Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 6 minor 42 references

Dialogue Director: Bridging the Gap in Dialogue Visualization for Multimodal Storytelling

T0 review · 4 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-10 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper claims that a dialogue script alone can be turned into coherent multi-view cinematic storyboards by a training-free pipeline of three agents: script analysis, multi-view character generation, and cinematic layout.

desk verdict New task framing and a clean training-free pipeline, but the headline outperformance claim is ahead of the evidence and the multi-view consistency dependency is unmeasured. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.20725 v1 pith:B7DUHFPK submitted 2024-12-30 cs.CV

Min Zhang , Zilin Wang , Liyan Chen , Kunhong Liu , Juncong Lin This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.CV
keywords DialogueVisualizationStoryboardGenerationMultimodalStorytellingMulti-viewDiffusionRetrieval-AugmentedChain-of-ThoughtReasoningCinematicPrinciplesLargeModels
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

The paper tries to establish that a dialogue script—just the spoken lines and sparse scene headings—can be converted directly into a multi-view storyboard without the manual prompt engineering that previous story-visualization methods require. It introduces a new task, Dialogue Visualization, and a framework called Dialogue Director, built from three agents: a Script Director that enriches sparse dialogue using Chain-of-Thought reasoning and retrieval-augmented generation, a Cinematographer that generates multiple viewpoint portraits of each character, and a Storyboard Maker that arranges panels according to cinematic conventions. If the central claim is correct, generative storytelling shifts from asking for a hand-crafted prompt to simply supplying a screenplay, and the same modular agents can be attached to other image generators. The authors support this claim with comparisons to identity-preserving and storytelling diffusion baselines, ablations that remove each agent, and human ratings from film students.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing mechanism is the three-agent decomposition: Script Director, Cinematographer, and Storyboard Maker. The Script Director applies Chain-of-Thought reasoning—a prompting method that makes the model spell out intermediate steps—and retrieval-augmented generation, which pulls relevant stored context into the prompt, to turn sparse dialogue into detailed descriptions (the paper calls these T-RAG, V-RAG, and K-RAG for text, visual, and cinematic knowledge). The Cinematographer uses off-the-shelf multi-view diffusion models to expand one reference portrait per character into eight viewpoint images, creating a visual library that supports over-the-shoulder and shot/reverse-shot compositions. The Storyboard Maker uses a large multimodal model to pick the optimal viewpoint for each dialogue segment, assign layout boundaries that keep characters and focal elements in place, and compose the final panel. This division of labor is what lets the framework stay training-free while keeping language context, visual consistency, and cinematic rules aligned.

What would settle it

A concrete check: run the Cinematographer alone on one reference portrait per character from a dialogue script and measure identity consistency across all eight viewpoints; if the same character's face, hairstyle, or clothing visibly changes between front and side or back views, the multi-view coherence that the storyboard depends on is not actually delivered.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery claimed is that the bottleneck in dialogue-driven story visualization is not image generation itself but the translation of sparse dialogue into structured visual and cinematic information, and that this translation can be done by composing existing large multimodal models with existing multi-view diffusion models rather than training a new model. Concretely, Dialogue Director parses the script into characters, locations, and dialogue lines; enriches each element with text, visual, and cinematic knowledge; produces a library of eight viewpoints per character using multi-view diffusion; and selects a viewpoint and panel layout for each dialogue segment according to cinematic principles. The claim is that this composition yields storyboards that reflect conversational relationships such as eye contact and face orientation, maintain physical details like clothing and hairstyle across shot changes, and follow cinematic rules, whereas prior methods either require extra manual input, lose details across views, or cannot accept dialogue-only scripts.

Load-bearing premise

The framework's usefulness depends on the assumption that off-the-shelf multi-view diffusion models generate physically coherent character views from a single reference portrait without training on dialogue scenes.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • A raw dialogue script can serve as the sole input for storyboard generation, removing the extra manual prompts that baseline methods need.
  • Because the framework is training-free and modular, its individual agents can be plugged into other generative models; the paper demonstrates this by attaching its components to OmniGen and measuring improved image quality and text-image coherence.
  • Multi-view character references make dialogue-specific compositions feasible, including proper face orientation, eye contact, and over-the-shoulder shots in two-character scenes.
  • Ablation results support the contribution of each agent: removing the Script Director loses script understanding, removing the Cinematographer breaks visual consistency across shots, and removing the Storyboard Maker produces illogical layouts.

