Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 2 cited by

Dimension-Reduction Attack! Video Generative Models are Experts on Controllable Image Synthesis

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 A video generative model can be repurposed for controllable image generation and beats image-native methods when condition and target images are joined by a synthetic mixup shot transition.

desk verdict A useful adaptation recipe for turning video models into controllable image generators, but the headline comparison to image-based methods is not yet backed by controlled evaluation. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.23325 v1 pith:LDP3U527 submitted 2025-05-29 cs.CV

Hengyuan Cao , Yutong Feng , Biao Gong , Yijing Tian , Yunhong Lu , Chuang Liu , Bin Wang This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.CV
keywords videogenerativemodelscontrollableimagegenerationdimension-reductiontransfersubject-drivenspatially-alignedmixupshottransitionattentionmaskingframeskippositionembedding
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 fully trained video generative model — one that learned continuous, high-dimensional spatiotemporal structure — can be compressed down to image-level tasks and that it solves controllable image generation better than models trained on images alone. The authors' DRA-Ctrl fine-tunes HunyuanVideo-I2V by treating the condition image and target image as the two endpoints of a synthetic shot transition, with intermediate frames formed by a smooth mixup, so the model never has to bridge a discrete jump. Three further components carry the adaptation: a Frame Skip Position Embedding that lets a few latent frames stand in for a long transition, an attention mask that keeps condition and target prompts from blurring into each other, and a loss weighted by each frame's target-image content. On DreamBench and on the COCO2017 validation set, the repurposed video model reports the best subject-consistency and controllability numbers, though the paper concedes that some general-quality metrics (FID, SSIM) lag the strongest image-specific methods. If the claim holds, resource-intensive video generators become a general visual prior that can be pulled back down to still-image work.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the synthetic shot-transition sequence: the condition image $F_{\alpha=0}$ and target image $F_{\alpha=1}$ are the endpoints, and $K$ intermediate frames $F_\alpha$ are produced by a weighted mixup $F_\alpha = ((1-\beta) F^\gamma_{\alpha=0} + \beta F^\gamma_{\alpha=1})^{1/\gamma}$ with $\beta = \alpha^2(3-2\alpha)$ and $\gamma = 2.2$, so the sequence reads as a smooth fade between the two stills. This turns an abrupt discrete image-pair change into the kind of continuous motion the video model already knows, and a reweighted flow-matching loss doubles down on the target frame by weighting each latent frame by its proportion of target-image content. Frame Skip Position Embedding rescales the temporal coordinate of the model's rotary position embedding by a skip interval $\delta = 12$, letting four latent frames emulate 145 pixel-space frames and cutting the cost of long transitions. An attention mask blocks similarity scores between incompatible token groups (for instance, condition-image tokens against target prompts) and, at inference, adds 0.6 times the mean absolute attention weight to the target-image-versus-target-prompt region, pushing the output to follow the user's prompt rather than the condition caption.

What would settle it

Re-run the Table 1 and Table 2 baselines under DRA-Ctrl's exact protocol — the same prompt selection, the same condition-image preprocessing including the gray-level normalization of Appendix C.1 applied to every method, and the same metric implementations — and observe whether the reported margins over ControlNet, OminiControl, EasyControl, UniReal, and UNO survive; if they shrink to noise or reverse, the claim that repurposed video models outperform image-native models fails.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery the authors argue for is that high-dimensional video priors dominate image-native training when the adaptation respects the video model's own dynamics. Concretely, DRA-Ctrl outperforms image-based controllable-generation baselines across two task families: on the COCO2017 spatially aligned benchmarks it posts the best controllability for canny-to-image (F1 0.42), depth-to-image (MSE 76), deblurring (MSE 11), and inpainting (MSE 16), and on DreamBench it reaches the highest VL Score (2.56), DINO (0.722), and CLIP-I (0.825) among all compared methods. The authors' explanation is that temporal full-attention, long-range context, and consistent subject tracking learned on video transfer directly to what controllable image generation needs, namely holding a subject's identity fixed while letting pose, background, and state change. They name this the 'Dimension-Reduction Attack': a model trained in a higher-dimensional space, when adapted downward, outperforms models trained directly in the target space. The paper also states a limitation: the video backbone, not optimized for stills, yields slightly inferior FID and SSIM on parts of the spatial tasks and marginally lower CLIP-T than some competitors.

