Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 44 references

Parallel Rescaling: Rebalancing Consistency Guidance for Personalized Diffusion Models

T0 review · 4 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper claims that re-centering and re-scaling the parallel component of consistency guidance relative to classifier-free guidance improves prompt alignment in personalized diffusion while keeping identity, at a small cost in image…

desk verdict A clean, simple extension of DCO that is undermined by a missing ablation: the paper never shows that its specific rescaling is what improves alignment beyond just weakening consistency guidance. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.00607 v1 pith:G4KAAP64 submitted 2025-05-31 cs.CV cs.AI

JungWoo Chae , Jiyoon Kim , Sangheum Hwang This is my paper
classification cs.CVcs.AI
keywords diffusionmodelspersonalizationclassifier-freeguidanceconsistencypromptalignmentidentitypreservationparallelrescalingsampling
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 argues that a specific part of DCO's consistency guidance—the component that points along the text-guidance direction—drifts oppositely to the prompt as denoising proceeds, and that this drift is why personalized models fail on stylized or complex prompts. It proposes re-centering and re-scaling that parallel component at each timestep, replacing its raw value with a normalized version while leaving the orthogonal component untouched. The result, the paper reports, is better text alignment and more faithful stylization with only a small, acceptable drop in identity similarity. A sympathetic reader would care because the fix is a few lines of inference-time code added on top of existing methods, requiring no extra data, masks, or annotations.

What carries the argument

The machinery is the decomposition of the consistency guidance vector $g_{\mathrm{cons}}$ into a component parallel to the CFG text-guidance vector $g_{\mathrm{text}}$ and a component orthogonal to it, together with the per-timestep statistic $\mathrm{Consistency}_p$ (Eq. 6) that measures the parallel component's signed strength relative to text guidance. Equation (7) then re-centers and re-scales that ratio to zero mean and unit variance across spatial positions and modulates $g_{\mathrm{text}}$ by it, leaving the orthogonal component untouched. This transforms the consistency term from a fixed-weight push along the prompt direction into a normalized signal whose average opposition to the prompt is removed.

What would settle it

Run the same sampling procedure with the normalized parallel term replaced by zero, leaving only the orthogonal component; if prompt alignment stays the same or improves while identity similarity also stays the same, then the normalization step itself is not the mechanism and the gain comes from discarding the parallel signal. Alternatively, measure the parallel consistency ratio on prompts that already align well: if successful stylized generations also show large negative drift, the claimed causal role of that drift is not supported.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that decomposing the consistency guidance vector $g_{\mathrm{cons}}$ into parts parallel and orthogonal to the CFG text-guidance vector $g_{\mathrm{text}}$ reveals the cause of prompt misalignment: the parallel part, measured by $\mathrm{Consistency}_p = \mathrm{mean}_{\mathrm{channel}}(\omega_{\mathrm{cons}} g^{\parallel}_{\mathrm{cons}} / (\omega_{\mathrm{text}} g_{\mathrm{text}}))$, skews negative and grows in variance as denoising progresses, so it opposes the text direction and weakens stylization. Parallel rescaling (Eq. 7) re-centers this ratio to zero mean and unit variance over spatial locations and re-injects it through $g_{\mathrm{PR}} = g^{\perp}_{\mathrm{cons}} + (\omega_{\mathrm{text}}/\omega_{\mathrm{cons}}) \cdot [(\mathrm{Consistency}_p - \mu)/(\sigma + \epsilon)] \odot g_{\mathrm{text}}$. The paper states that this reduces interference with CFG while retaining identity information carried by the orthogonal component, and reports quantitative gains in CLIP text alignment over both plain CFG and the original consistency guidance sampler at a minor cost in DINOv2 image similarity.