Reading between the lines

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

  • One natural extension the paper does not claim is to feed the structured character, location, dialogue, and cinematic notes into a video generation model, turning the storyboard into a shot list for animated previsualization.
  • The reliability of the whole pipeline inherits the reliability of the off-the-shelf multi-view generator; improvements in multi-view identity consistency would directly improve storyboard coherence, even without changing the other two agents.
  • The Script Director's structured output could serve as a canonical prompt for comparing other story-visualization methods, reducing the confounding effect of hand-written prompts in evaluation.
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

4 major / 6 minor

Summary. This paper proposes Dialogue Visualization, a new task of converting dialogue-only scripts into multi-view storyboards, and introduces Dialogue Director, a training-free three-agent pipeline: a Script Director that uses chain-of-thought and retrieval-augmented generation to parse and enrich script elements, a Cinematographer that generates reference portraits and eight views per character via MV-Adapter and Hunyuan3D-1 stage one, and a Storyboard Maker that plans layouts and composes panels. The authors evaluate on Hollywood scripts and fairy tales using NIQE, CLIP-T, and a human study with 30 film students, reporting favorable results against MIP-Adapter, StoryMaker, StoryDiffusion, OmniGen, and DALL-E 3.

Significance. Strengths include a well-motivated and practically relevant task, a modular and training-free architecture that uses off-the-shelf components, and a plug-and-play demonstration with OmniGen in Section IV-E that shows transferability. The paper also includes an explicit Limitations discussion, which is helpful. If the central SOTA claim is substantiated, the system would be a useful contribution to dialogue-driven storyboarding. However, the current evidence is insufficient: key quantitative comparisons are within noise or favor a baseline, the human evaluation lacks reliability statistics, and the pipeline's reliance on unvalidated multi-view consistency is load-bearing for the claimed physical-understanding advantage.

major comments (4)
  1. [Section IV-B, Table I] The central claim of outperforming the state of the art in text-image coherence is not supported by the reported numbers: StoryDiffusion achieves a higher CLIP-T score (0.2247) than the proposed method (0.2240), and the NIQE margin (3.78 vs. 3.91) is small and reported without any measure of variance. No error bars, standard deviations, or significance tests are provided; please report multiple runs or per-sample scores and run a paired significance test such as a paired t-test or Wilcoxon signed-rank test.
  2. [Section IV-D, Table II] The human evaluation uses 30 film students on only five scripts and reports no inter-annotator agreement measure (e.g., Cohen's kappa or Krippendorff's alpha), no statistical test of the mean differences, and no description of how the baselines' outputs were presented to raters or whether the order of methods was randomized. The claim of a 'large margin' in physical understanding (4.00 vs. 3.17) requires error bars and a significance test, especially given the small number of scripts.
  3. [Section III-C, Eq. (4); Conclusion/Limitations] The framework's physical-world understanding benefit depends on MV-Adapter and the first stage of Hunyuan3D-1 producing eight identity-consistent views from a single portrait, but no quantitative identity or consistency check across views is reported. NIQE is a global no-reference quality score and CLIP-T measures text-image alignment, so neither can detect face or garment swaps or orientation inconsistencies between views. The Limitations section concedes that 'the modeling performance relies on the characters' multi-view closely.' Please add a direct evaluation of multi-view identity and consistency (e.g., face identity similarity and clothing/pose consistency metrics) or, at minimum, a manual verification on all test characters.
  4. [Section IV-A] The experimental protocol is under-specified: there are no seeds, no number of generated samples per method, no prompt templates for the baselines, and the exact Stable Diffusion checkpoint (base SD 1.5 vs. the Civitai model in [36]) is ambiguous. Without these details, the comparisons are hard to reproduce and the claim that using 'part of our framework's agents as data processors' does not bias the baselines is unverifiable.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Table I, Fig. 1, Fig. 3 caption] There are typos in the manuscript: 'Quantitive' in Table I should be 'Quantitative'; 'Cinenatic' in Fig. 1 should be 'Cinematic'; and 'Qualification comparison' in the Fig. 3 caption should be 'Qualitative comparison'.
  2. [Section IV-A] The statement that CLIP-I 'cannot effectively evaluate the side-view appearance' is asserted without supporting evidence or a citation; please either substantiate it or remove it.
  3. [Equations (1)-(7)] The notation with superscripts (0), (1), (2) is overloaded for both agent stages and instruction indices, which makes the pipeline description harder to follow; consider renaming the stage superscripts or using distinct symbols.
  4. [Section IV-E, Table III] The ablation rows report only point estimates; given the small margins in NIQE and CLIP-T, please report repeated-run standard deviations or confidence intervals to support the ablation claims.
  5. [Reference [36]] Reference [36] points to a Civitai model page rather than a formally versioned or peer-reviewed source; please specify the exact checkpoint version and license to support reproducibility.
  6. [Section IV-D] For the human evaluation, the three rating criteria are described in prose; including a short written rubric or example storyboards in the supplemental material would strengthen the methodology and help future comparisons.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: Dialogue Director is a training-free pipeline whose claims are evaluated against external baselines and human raters.