Load-bearing premise

The 'consistently outperforming' claim assumes the published baseline numbers were measured under the same protocol as DRA-Ctrl — identical prompts, identical condition-image preprocessing, identical metric definitions — but the paper applies its gray-level condition normalization (Appendix C.1) only to its own inputs and never states that ControlNet, OminiControl, EasyControl, UniReal, or UNO were re-run under that protocol.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Video generative models can serve as a shared backbone for both image and video generation, so subject-driven, spatially conditioned, and editing tasks no longer need separate image-native models.
  • The synthetic shot-transition construction makes long-range temporal context available to still-image tasks at low cost, since a few latent frames with skipped position embeddings carry the dynamics of a much longer transition.
  • A single fine-tuned video model can cover many condition types — edges, depth, masks, blur, style — pointing toward one controllable-generation system where today there are many task-specific adapters.
  • Keeping condition and target prompts separate in attention lets the same architecture handle multi-prompt and multi-subject requests in one pass, which the paper observes emerging in its own outputs.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the reported margins hinge on the one-sided color normalization, then the honest takeaway may be that condition-image preprocessing matters as much as architecture; a protocol-fair re-run would decide which reading of the numbers is correct.
  • The dimension-reduction framing suggests a testable scaling law: if video priors genuinely dominate image priors, the gap over image-native methods should widen as the base video model's scale and training data grow — an ablation the paper does not run.
  • The mixup shot-transition idea is reusable beyond this paper: the same fade-bridging construction could apply to animation in-betweening, video-frame editing, or multi-image storytelling.
  • Training an image-native model on the same interpolated transition sequences would isolate whether the advantage comes from the video training domain itself or simply from a larger, full-attention backbone trained on richer data.
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 DRA-Ctrl, a method that adapts the HunyuanVideo-I2V video generation model to controllable image generation tasks. To bridge the gap between smooth video transitions and discrete image pairs, it introduces a mixup-based shot transition strategy, a Frame-Skip Position Embedding (FSPE), an attention masking mechanism, and loss reweighting. The authors evaluate on subject-driven generation, spatially aligned tasks (canny, depth, deblurring, colorization, in/out-painting), and style transfer, and claim that repurposed video models outperform image-generation baselines. The central claim is that high-dimensional video priors can be effectively compressed and transferred to lower-dimensional image synthesis tasks.

Significance. If the comparative claims were rigorously supported, the paper would provide a useful demonstration of reusing large-scale video generators for image-level control, with potential implications for unified generative models across visual modalities. The proposed mixup transition and FSPE are interesting technical ideas, and the qualitative results are suggestive. However, the current evidence is not yet sufficient to establish the headline claim of consistent superiority over image-based methods, because the evaluations are not shown to be apples-to-apples and the newly proposed VL score is not validated. The paper's significance therefore depends on the outcome of a revised, more rigorous evaluation.