Load-bearing premise

The paper assumes that the negative drift of the consistency term's component that lies along the text direction is the main cause of text misalignment, and that standardizing that component fixes it without throwing away identity information, an assumption supported only by a conceptual figure and never tested by ablating the normalization.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Applying parallel rescaling to both DreamBooth+Textual Inversion and DCO fine-tuned SDXL models raises CLIP text alignment from 0.6457 to 0.6517 and from 0.6482 to 0.6534 respectively, on the paper's reported tests.
  • Stylized prompts—pixel art, comic book, impressionist, vintage poster—are rendered with the requested style more often, while the reference object remains recognizable in the qualitative examples.
  • The method adds no training data, masks, or annotations; its only extra cost over DCO's consistency guidance is computing one ratio and a normalization per sampling step.
  • Because the orthogonal component carries the identity information, the same recipe could in principle be adapted to a user-controlled strength, trading a bit more alignment for a bit more identity fidelity.
  • The reported image-similarity drops (0.6833 to 0.6776 under DreamBooth+TI, 0.6790 to 0.6765 under DCO) indicate a consistent but small identity cost, which the paper frames as an acceptable trade-off.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The paper never ablates the normalization itself, so the measured gain could come from the re-centering alone, the re-scaling alone, or simply from removing the mean drift rather than from the full standardization; a test that replaces the parallel term with zero would separate these.
  • Because $\mathrm{Consistency}_p$ is computed per spatial location, the same recipe could be applied selectively at only the timesteps where the drift is large, or only within cross-attention layers, which the authors leave for future work.
  • The identity loss, though small, suggests the normalization is implicitly trading a little fidelity for alignment; exposing the target variance of the rescaled component as a user slider would make that trade explicit and tunable.
  • The reported gains are averages over 80 samples per method; a per-prompt breakdown would show whether the improvement is concentrated in heavily stylized prompts or holds across all prompt types, which the paper does not provide.
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 / 4 minor

Summary. The paper proposes an inference-time modification of DCO's consistency guidance for personalized text-to-image diffusion. It decomposes the consistency vector g_cons into components parallel and orthogonal to the CFG text guidance g_text (Eq. 5), defines a per-location statistic Consistency_p as the channel-averaged ratio of the scaled parallel term to the scaled text term (Eq. 6), and replaces the parallel component by a standardized version so that the final update uses gPR = g_perp + (omega_text/omega_cons) * z * g_text (Eq. 7). Algorithm 1 inserts this into the denoising loop. Experiments on SDXL with DreamBooth+TI and DCO finetuning compare CFG, Consistency Guidance, and the proposed method over 20 prompts and 4 images per prompt (80 samples per method), reporting mean CLIP text alignment and DINO image similarity (Table 1) plus qualitative comparisons. The paper also includes a limitation paragraph in Section 6.

Significance. If validated, the method would be a lightweight, training-free way to improve prompt adherence of consistency-guided personalized diffusion, and the decomposition of consistency guidance into parallel and orthogonal components is a clear conceptual contribution. The paper's strengths are its simplicity and the explicit algorithmic statement. However, the evidence currently falls short of establishing the proposed mechanism: the key normalization is not ablated, the quantitative gains are within plausible run-to-run noise, and the motivating distribution-shift plot is unquantified. The significance is therefore conditional on the additional experiments requested below.

