. Lu, Y . Zhang, M. Lu, and V . Roychowdhury, “Action-conditioned on-demand motion generation,” in Proceedings of the 30th ACM Inter- national Conference on Multimedia , 2022, pp. 2249–2257

    2022

  16. [24]

    Posegpt: Quantization-based 3d human motion generation and forecasting,

    T. Lucas, F. Baradel, P. Weinzaepfel, and G. Rogez, “Posegpt: Quantization-based 3d human motion generation and forecasting,” in European Conference on Computer Vision . Springer, 2022, pp. 417– 435

    2022

  17. [25]

    Motionclip: Exposing human motion generation to clip space,

    G. Tevet, B. Gordon, A. Hertz, A. H. Bermano, and D. Cohen-Or, “Motionclip: Exposing human motion generation to clip space,” in European Conference on Computer Vision . Springer, 2022, pp. 358– 374

    2022

  18. [26]

    Humantomato: Text-aligned whole-body motion generation,

    S. Lu, L.-H. Chen, A. Zeng, J. Lin, R. Zhang, L. Zhang, and H.-Y . Shum, “Humantomato: Text-aligned whole-body motion generation,”

  19. [27]

    Omnicontrol: Control any joint at any time for human motion generation,

    Y . Xie, V . Jampani, L. Zhong, D. Sun, and H. Jiang, “Omnicontrol: Control any joint at any time for human motion generation,” 2024. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/2310.08580

    2024 arXiv

  20. [28]

    Text2motion: from natural language instructions to feasible plans,

    K. Lin, C. Agia, T. Migimatsu, M. Pavone, and J. Bohg, “Text2motion: from natural language instructions to feasible plans,” Autonomous Robots, vol. 47, no. 8, p. 1345–1365, Nov. 2023. [Online]. Available: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10514-023-10131-7

    2023 doi

  21. [29]

    Denoising diffusion probabilistic models,

    J. Ho, A. Jain, and P. Abbeel, “Denoising diffusion probabilistic models,” 2020. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/2006.11239

    2020 arXiv

  22. [30]

    Classifier-free diffusion guidance,

    J. Ho and T. Salimans, “Classifier-free diffusion guidance,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2207.12598, 2022

    2022 arXiv

  23. [31]

    Scalable diffusion models with transformers,

    W. Peebles and S. Xie, “Scalable diffusion models with transformers,”

  24. [32]

    6d rotation representation for unconstrained head pose estimation,

    T. Hempel, A. A. Abdelrahman, and A. Al-Hamadi, “6d rotation representation for unconstrained head pose estimation,” in 2022 IEEE International Conference on Image Processing (ICIP). IEEE, Oct. 2022. [Online]. Available: http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/ICIP46576.2022.9897219

    2022

  25. [33]

    Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/2212.09748

    [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/2212.09748

    arXiv

  26. [34]

    Auto-encoding variational bayes,

    D. P. Kingma, “Auto-encoding variational bayes,” arXiv preprint arXiv:1312.6114, 2013

    2013 arXiv

  27. [35]

    Dpm-solver++: Fast solver for guided sampling of diffusion probabilistic models,

    C. Lu, Y . Zhou, F. Bao, J. Chen, C. Li, and J. Zhu, “Dpm-solver++: Fast solver for guided sampling of diffusion probabilistic models,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2211.01095, 2022

    2022 arXiv

  28. [36]

    Freemotion: A unified framework for number-free text-to-motion synthesis,

    K. Fan, J. Tang, W. Cao, R. Yi, M. Li, J. Gong, J. Zhang, Y . Wang, C. Wang, and L. Ma, “Freemotion: A unified framework for number-free text-to-motion synthesis,” 2024. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/2405.15763

    2024 arXiv

  29. [37]

    Denoising diffusion implicit models,

    J. Song, C. Meng, and S. Ermon, “Denoising diffusion implicit models,” 2022. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/2010.02502

    2022 arXiv

  30. [38]

    Variational inference with normalizing flows,

    D. J. Rezende and S. Mohamed, “Variational inference with normalizing flows,” 2016. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/1505.05770

    2016 arXiv

  31. [39]

    Generative adversarial networks,

    I. J. Goodfellow, J. Pouget-Abadie, M. Mirza, B. Xu, D. Warde-Farley, S. Ozair, A. Courville, and Y . Bengio, “Generative adversarial networks,” 2014. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/1406.2661

    2014 arXiv

  32. [40]

    Learning transferable visual models from natural language supervision,

    A. Radford, J. W. Kim, C. Hallacy, A. Ramesh, G. Goh, S. Agarwal, G. Sastry, A. Askell, P. Mishkin, J. Clark, G. Krueger, and I. Sutskever, “Learning transferable visual models from natural language supervision,” 2021. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/2103.00020

    2021 arXiv

  33. [41]

    U-net: Convolutional networks for biomedical image segmentation,

    O. Ronneberger, P. Fischer, and T. Brox, “U-net: Convolutional networks for biomedical image segmentation,” 2015. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/1505.04597

    2015 arXiv

  34. [42]

    Exploring the limits of transfer learning with a unified text-to-text transformer,

    C. Raffel, N. Shazeer, A. Roberts, K. Lee, S. Narang, M. Matena, Y . Zhou, W. Li, and P. J. Liu, “Exploring the limits of transfer learning with a unified text-to-text transformer,” 2023. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/1910.10683

    2023 arXiv

  35. [43]

    Scaling rectified flow transformers for high-resolution image synthesis,

    P. Esser, S. Kulal, A. Blattmann, R. Entezari, J. M ¨uller, H. Saini, Y . Levi, D. Lorenz, A. Sauer, F. Boesel, D. Podell, T. Dockhorn, Z. English, K. Lacey, A. Goodwin, Y . Marek, and R. Rombach, “Scaling rectified flow transformers for high-resolution image synthesis,” 2024....

    2024 arXiv

  36. [2023]

    Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/2310.12978

    [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/2310.12978

    arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 11, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.