major comments (4)
  1. [§4.2 / Appendix C.1 / Table 1] The comparison in Table 1 is not shown to be apples-to-apples: the paper does not state that ControlNet, OminiControl, EasyControl, or Uni-ControlNet were re-run under DRA-Ctrl's evaluation protocol, and Appendix C.1 describes a condition-color normalization applied only to DRA-Ctrl's inputs. Because this normalization changes the condition maps themselves (black edges, depth, or masks become gray), the reported controllability margins may reflect a different task rather than a superior model. Please either re-run baselines under the same preprocessing and prompts, or provide explicit evidence that the published baseline numbers are directly comparable.
  2. [Table 2 vs. Table 3] DRA-Ctrl's DreamBench numbers are internally inconsistent: Table 2 reports VL Score 2.56, DINO 0.722, CLIP-I 0.825, and CLIP-T 0.302, while Table 3 reports VL 2.44, DINO 0.715, CLIP-I 0.821, and CLIP-T 0.298 for the same method. The manuscript gives no explanation for these differences, which are large relative to the margins over UNO and OminiControl in Table 2. Please clarify which configuration each table reports and how the final numbers were obtained.
  3. [§4.1 / Appendix B / Figure 10] The newly proposed VL score is used as a headline metric for ranking DRA-Ctrl above baselines, but it is neither human-validated nor described with enough detail to assess its reliability. Moreover, the prompt-adherence scoring criteria in Figure 10 appear to be copied from the subject-consistency criteria, as both refer to 'the generated image's subject' and 'the reference,' which calls into question what the prompt-adherence component actually measures. Please add a human evaluation or a correlation study against human judgments, and correct the prompt construction.
  4. [Abstract / §5 Limitations] The abstract and Section 5 claim that repurposed video models 'outperform those trained directly on images,' but the Limitations section concedes that FID/SSIM are often worse than image-specific approaches, and Table 2 shows DRA-Ctrl's CLIP-T is lower than several baselines. The blanket 'consistently outperforming' language is not supported by the evidence. Please either qualify the claim to specific metrics and tasks, or provide additional quality-metric results that justify the stronger statement.
minor comments (4)
  1. [§2] The word 'non-trival' should be 'non-trivial.'
  2. [§4.5] The phrase 'Quantitative results 3' should be 'Quantitative results in Table 3.'
  3. [Appendix C.1] Section C.1 appears twice with identical text, and Figure 10 is referenced twice with the same number; please renumber the appendix sections and figures.
  4. [Eq. (2)] The indexing of Encode(·, k) is unclear: for K transition frames plus the target frame, the text says it returns the (k+2)-th latent representation, but the range k=0,...,K needs a worked example to verify that the condition, transition, and target latents are correctly aligned.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the method's core components are architectural and empirically benchmarked, and reported internal inconsistencies are validity concerns rather than circular reasoning.

full rationale

The central derivation is empirical: DRA-Ctrl is fine-tuned from HunyuanVideo-I2V on external datasets (Subjects200K, Text-to-Image-2M) and evaluated on external benchmarks (DreamBench, COCO2017) against published baselines. The method equations do not assume the conclusion. In the mixup transition loss (Eq. 2), the target image appears as training supervision, but inference concatenates only the condition image with Gaussian noise and decodes the last denoised frame; the target is not an input at test time. FSPE and attention masking are architectural modifications, not parameters fitted to the benchmark outcomes. The paper's central claim is therefore not circular in the formal sense. Two concerns should be weighed under correctness rather than circularity: the new VL Score is author-defined and lacks human validation, and the comparison with baselines may not be protocol-matched because Appendix C.1 applies a color normalization only to DRA-Ctrl inputs. Additionally, the same method's numbers differ between Table 2 (VL 2.56, DINO 0.722, CLIP-I 0.825, CLIP-T 0.302) and Table 3 (VL 2.44, DINO 0.715, CLIP-I 0.821, CLIP-T 0.298) without explanation, and the Limitations section concedes that FID/SSIM are often worse than image-specific approaches. These issues affect the trustworthiness and precision of the superiority claim, but they do not constitute a derivation that reduces to its own inputs. No load-bearing self-citation or uniqueness argument is invoked: the only potentially overlapping citations (e.g., Wan [45]) are external model sources, not used to forbid alternatives or to justify the core result.

Assumptions & free parameters 7 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 1 invented entities

The central empirical claim depends on the pretrained video model, on mixup interpolation matching learned video transitions, on comparable baselines, and on the validity of the authors' VL metric. The hyperparameters are fixed by hand or by small ablations, and the paper ships no code or data, so all of these assumptions remain unverified outside the paper.