major comments (4)
  1. [§4.3, Eq. (7)] The central claim that re-centering and re-scaling the parallel component, rather than simply reducing or removing it, drives the improvement is not tested. As written, the final update is equivalent to omega_text * (1+z) * g_text + omega_cons * g_perp, where z is the standardized Consistency_p; this is a per-location modulation of the text guidance. Without ablations that replace z by (a) zero (so gPR = g_perp), (b) the raw unstandardized Consistency_p, or (c) a constant, the current experiments cannot attribute the Table 1 gains to the re-centering/re-scaling operation. Please add these ablations and also report the measured mean and variance of Consistency_p before and after the transform.
  2. [§5.3, Table 1] The quantitative support is statistically thin. Table 1 reports only means over 80 samples per method, with no confidence intervals, standard deviations, significance tests, or per-prompt breakdowns; the reported CLIP gains are 0.0060 (DB+TI) and 0.0052 (DCO), which are within the typical run-to-run variability of CLIP-based text-alignment evaluations. The image-similarity score simultaneously decreases relative to Consistency Guidance (from 0.6833 to 0.6776 for DB+TI and from 0.6790 to 0.6765 for DCO), so the claim of effectively retaining subject identity is not established. Please provide the full table, per-prompt results, and a statistical comparison with error bars.
  3. [§4.2, Fig. 1] The motivation relies on an observed distribution shift of Consistency_p, but Figure 1 has no axis labels, units, scale, or information about which model, prompts, timesteps, and number of samples it is based on. No quantitative value of the drift is reported. As written, the figure cannot substantiate the causal statement that the parallel consistency component drifts negatively and thereby counteracts text guidance. Please describe the measurement protocol and report the actual distributions, e.g., mean and variance as a function of timestep.
  4. [§4.3, Eq. (7)] Because z is standardized to unit variance, the multiplier (1+z) on the text guidance is negative whenever z < -1; the paper does not discuss this sign reversal, which would actively oppose the prompt at those spatial locations. The method may still improve average alignment, but the mechanism and its possible artifacts need to be analyzed or constrained. Please either discuss this behavior explicitly or add an experiment measuring the fraction of locations where 1+z < 0 during sampling.
minor comments (4)
  1. [§4.2, Eq. (6)] Equation (6) uses division of vectors without specifying elementwise division; please clarify the notation and define 'mean_channel' precisely.
  2. [§4.1, Algorithm 1] Algorithm 1 does not give the projection formula used to compute g_parallel_cons; specify, e.g., g_parallel = ((g_cons dot g_text) / ||g_text||^2) * g_text, and state whether the projection is onto the unit direction or the raw vector.
  3. [Throughout] Typographical and consistency issues: 'by :' before Eq. (7); inconsistent use of 'Consistencyp' vs 'Consistency_p'; 'barbel' in Appendix Table 2 should be 'barbell'; Fig. 3/Fig. 4 references use singular/plural inconsistently; and Table 1 is labeled 'Partial Quantitative Results' but no full version is provided outside the appendix.
  4. [§6] The Section 6 limitation paragraph is vague ('may not fully resolve'); it should also mention the sign-flip behavior in Eq. (7) and the lack of a direct interference measurement.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the rescaling is a stated normalization of the paper's own Consistency_p statistic, not a fitted parameter, and the claimed gains are measured against external CLIP/DINO benchmarks.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is self-contained in the sense required for a circularity finding. Equation (6) defines Consistency_p as a per-location ratio between the parallel consistency component and text guidance, and Equation (7) standardizes that ratio by subtracting the mean and dividing by the standard deviation. This is an explicit algorithmic transformation, not a parameter fitted to the evaluation metrics. The central claim of improved prompt alignment is tested on held-out prompts and evaluated with CLIP and DINOv2 scores, which are external benchmarks not used to construct the transform. The motivation that the parallel component 'drifts negatively' (Section 4.2, Fig. 1) is a stated observation, though the figure is underspecified; this is an evidence-quality concern, not circularity. No load-bearing self-citations exist: DCO [13], CFG [8], and other baselines are independent external works. The paper's own limitation paragraph concedes that the normalization 'may not fully resolve all conflicts,' which is a measured admission of scope, not a hidden admission of circularity. The skeptical concern that the causal mechanism is untested because no ablation isolates the re-centering/re-scaling is valid as a completeness critique, but an untested mechanism is not a reduction of the result to its inputs. Therefore no circular step can be exhibited, and the appropriate score is 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 3 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The method relies on two hand-picked guidance weights and a small solver epsilon, all standard in the literature. The main assumptions are about the geometry of the latent space and the causal role of the parallel component, both untested.

free parameters (3)
  • omega_text = 7.5
    CFG guidance scale, chosen by hand, standard in prior work; affects how strongly the parallel re-scaling modifies the signal.
  • omega_cons = 3.0
    Consistency guidance weight, chosen by hand; determines the scale of the parallel component being re-scaled.
  • epsilon = 3e-8
    Small constant to avoid division by zero in Eq. 7.
assumptions (3)
  • domain assumption Latent space vector operations (projection, addition, scaling) preserve the semantic meaning of guidance
    The method decomposes epsilon predictions as vectors and assumes Euclidean geometry in the latent space, Section 4.1.
  • ad hoc to paper The mean and standard deviation over spatial locations of Consistency_p capture the relevant statistics
    The normalization in Eq. 7 uses these statistics; no justification that zero mean and unit variance is the correct target, Section 4.3.
  • ad hoc to paper The parallel component of consistency guidance is the main source of interference with text guidance
    Motivation in Section 4.2 is qualitative and based on a conceptual figure, not measured.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Parallel Rescaling: Rebalancing Consistency Guidance for Personalized Diffusion Models." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/G4KAAP64