full rationale

No circular step is present. Dialogue Director is a training-free pipeline; its components are either external off-the-shelf models (GPT-4, Stable Diffusion 1.5, MV-Adapter, Hunyuan3D-1) or LLM-based prompts. Equations (1)-(7) are data-flow descriptions, not derivations with fitted parameters: no quantity is defined in terms of the result it is used to predict, and no parameter is fitted to a subset of the evaluation data and then reported as a prediction. The central claims are evaluated against external baselines (MIP-Adapter, StoryMaker, StoryDiffusion, OmniGen, DALL-E 3) using NIQE, CLIP-T, and a human study by 30 film students; the human criteria are task-specific but do not encode the method's outputs or its internal equations. The paper's own limitation statement, 'the modeling performance relies on the characters' multi-view closely,' identifies an unmeasured external dependency on off-the-shelf multi-view consistency, which is a robustness and correctness risk rather than a circularity. There is no load-bearing self-citation, no imported uniqueness theorem, and no ansatz smuggled in via citation. The framework is therefore self-contained against external benchmarks, and the honest finding is no significant circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The ledger is light because Dialogue Director is an integration of existing models: no free numeric parameters are fitted and no new physical or conceptual entities are introduced. The main axioms are domain assumptions about the reliability of GPT-4, multi-view diffusion, and the chosen metrics.

assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption GPT-4 can accurately extract and enrich characters, locations, and dialogue from raw scripts without task-specific training.
    Invoked in Script Director, Section III-B; no parsing accuracy or enrichment quality is measured.
  • domain assumption MV-Adapter and the first stage of Hunyuan3D-1 produce multi-view character images consistent enough for storyboard use.
    Invoked in Cinematographer, Section III-C; only qualitative examples support this assumption.
  • domain assumption NIQE and CLIP-T scores, as used here, measure storyboard quality and dialogue-script understanding.
    Assumed in Section IV-A; the paper notes CLIP-I is unsuitable but does not validate NIQE and CLIP-T for this new task.
  • domain assumption Human evaluation criteria match the intended notion of cinematic quality.
    Section IV-D uses 30 film students and Likert ratings, but no inter-rater reliability or comparison with professional storyboard artists is reported.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Dialogue Director: Bridging the Gap in Dialogue Visualization for Multimodal Storytelling." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/B7DUHFPK

@misc{pith2026241220725,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Dialogue Director: Bridging the Gap in Dialogue Visualization for Multimodal Storytelling},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/B7DUHFPK}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.20725}
}
read the original abstract