free parameters (7)
  • mixup gamma = 2.2
    Set in Section 3.2 to smooth interpolations; no ablation or theoretical justification is given.
  • FSPE skip interval delta = 12
    Fixed in Appendix A to emulate long temporal spans; no sensitivity analysis is reported.
  • attention offset omega = 0.6
    Used in Section 3.4 and Equation 4 to amplify target prompt attention; no ablation is reported.
  • LoRA rank = 16
    Fixed for all tasks in Appendix A; not varied.
  • transition frame count = 8 in ablations; 4 latent frames in efficiency analysis
    Tables 5 and 7 use different frame-count terminology and values; the chosen count comes from an ablation without error bars.
  • smoothstep loss reweighting = w(k) = (smoothstep((4k+i)/(4K+1)))^2
    Hand-designed weighting in Equation 2 to emphasize target content; no derivation from first principles.
  • condition color normalization threshold = remap black (0,0,0) to gray (128,128,128)
    Introduced post hoc in Appendix C.1 to avoid dark outputs; not reported for baseline methods.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption HunyuanVideo-I2V has learned high-dimensional video priors that survive LoRA fine-tuning and transfer to image generation tasks.
    Central premise in Sections 1 and 3.1; supported by the reported experiments but not independently guaranteed.
  • ad hoc to paper Gamma-2.2 mixup interpolants between condition and target images approximate the natural fade-in-fade-out transitions that the I2V model learned.
    Section 3.2 asserts that certain I2V models naturally produce fade-in-fade-out transitions; no distributional or perceptual evidence links the mixup interpolants to the model's learned transition manifold.
  • domain assumption Baseline metrics from prior publications are directly comparable to DRA-Ctrl's numbers despite differences in prompts, preprocessing, and metric implementation.
    Section 4.1 defines DRA-Ctrl's evaluation, but the paper does not state whether ControlNet, OminiControl, EasyControl, UniReal, or UNO were re-evaluated under the same protocol.
  • domain assumption QWen2.5-VL-based VL scores are a valid proxy for human judgment of subject consistency and prompt adherence.
    Appendix B introduces the VL score and uses it as a headline metric, but no human correlation study is reported.
  • standard math The flow matching objective and the 3D VAE of HunyuanVideo-I2V behave as described in Equation 1.
    Section 3.1 relies on the standard flow-matching loss and the pretrained VAE; these are standard background results in the field.
invented entities (1)
  • VL score (QWen2.5-VL-based evaluation metric)
    purpose: Scores subject consistency and prompt adherence on DreamBench and is used to rank DRA-Ctrl first in Table 2.
    The metric is proposed by the authors, the scoring prompts are designed by them, and no calibration against human ratings or established benchmarks is provided, so it has no independent falsifiable handle outside this paper.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Dimension-Reduction Attack! Video Generative Models are Experts on Controllable Image Synthesis." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/LDP3U527

@misc{pith2026250523325,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Dimension-Reduction Attack! Video Generative Models are Experts on Controllable Image Synthesis},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/LDP3U527}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.23325}
}
read the original abstract