@misc{pith2026250600607,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Parallel Rescaling: Rebalancing Consistency Guidance for Personalized Diffusion Models},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/G4KAAP64}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.00607}
}
read the original abstract

Personalizing diffusion models to specific users or concepts remains challenging, particularly when only a few reference images are available. Existing methods such as DreamBooth and Textual Inversion often overfit to limited data, causing misalignment between generated images and text prompts when attempting to balance identity fidelity with prompt adherence. While Direct Consistency Optimization (DCO) with its consistency-guided sampling partially alleviates this issue, it still struggles with complex or stylized prompts. In this paper, we propose a parallel rescaling technique for personalized diffusion models. Our approach explicitly decomposes the consistency guidance signal into parallel and orthogonal components relative to classifier free guidance (CFG). By rescaling the parallel component, we minimize disruptive interference with CFG while preserving the subject's identity. Unlike prior personalization methods, our technique does not require additional training data or expensive annotations. Extensive experiments show improved prompt alignment and visual fidelity compared to baseline methods, even on challenging stylized prompts. These findings highlight the potential of parallel rescaled guidance to yield more stable and accurate personalization for diverse user inputs.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2506.00607 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Distribution shift of Consistencyp as timesteps de￾crease. The parallel gcons component drifts negatively, counter￾acting the text guidance for stylized prompts. 4.1. Decomposition and Motivation Let gcons be the consistency guidance vector that preserves a subject’s features during sampling. We split it into parallel and orthogonal parts with respect to the text guidance gtext per location (w, h): gcons = g ∥ cons … view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Qualitative results: Examples show our method preserving subject identity and stylization across a variety of creative prompts. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Additional qualitative comparison under stylized prompts. From left to right: Reference images, CFG, Consistency Guidance, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_3.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

44 extracted references · 35 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    A neural space-time representation for text- to-image personalization.ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG), 42(6):1–10, 2023

    Yuval Alaluf, Elad Richardson, Gal Metzer, and Daniel Cohen-Or. A neural space-time representation for text- to-image personalization.ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG), 42(6):1–10, 2023. 2

    work page 2023

  2. [2]

    Palp: prompt aligned personalization of text-to- image models

    Moab Arar, Andrey V oynov, Amir Hertz, Omri Avrahami, Shlomi Fruchter, Yael Pritch, Daniel Cohen-Or, and Ariel Shamir. Palp: prompt aligned personalization of text-to- image models. InSIGGRAPH Asia 2024 Conference Papers, pages 1–11, 2024. 2

    work page 2024

  3. [3]

    Break-a-scene: Extracting multi- ple concepts from a single image

    Omri Avrahami, Kfir Aberman, Ohad Fried, Daniel Cohen- Or, and Dani Lischinski. Break-a-scene: Extracting multi- ple concepts from a single image. InSIGGRAPH Asia 2023 Conference Papers, pages 1–12, 2023. 1, 2

    work page 2023

  4. [4]

    Improving image generation with better captions.Computer Science

    James Betker, Gabriel Goh, Li Jing, Tim Brooks, Jianfeng Wang, Linjie Li, Long Ouyang, Juntang Zhuang, Joyce Lee, Yufei Guo, et al. Improving image generation with better captions.Computer Science. https://cdn. openai. com/papers/dall-e-3. pdf, 2(3):8, 2023. 2

    2023

  5. [5]

    Attend-and-excite: Attention-based se- mantic guidance for text-to-image diffusion models.ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG), 42(4):1–10, 2023

    Hila Chefer, Yuval Alaluf, Yael Vinker, Lior Wolf, and Daniel Cohen-Or. Attend-and-excite: Attention-based se- mantic guidance for text-to-image diffusion models.ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG), 42(4):1–10, 2023. 2

    2023

  6. [6]

    Scaling recti- fied flow transformers for high-resolution image synthesis

    Patrick Esser, Sumith Kulal, Andreas Blattmann, Rahim Entezari, Jonas M ¨uller, Harry Saini, Yam Levi, Dominik Lorenz, Axel Sauer, Frederic Boesel, et al. Scaling recti- fied flow transformers for high-resolution image synthesis. InForty-first international conference on machine learning,