Recent advances in AI-driven storytelling have enhanced video generation and story visualization. However, translating dialogue-centric scripts into coherent storyboards remains a significant challenge due to limited script detail, inadequate physical context understanding, and the complexity of integrating cinematic principles. To address these challenges, we propose Dialogue Visualization, a novel task that transforms dialogue scripts into dynamic, multi-view storyboards. We introduce Dialogue Director, a training-free multimodal framework comprising a Script Director, Cinematographer, and Storyboard Maker. This framework leverages large multimodal models and diffusion-based architectures, employing techniques such as Chain-of-Thought reasoning, Retrieval-Augmented Generation, and multi-view synthesis to improve script understanding, physical context comprehension, and cinematic knowledge integration. Experimental results demonstrate that Dialogue Director outperforms state-of-the-art methods in script interpretation, physical world understanding, and cinematic principle application, significantly advancing the quality and controllability of dialogue-based story visualization.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.20725 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Motivation of Dialogue Visualization and our framework. Traditional [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p001_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Pipeline of our dialogue visualization system, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. In-the-wild scripts Dialogue Visualization evaluation. Methods in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Ablation analysis on our method and OmniGen. It can be seen the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

42 extracted references · 31 canonical work pages

  1. [36]

    Dream creation: Virtual 3d or e-commerce scene key visual poster or blind box ip display c4d super visual

    Civitai, “Dream creation: Virtual 3d or e-commerce scene key visual poster or blind box ip display c4d super visual.” Civitai, 2024. Accessed: 2024-12-22

    work page 2024

  2. [1]

    Video generation models as world simulators,

    T. Brooks, B. Peebles, C. Holmes, W. DePue, Y . Guo, L. Jing, D. Schnurr, J. Taylor, T. Luhman, E. Luhman, C. Ng, R. Wang, and A. Ramesh, “Video generation models as world simulators,” 2024

    2024

  3. [2]

    Video-driven sketch animation via cyclic reconstruction mechanism,

    Z. Xie, H. Mo, and C. Gao, “Video-driven sketch animation via cyclic reconstruction mechanism,” in ICME, pp. 1–6, 2024

    work page 2024

  4. [3]

    Styleself: Style-controllable high- fidelity conversational virtual avatars generation,

    Y . Guo, R. Yan, Y . Wu, and S. Ma, “Styleself: Style-controllable high- fidelity conversational virtual avatars generation,” in ICMEW, pp. 1–6, 2024

    work page 2024

  5. [4]

    Training-free semantic video composition via pre-trained diffusion model,

    J. Guo, S. Su, J. Zhu, L. Gao, and J. Song, “Training-free semantic video composition via pre-trained diffusion model,” in ICME, pp. 1–6, 2024

    work page 2024

  6. [5]

    Reisz, G

    K. Reisz, G. Millar, and E. Al, The technique of film editing. Burlington, Ma: Focal Press, 2010

    work page 2010

  7. [6]

    Storygan: A sequential conditional gan for story visualization,

    Y . Li, Z. Gan, Y . Shen, J. Liu, Y . Cheng, Y . Wu, L. Carin, D. Carlson, and J. Gao, “Storygan: A sequential conditional gan for story visualization,” in CVPR, 2019

    work page 2019

  8. [7]

    Character-preserving coherent story visualization,

    Y . Song, Z. R. Tam, H. Chen, H. Lu, and H. Shuai, “Character-preserving coherent story visualization,” in ECCV, vol. 12362, pp. 18–33, Springer, 2020

    work page 2020

Show all 42 references
  1. [8]

    Learning to model multimodal semantic alignment for story visualization,

    B. Li and T. Lukasiewicz, “Learning to model multimodal semantic alignment for story visualization,” in EMNLP, pp. 4712–4718, 2022

    2022

  2. [9]

    Integrating visuospatial, linguistic, and commonsense structure into story visualization,

    A. Maharana and M. Bansal, “Integrating visuospatial, linguistic, and commonsense structure into story visualization,” in EMNLP, pp. 6772– 6786, 2021

    2021

  3. [10]

    Omnigen: Unified image generation,

    S. Xiao, Y . Wang, J. Zhou, H. Yuan, X. Xing, R. Yan, S. Wang, T. Huang, and Z. Liu, “Omnigen: Unified image generation,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2409.11340, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  4. [11]

    Ensembling diffusion models via adaptive feature aggregation,

    C. Wang, K. Tian, Y . Guan, J. Zhang, Z. Jiang, F. Shen, X. Han, Q. Gu, and W. Yang, “Ensembling diffusion models via adaptive feature aggregation,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.17082 , 2024

    2024 arXiv

  5. [12]

    V-express: Conditional dropout for progressive training of portrait video generation,