Video generative models can be regarded as world simulators due to their ability to capture dynamic, continuous changes inherent in real-world environments. These models integrate high-dimensional information across visual, temporal, spatial, and causal dimensions, enabling predictions of subjects in various status. A natural and valuable research direction is to explore whether a fully trained video generative model in high-dimensional space can effectively support lower-dimensional tasks such as controllable image generation. In this work, we propose a paradigm for video-to-image knowledge compression and task adaptation, termed \textit{Dimension-Reduction Attack} (\texttt{DRA-Ctrl}), which utilizes the strengths of video models, including long-range context modeling and flatten full-attention, to perform various generation tasks. Specially, to address the challenging gap between continuous video frames and discrete image generation, we introduce a mixup-based transition strategy that ensures smooth adaptation. Moreover, we redesign the attention structure with a tailored masking mechanism to better align text prompts with image-level control. Experiments across diverse image generation tasks, such as subject-driven and spatially conditioned generation, show that repurposed video models outperform those trained directly on images. These results highlight the untapped potential of large-scale video generators for broader visual applications. \texttt{DRA-Ctrl} provides new insights into reusing resource-intensive video models and lays foundation for future unified generative models across visual modalities. The project page is https://dra-ctrl-2025.github.io/DRA-Ctrl/.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2505.23325 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. This paper leverages high-level prior of video generative models to unify controllable image [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p001_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. The training framework of DRA-Ctrl. We propose a mixup-based transition strategy to construction shot transition videos to adapt the video model for abrupt image changes, with FSPE strategically reducing transitional frames. The loss function is adaptively reweighted according to the proportion of target image in the token sequence. Besides, to align text prompts with image-level control, we design an attention mask… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. The inference process of T2V/I2V models and their finetuned subject-driven image [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (16 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Qualitative results comparing different methods. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Qualitative results of DRA-Ctrl on style transferring [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Different mixup-based shot transition types. 4.3 Subject-driven Image Generation Results To validate the effectiveness of DRA-Ctrl for subject-driven generation, we conduct comprehensive comparisons with multiple state-of-the-art approaches. Qualitative results are pre…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Attention masking strategy in spatially-aligned tasks. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Bitmoji-style example images in our dataset. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_8.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: An example of VL Score evaluation process Figure 10: An example of VL Score evaluation process. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_10.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: More canny-to-image generation results. C.1.2 Colorization A vibrant young woman with rainbow glasses, yellow eyes, and colorful feather accessory against a bright yellow background Brown-haired girl in blue floral shirt holds camera against sunset field with colorful…
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: More colorization generation results. 17 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_12.png]
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: More deblurring generation results. C.1.4 Depth-to-image Adorable fuzzy chick in soft pink stands on green clover patch under dappled forest sunlight Blonde woman in bold red puffer jacket stands confidently in snow-laden forest, black gloves contrasting winter whites…
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: More depth-to-image generation results. 18 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_14.png]
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: More image-to-depth generation results. C.1.6 In/out-painting Young woman with long brown hair beams gently, bathed in cozy natural light against blurred home backdrop 17th-century woman in blue headscarf wears bold red sunglasses, pearl earring gleaming against dark …
Figure 16
Figure 16. Figure 16: More in/out-painting generation results. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_16.png]
Figure 17
Figure 17. Figure 17: More super-resolution generation results. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p020_17.png]
Figure 18
Figure 18. Figure 18: More subject-driven generation results on DreamBench. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p020_18.png]
Figure 19
Figure 19. Figure 19: More subject-driven generation results. Interestingly, we discover that during subject-driven image generation, DRA-Ctrl can occasionally control two subjects in the condition image simultaneously. As shown in the third row of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_19.png]
Figure 20
Figure 20. Figure 20: More style transfer generation results. D Societal Impact Our work advances controllable image generation with significant societal implications, offering both opportunities for innovation and risks requiring proactive mitigation. Below, we outline the potential posit…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

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

  1. Chamaileon: Cross-Context Binder Design with Contextualized Modeling and Mixed Sampling

    cs.LG 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.5 of 10

    I3CD plus MoPS sampling produces single binder sequences that AlphaFold-Multimer scores as compatible with multiple conformational or multi-target contexts on the CROSS benchmark.

  2. Smoothed Preference Optimization via ReNoise Inversion for Aligning Diffusion Models with Varied Human Preferences

    cs.CV 2025-06 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    SmPO-Diffusion improves diffusion-model preference alignment with reward-model soft labels and ReNoise inversion, reporting higher human-preference scores and up to 26x lower training cost than Diffusion-KTO.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

70 extracted references · 12 canonical work pages · cited by 2 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    Qwen2.5-vl technical report, 2025

    Shuai Bai, Keqin Chen, Xuejing Liu, Jialin Wang, Wenbin Ge, Sibo Song, Kai Dang, Peng Wang, Shijie Wang, Jun Tang, Humen Zhong, Yuanzhi Zhu, Mingkun Yang, Zhaohai Li, Jianqiang Wan, Pengfei Wang, Wei Ding, Zheren Fu, Yiheng Xu, Jiabo Ye, Xi Zhang, Tianbao Xie, Zesen Cheng, Hang Zhang, Zhibo Yang, Haiyang Xu, and Junyang Lin. Qwen2.5-vl technical report, 2...

    arXiv 2025

  2. [2]

    Video generation models as world simulators

    Tim Brooks, Bill Peebles, Connor Holmes, Will DePue, Yufei Guo, Li Jing, David Schnurr, Joe Taylor, Troy Luhman, Eric Luhman, et al. Video generation models as world simulators. OpenAI Blog, 1:8, 2024

