Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 cited by

HIVE: Harnessing Human Feedback for Instructional Visual Editing

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2303.09618 v2 pith:6246XT57 submitted 2023-03-16 cs.CV cs.AIcs.CLcs.HCcs.LG

classification cs.CVcs.AIcs.CLcs.HCcs.LG
keywords humaneditingfeedbackinstructionalimagepreferencesdatasethive
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Incorporating human feedback has been shown to be crucial to align text generated by large language models to human preferences. We hypothesize that state-of-the-art instructional image editing models, where outputs are generated based on an input image and an editing instruction, could similarly benefit from human feedback, as their outputs may not adhere to the correct instructions and preferences of users. In this paper, we present a novel framework to harness human feedback for instructional visual editing (HIVE). Specifically, we collect human feedback on the edited images and learn a reward function to capture the underlying user preferences. We then introduce scalable diffusion model fine-tuning methods that can incorporate human preferences based on the estimated reward. Besides, to mitigate the bias brought by the limitation of data, we contribute a new 1M training dataset, a 3.6K reward dataset for rewards learning, and a 1K evaluation dataset to boost the performance of instructional image editing. We conduct extensive empirical experiments quantitatively and qualitatively, showing that HIVE is favored over previous state-of-the-art instructional image editing approaches by a large margin.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 4 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. EditInspector: A Benchmark for Evaluation of Text-Guided Image Edits

    cs.CV 2025-06 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A new human-labeled benchmark shows leading vision-language models are unreliable at judging image edits, and the authors' methods improve artifact detection and difference captioning.

  2. KRIS-Bench: Benchmarking Next-Level Intelligent Image Editing Models

    cs.CV 2025-05 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A new benchmark, KRIS-Bench, evaluates image editing models on knowledge-grounded reasoning across factual, conceptual, and procedural tasks, and finds large performance gaps in current models.

  3. ByteMorph: Benchmarking Instruction-Guided Image Editing with Non-Rigid Motions

    cs.CV 2025-06 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    A released 6.4 million pair dataset and 613 sample benchmark for instruction-guided image editing of non-rigid motions, plus a Flux.1-dev based baseline that outperforms open-source methods on the new benchmark.

  4. Hands-off Image Editing: Language-guided Editing without any Task-specific Labeling, Masking or even Training

    cs.CL 2025-02 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    An instruction-guided image editor that needs no training, labels, or masks: an LLM writes before/after captions and their embedding difference guides Stable Diffusion.

Pith tools