  7. [7]

    An image is worth one word: Personalizing text-to-image generation using textual inversion

    Rinon Gal, Yuval Alaluf, Yuval Atzmon, Or Patashnik, Amit Haim Bermano, Gal Chechik, and Daniel Cohen-or. An image is worth one word: Personalizing text-to-image generation using textual inversion. InICLR, 2022. 1, 2

    work page 2022

  8. [8]

    Classifier-free diffusion guidance

    Jonathan Ho and Tim Salimans. Classifier-free diffusion guidance. InNeurIPS 2021 Workshop on Deep Generative Models and Downstream Applications, 2021. 1, 2

    work page 2021

Show all 44 references
  1. [9]

    Identity decoupling for multi-subject personaliza- tion of text-to-image models

    Sangwon Jang, Jaehyeong Jo, Kimin Lee, and Sung Ju Hwang. Identity decoupling for multi-subject personaliza- tion of text-to-image models. InThe Thirty-eighth An- nual Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems,

  2. [10]

    Guiding a diffu- sion model with a bad version of itself.Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 37:52996–53021, 2024

    Tero Karras, Miika Aittala, Tuomas Kynk ¨a¨anniemi, Jaakko Lehtinen, Timo Aila, and Samuli Laine. Guiding a diffu- sion model with a bad version of itself.Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 37:52996–53021, 2024. 2

    2024

  3. [11]

    Multi-concept customization of text-to-image diffusion

    Nupur Kumari, Bingliang Zhang, Richard Zhang, Eli Shechtman, and Jun-Yan Zhu. Multi-concept customization of text-to-image diffusion. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 1931–1941, 2023. 2

    1931

  4. [12]

    Applying guidance in a limited interval improves sample and distribution quality in diffusion models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.07724, 2024

    Tuomas Kynk ¨a¨anniemi, Miika Aittala, Tero Karras, Samuli Laine, Timo Aila, and Jaakko Lehtinen. Applying guidance in a limited interval improves sample and distribution quality in diffusion models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.07724, 2024. 2

    2024 arXiv

  5. [13]

    Direct consistency optimization for compositional text- to-image personalization.NeurIPS, 2024

    Kyungmin Lee, Sangkyung Kwak, Kihyuk Sohn, and Jinwoo Shin. Direct consistency optimization for compositional text- to-image personalization.NeurIPS, 2024. 1, 2, 3

    2024

  6. [14]

    Subject-diffusion: Open domain personalized text-to-image generation without test-time fine- tuning.Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 36, 2023

    Yichen Ma, Chaojie Ma, Yichi Wang, Xudong Yu, Wei Liu, Hao Zhou, Xinrong Tian, Shanghang Chen, Xiaolan Li, Hongjun Fang, et al. Subject-diffusion: Open domain personalized text-to-image generation without test-time fine- tuning.Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems...

    2023

  7. [15]

    Dreammatcher: Appearance matching self-attention for semantically-consistent text-to- image personalization

    Jisu Nam, Heesu Kim, DongJae Lee, Siyoon Jin, Seungry- ong Kim, and Seunggyu Chang. Dreammatcher: Appearance matching self-attention for semantically-consistent text-to- image personalization. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition,...

    2024

  8. [16]

    Dinov2: Learning robust visual features without supervision

    Maxime Oquab, Timoth ´ee Darcet, Th ´eo Moutakanni, Huy V o, Marc Szafraniec, Vasil Khalidov, Pierre Fernandez, Daniel Haziza, Francisco Massa, Alaaeldin El-Nouby, et al. Dinov2: Learning robust visual features without supervision. arXiv preprint arXiv:2304.07193, 2023. 4

    2023 arXiv

  9. [17]

    Attndream- booth: Towards text-aligned personalized text-to-image gen- eration

    Lianyu Pang, Jian Yin, Baoquan Zhao, et al. Attndream- booth: Towards text-aligned personalized text-to-image gen- eration. InProceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), 2024. 1

    2024

  10. [18]

    Sdxl: Im- proving latent diffusion models for high-resolution image synthesis

    Dustin Podell, Zion English, Kyle Lacey, et al. Sdxl: Im- proving latent diffusion models for high-resolution image synthesis. InICLR, 2024. 1, 2, 3