    2024

  3. [3]

    Emerging properties in self-supervised vision transformers, 2021

    Mathilde Caron, Hugo Touvron, Ishan Misra, Hervé Jégou, Julien Mairal, Piotr Bojanowski, and Armand Joulin. Emerging properties in self-supervised vision transformers, 2021. URL https://arxiv.org/ abs/2104.14294

    arXiv 2021

  4. [4]

    Pre-trained image processing transformer, 2021

    Hanting Chen, Yunhe Wang, Tianyu Guo, Chang Xu, Yiping Deng, Zhenhua Liu, Siwei Ma, Chunjing Xu, Chao Xu, and Wen Gao. Pre-trained image processing transformer, 2021. URL https://arxiv.org/ abs/2012.00364

    arXiv 2021

  5. [5]

    Wenhu Chen, Hexiang Hu, Chitwan Saharia, and William W. Cohen. Re-imagen: Retrieval-augmented text-to-image generator, 2022. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2209.14491

    arXiv 2022

  6. [6]

    Anydoor: Zero-shot object-level image customization

    Xi Chen, Lianghua Huang, Yu Liu, Yujun Shen, Deli Zhao, and Hengshuang Zhao. Anydoor: Zero-shot object-level image customization. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pages 6593–6602, 2024

    work page 2024

  7. [7]

    Unireal: Universal image generation and editing via learning real-world dynamics, 2024

    Xi Chen, Zhifei Zhang, He Zhang, Yuqian Zhou, Soo Ye Kim, Qing Liu, Yijun Li, Jianming Zhang, Nanxuan Zhao, Yilin Wang, Hui Ding, Zhe Lin, and Hengshuang Zhao. Unireal: Universal image generation and editing via learning real-world dynamics, 2024. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2412. 07774

    work page 2024

  8. [8]

    Xtuner: A toolkit for efficiently fine-tuning llm.https://github.com/InternLM/ xtuner, 2023

    XTuner Contributors. Xtuner: A toolkit for efficiently fine-tuning llm.https://github.com/InternLM/ xtuner, 2023

    2023

Show all 70 references
  1. [9]

    Scaling rectified flow transformers for high-resolution image synthesis

    Patrick Esser, Sumith Kulal, Andreas Blattmann, Rahim Entezari, Jonas Müller, Harry Saini, Yam Levi, Dominik Lorenz, Axel Sauer, Frederic Boesel, et al. Scaling rectified flow transformers for high-resolution image synthesis. In Forty-first international conference on machine ...

    2024

  2. [10]

    Ranni: Taming text-to-image diffusion for accurate instruction following

    Yutong Feng, Biao Gong, Di Chen, Yujun Shen, Yu Liu, and Jingren Zhou. Ranni: Taming text-to-image diffusion for accurate instruction following. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 4744–4753, 2024

    2024

  3. [11]

    Bermano, Gal Chechik, and Daniel Cohen-Or

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

  4. [12]

    Ace: All-round creator and editor following instructions via diffusion transformer, 2024

    Zhen Han, Zeyinzi Jiang, Yulin Pan, Jingfeng Zhang, Chaojie Mao, Chenwei Xie, Yu Liu, and Jingren Zhou. Ace: All-round creator and editor following instructions via diffusion transformer, 2024. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2410.00086

    2024 arXiv

  5. [13]

    Gans trained by a two time-scale update rule converge to a local nash equilibrium, 2018

    Martin Heusel, Hubert Ramsauer, Thomas Unterthiner, Bernhard Nessler, and Sepp Hochreiter. Gans trained by a two time-scale update rule converge to a local nash equilibrium, 2018. URL https://arxiv. org/abs/1706.08500

    2018 arXiv

  6. [14]

    Hu, Yelong Shen, Phillip Wallis, Zeyuan Allen-Zhu, Yuanzhi Li, Shean Wang, Lu Wang, and Weizhu Chen