    C. Wang, K. Tian, J. Zhang, Y . Guan, F. Luo, F. Shen, Z. Jiang, Q. Gu, X. Han, and W. Yang, “V-express: Conditional dropout for progressive training of portrait video generation,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.02511, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  6. [13]

    Ic-light github page,

    L. Zhang, A. Rao, and M. Agrawala, “Ic-light github page,” 2024

    2024

  7. [14]

    Towards efficient generative large language model serving: A survey from algorithms to systems,

    X. Miao, G. Oliaro, Z. Zhang, X. Cheng, H. Jin, T. Chen, and Z. Jia, “Towards efficient generative large language model serving: A survey from algorithms to systems,” 2023

    2023

  8. [15]

    Resolving multi- condition confusion for finetuning-free personalized image generation,

    Q. Huang, S. Fu, J. Liu, H. Jiang, Y . Yu, and J. Song, “Resolving multi- condition confusion for finetuning-free personalized image generation,” 2024

    2024

  9. [16]

    Storymaker: Towards holistic consistent characters in text-to-image generation,

    Z. Zhou, J. Li, H. Li, N. Chen, and X. Tang, “Storymaker: Towards holistic consistent characters in text-to-image generation,” 2024

    2024

  10. [17]

    Storydiffusion: Consistent self-attention for long-range image and video generation,

    Y . Zhou, D. Zhou, M.-M. Cheng, J. Feng, and Q. Hou, “Storydiffusion: Consistent self-attention for long-range image and video generation,” in NeuralIPS, 2024

    2024

  11. [18]

    Chain-of-thought prompting elicits reasoning in large language models,

    J. Wei, X. Wang, D. Schuurmans, M. Bosma, B. Ichter, F. Xia, E. H. Chi, Q. V . Le, and D. Zhou, “Chain-of-thought prompting elicits reasoning in large language models,” in NeuralIPS, pp. 24824 – 24837, 2024

    2024

  12. [19]

    Retrieval- augmented generation for knowledge-intensive nlp tasks,

    P. Lewis, E. Perez, A. Piktus, F. Petroni, V . Karpukhin, N. Goyal, H. K ¨uttler, M. Lewis, W.-t. Yih, T. Rockt ¨aschel, et al. , “Retrieval- augmented generation for knowledge-intensive nlp tasks,” NeuralIPS, vol. 33, pp. 9459–9474, 2020

    2020

  13. [20]

    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 CVPR, pp. 10684–10695, 2022

    2022

  14. [21]

    Advancing pose-guided image synthesis with progressive conditional diffusion models,

    F. Shen, H. Ye, J. Zhang, C. Wang, X. Han, and W. Yang, “Advancing pose-guided image synthesis with progressive conditional diffusion models,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2310.06313 , 2023

    2023 arXiv

  15. [22]

    Exploring warping- guided features via adaptive latent diffusion model for virtual try-on,

    B. Gao, J. Ren, F. Shen, M. Wei, and Z. Huang, “Exploring warping- guided features via adaptive latent diffusion model for virtual try-on,” in ICME, pp. 1–6, IEEE, 2024

    2024

  16. [23]

    Imagpose: A unified conditional framework for pose-guided person generation,

    F. Shen and J. Tang, “Imagpose: A unified conditional framework for pose-guided person generation,” in NeuralIPS, 2024

    2024

  17. [24]

    Mastering text-to-image diffusion: Recaptioning, planning, and generating with multimodal llms,

    L. Yang, Z. Yu, C. Meng, M. Xu, S. Ermon, and B. Cui, “Mastering text-to-image diffusion: Recaptioning, planning, and generating with multimodal llms,” in ICML, 2024

    2024

  18. [25]

    Imagdressing-v1: Customizable virtual dressing,

    F. Shen, X. Jiang, X. He, H. Ye, C. Wang, X. Du, Z. Li, and J. Tang, “Imagdressing-v1: Customizable virtual dressing,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.12705, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  19. [26]

    Layoutgpt: Compositional visual planning and generation with large language models,

    W. Feng, W. Zhu, T.-j. Fu, V . Jampani, A. Akula, X. He, S. Basu, X. E. Wang, and W. Y . Wang, “Layoutgpt: Compositional visual planning and generation with large language models,” NeurIPS, vol. 36, 2024