    2024

  11. [19]

    Controlling text-to-image diffusion by orthogo- nal finetuning.Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 36:79320–79362, 2023

    Zeju Qiu, Weiyang Liu, Haiwen Feng, Yuxuan Xue, Yao Feng, Zhen Liu, Dan Zhang, Adrian Weller, and Bernhard Sch¨olkopf. Controlling text-to-image diffusion by orthogo- nal finetuning.Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 36:79320–79362, 2023. 2

    2023

  12. [20]

    Learning transferable visual models from natural language supervi- sion

    Alec Radford, Jong Wook Kim, Chris Hallacy, Aditya Ramesh, Gabriel Goh, Sandhini Agarwal, Girish Sastry, Amanda Askell, Pamela Mishkin, Jack Clark, et al. Learning transferable visual models from natural language supervi- sion. InInternational conference on machine learning, p...

    2021

  13. [21]

    Dreambooth: Fine tuning text-to-image diffusion models for subject-driven generation

    Nataniel Ruiz, Yuanzhen Li, Varun Jampani, Yael Pritch, Michael Rubinstein, and Kfir Aberman. Dreambooth: Fine tuning text-to-image diffusion models for subject-driven generation. InCVPR, pages 22500–22510, 2023. 1, 2, 3

    2023

  14. [22]

    p+: Extended textual conditioning in text-to- image generation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.09522, 2023

    Andrey V oynov, Qinghao Chu, Daniel Cohen-Or, and Kfir Aberman. p+: Extended textual conditioning in text-to- image generation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.09522, 2023. 2

    2023 arXiv

  15. [23]

    Elite: Encoding visual concepts into textual embeddings for customized text-to-image generation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2302.13848, 2023

    Yuxin Wei, Hanting Shi, Xingqian Xie, Kai Zhang, Yu Qiao, and Li Yuan. Elite: Encoding visual concepts into textual embeddings for customized text-to-image generation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2302.13848, 2023. 2

    2023 arXiv

  16. [24]

    Attention calibration for disentangled text-to-image person- alization

    Yanbing Zhang, Mengping Yang, Qin Zhou, and Zhe Wang. Attention calibration for disentangled text-to-image person- alization. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 4764– 4774, 2024. 1 Parallel Rescaling: Rebalancing Consiste...

    2024

  17. [25]

    A [V] is building a sandcastle on a sunny beach while tiny crabs scuttle around and seagulls fly overhead

  18. [26]

    A [V] is lifting a barbel at the gym

  19. [27]

    A [V] wearing a police cap, resting on the police car

  20. [28]

    A photo of [V] made out of lego building blocks

  21. [29]

    A [V] surfing giant waves at sunset

  22. [30]

    A [V] dressed as a cowboy, riding a white fluffy donkey in the desert

  23. [31]

    A [V] as a Jedi casting a long shadow in a sunlit, empty desert

  24. [32]

    A [V] as navy officer, saluting at a naval parade with a crowd cheering, in a pastel drawing style

  25. [33]

    A [V] sprinting on a running track, painted in impressionist style

  26. [34]

    A [V] collecting nuts in an autumn forest, illustrated in art nouveau style

  27. [35]

    A painting of a [V] floating on the lake under the full moon’s glow in the style of Monet

  28. [36]

    A [V] in a dramatic action scene in retro comic book

  29. [37]

    A [V] on an epic quest in pixel art style

  30. [38]

    [V], crashed down in distance Anime drawing, on mars

  31. [39]

    [V] riding a bicycle through a city park, urban sketch style

  32. [40]

    An illustration of [V], playing fetch with its owner in a serene meadow at dawn, in vintage poster style

  33. [41]

    A product overview page of [V] in the magazine, illustrated in a infographic style

  34. [42]

    A surreal painting of [V] in Magritte style

  35. [43]

    A [V] playing guitar in pop art style

  36. [44]

    An oil painting of a [V] dressed as a musketeer in an old French town. Reference CFG Consistency Guidance Ours Reference CFG Consistency Guidance Ours A sneaker sprinting on a running track, painted in impressionist style A alarm clock sitting on a nightstand in a cozy bedroom...

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.