    Edward J. Hu, Yelong Shen, Phillip Wallis, Zeyuan Allen-Zhu, Yuanzhi Li, Shean Wang, Lu Wang, and Weizhu Chen. Lora: Low-rank adaptation of large language models, 2021. URL https://arxiv.org/ abs/2106.09685

    2021 arXiv

  7. [15]

    Animate anyone: Consistent and controllable image-to-video synthesis for character animation, 2024

    Li Hu, Xin Gao, Peng Zhang, Ke Sun, Bang Zhang, and Liefeng Bo. Animate anyone: Consistent and controllable image-to-video synthesis for character animation, 2024. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/ 2311.17117

    2024 arXiv

  8. [16]

    Dreamtuner: Single image is enough for subject-driven generation, 2023

    Miao Hua, Jiawei Liu, Fei Ding, Wei Liu, Jie Wu, and Qian He. Dreamtuner: Single image is enough for subject-driven generation, 2023. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2312.13691

    2023 arXiv

  9. [17]

    In-context lora for diffusion transformers, 2024

    Lianghua Huang, Wei Wang, Zhi-Fan Wu, Yupeng Shi, Huanzhang Dou, Chen Liang, Yutong Feng, Yu Liu, and Jingren Zhou. In-context lora for diffusion transformers, 2024. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/ 2410.23775

    2024 arXiv

  10. [18]

    Flexip: Dynamic control of preservation and personality for customized image generation, 2025

    Linyan Huang, Haonan Lin, Yanning Zhou, and Kaiwen Xiao. Flexip: Dynamic control of preservation and personality for customized image generation, 2025. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2504.07405

    2025 arXiv

  11. [19]

    Phillip Isola, Jun-Yan Zhu, Tinghui Zhou, and Alexei A. Efros. Image-to-image translation with conditional adversarial networks, 2018. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/1611.07004

    2018 arXiv

  12. [20]

    Hunyuanvideo: A systematic framework for large video generative models,

    Weijie Kong, Qi Tian, Zijian Zhang, Rox Min, Zuozhuo Dai, Jin Zhou, Jiangfeng Xiong, Xin Li, Bo Wu, Jianwei Zhang, Kathrina Wu, Qin Lin, Junkun Yuan, Yanxin Long, Aladdin Wang, Andong Wang, Changlin Li, Duojun Huang, Fang Yang, Hao Tan, Hongmei Wang, Jacob Song, Jiawang Bai, J...

  13. [21]

    Multi-concept customization of text-to-image diffusion, 2023

    Nupur Kumari, Bingliang Zhang, Richard Zhang, Eli Shechtman, and Jun-Yan Zhu. Multi-concept customization of text-to-image diffusion, 2023. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2212.04488

    2023 arXiv

  14. [22]

    Generating multi-image synthetic data for text-to-image customization, 2025

    Nupur Kumari, Xi Yin, Jun-Yan Zhu, Ishan Misra, and Samaneh Azadi. Generating multi-image synthetic data for text-to-image customization, 2025. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2502.01720

    2025

  15. [23]

    Black Forest Labs. Flux. https://github.com/black-forest-labs/flux , 2024

    2024

  16. [24]

    Dongxu Li, Junnan Li, and Steven C. H. Hoi. Blip-diffusion: Pre-trained subject representation for controllable text-to-image generation and editing, 2023. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2305.14720

    2023 arXiv

  17. [25]

    Visualcloze: A universal image generation framework via visual in-context learning, 2025

    Zhong-Yu Li, Ruoyi Du, Juncheng Yan, Le Zhuo, Zhen Li, Peng Gao, Zhanyu Ma, and Ming-Ming Cheng. Visualcloze: A universal image generation framework via visual in-context learning, 2025. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2504.07960

    2025

  18. [26]

    Lawrence Zitnick, and Piotr Dollár

    Tsung-Yi Lin, Michael Maire, Serge Belongie, Lubomir Bourdev, Ross Girshick, James Hays, Pietro Perona, Deva Ramanan, C. Lawrence Zitnick, and Piotr Dollár. Microsoft coco: Common objects in context, 2015. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/1405.0312