    2024

  20. [27]

    Interactive story visualization with multiple characters,

    Y . Gong, Y . Pang, X. Cun, M. Xia, Y . He, H. Chen, L. Wang, Y . Zhang, X. Wang, Y . Shan, and Y . Yang, “Interactive story visualization with multiple characters,” in SIGGRAPH Asia 2023 Conference Papers, 2023

    2023

  21. [28]

    Anim-director: A large multimodal model powered agent for control- lable animation video generation,

    Y . Li, H. Shi, B. Hu, L. Wang, J. Zhu, J. Xu, Z. Zhao, and M. Zhang, “Anim-director: A large multimodal model powered agent for control- lable animation video generation,” in SIGGRAPH Asia 2024 Conference Papers, pp. 1–11, 2024

    2024

  22. [29]

    Synthesizing coherent story with auto-regressive latent diffusion models,

    X. Pan, P. Qin, Y . Li, H. Xue, and W. Chen, “Synthesizing coherent story with auto-regressive latent diffusion models,” in WACV, pp. 2908–2918, 2024

    2024

  23. [30]

    Boosting consistency in story visualization with rich-contextual condi- tional diffusion models,

    F. Shen, H. Ye, S. Liu, J. Zhang, C. Wang, X. Han, and W. Yang, “Boosting consistency in story visualization with rich-contextual condi- tional diffusion models,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.02482 , 2024

    2024 arXiv

  24. [31]

    Ip-adapter: Text compatible image prompt adapter for text-to-image diffusion models,

    H. Ye, J. Zhang, S. Liu, X. Han, and W. Yang, “Ip-adapter: Text compatible image prompt adapter for text-to-image diffusion models,” arXiv preprint arxiv:2308.06721 , 2023

    2023 arXiv

  25. [32]

    In-context lora for diffusion transformers,

    L. Huang, W. Wang, Z.-F. Wu, Y . Shi, H. Dou, C. Liang, Y . Feng, Y . Liu, and J. Zhou, “In-context lora for diffusion transformers,” arXiv preprint arxiv:2410.23775, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  26. [33]

    Mv-adapter: Multi-view consistent image generation made easy,

    Z. Huang, Y . Guo, H. Wang, R. Yi, L. Ma, Y .-P. Cao, and L. Sheng, “Mv-adapter: Multi-view consistent image generation made easy,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.03632, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  27. [34]

    Tencent hunyuan3d-1.0: A unified framework for text-to-3d and image-to-3d generation,

    X. Yang, H. Shi, B. Zhang, F. Yang, J. Wang, H. Zhao, X. Liu, X. Wang, Q. Lin, J. Yu, L. Wang, Z. Chen, S. Liu, Y . Liu, Y . Yang, D. Wang, J. Jiang, and C. Guo, “Tencent hunyuan3d-1.0: A unified framework for text-to-3d and image-to-3d generation,” 2024

    2024

  28. [35]

    Chatgpt (version 4),

    OpenAI, “Chatgpt (version 4),” 2024. Accessed: 2024-12-21

    2024

  29. [37]

    Making a “completely blind

    A. Mittal, R. Soundararajan, and A. C. Bovik, “Making a “completely blind” image quality analyzer,” IEEE Signal processing letters , vol. 20, no. 3, pp. 209–212, 2013

    2013

  30. [38]

    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, et al., “Learning transferable visual models from natural language supervision,” in International conference on machine learning , pp. 8748–8763, PMLR, 2021

    2021

  31. [39]

    Dall·e 3: Text-to-image generation

    OpenAI, “Dall·e 3: Text-to-image generation.” OpenAI, 2024. Accessed: 2024-12-22

    2024

  32. [40]

    Before sunset

    R. Linklater, “Before sunset.” Warner Independent Pictures, 2004. Film

    2004

  33. [41]

    de Saint-Exup ´ery, The Little Prince

    A. de Saint-Exup ´ery, The Little Prince. Reynal & Hitchcock, 1943. First published in 1943

    1943

  34. [42]

    H. C. Andersen, Andersen’s Fairy Tales . C.A. Reitzel, 1837. First published in 1837

Pith tools

Reviewed August 10, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.