    2015 arXiv

  19. [27]

    Realgeneral: Unifying visual generation via temporal in-context learning with video models, 2025

    Yijing Lin, Mengqi Huang, Shuhan Zhuang, and Zhendong Mao. Realgeneral: Unifying visual generation via temporal in-context learning with video models, 2025. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2503.10406

    2025 arXiv

  20. [28]

    Yaron Lipman, Ricky T. Q. Chen, Heli Ben-Hamu, Maximilian Nickel, and Matt Le. Flow matching for generative modeling, 2023. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2210.02747

    2023 arXiv

  21. [29]

    Ace++: Instruction-based image creation and editing via context-aware content filling, 2025

    Chaojie Mao, Jingfeng Zhang, Yulin Pan, Zeyinzi Jiang, Zhen Han, Yu Liu, and Jingren Zhou. Ace++: Instruction-based image creation and editing via context-aware content filling, 2025. URL https: //arxiv.org/abs/2501.02487

    2025 arXiv

  22. [30]

    Sdedit: Guided image synthesis and editing with stochastic differential equations, 2022

    Chenlin Meng, Yutong He, Yang Song, Jiaming Song, Jiajun Wu, Jun-Yan Zhu, and Stefano Ermon. Sdedit: Guided image synthesis and editing with stochastic differential equations, 2022. URL https: //arxiv.org/abs/2108.01073. 11

    2022 arXiv

  23. [31]

    T2i-adapter: Learning adapters to dig out more controllable ability for text-to-image diffusion models,

    Chong Mou, Xintao Wang, Liangbin Xie, Yanze Wu, Jian Zhang, Zhongang Qi, Ying Shan, and Xiaohu Qie. T2i-adapter: Learning adapters to dig out more controllable ability for text-to-image diffusion models,

  24. [32]

    Kosmos-g: Generating images in context with multimodal large language models, 2024

    Xichen Pan, Li Dong, Shaohan Huang, Zhiliang Peng, Wenhu Chen, and Furu Wei. Kosmos-g: Generating images in context with multimodal large language models, 2024. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2310. 02992

    2024

  25. [33]

    Scalable diffusion models with transformers, 2023

    William Peebles and Saining Xie. Scalable diffusion models with transformers, 2023. URL https: //arxiv.org/abs/2212.09748

    2023 arXiv

  26. [34]

    SDXL: Improving latent diffusion models for high-resolution image synthesis

    Dustin Podell, Zion English, Kyle Lacey, Andreas Blattmann, Tim Dockhorn, Jonas Müller, Joe Penna, and Robin Rombach. SDXL: Improving latent diffusion models for high-resolution image synthesis. arXiv preprint arXiv:2307.01952, 2023

    2023 arXiv

  27. [35]

    Bootpig: Bootstrapping zero-shot personalized image generation capabilities in pretrained diffusion models, 2024

    Senthil Purushwalkam, Akash Gokul, Shafiq Joty, and Nikhil Naik. Bootpig: Bootstrapping zero-shot personalized image generation capabilities in pretrained diffusion models, 2024. URL https://arxiv. org/abs/2401.13974

    2024 arXiv

  28. [36]

    Unicontrol: A unified diffusion model for controllable visual generation in the wild, 2023

    Can Qin, Shu Zhang, Ning Yu, Yihao Feng, Xinyi Yang, Yingbo Zhou, Huan Wang, Juan Carlos Niebles, Caiming Xiong, Silvio Savarese, Stefano Ermon, Yun Fu, and Ran Xu. Unicontrol: A unified diffusion model for controllable visual generation in the wild, 2023. URLhttps://arxiv.org...

    2023 arXiv

  29. [37]

    Learning transferable visual models from natural language supervision, 2021

    Alec Radford, Jong Wook Kim, Chris Hallacy, Aditya Ramesh, Gabriel Goh, Sandhini Agarwal, Girish Sastry, Amanda Askell, Pamela Mishkin, Jack Clark, Gretchen Krueger, and Ilya Sutskever. Learning transferable visual models from natural language supervision, 2021. URL https://ar...

    2021 arXiv

  30. [38]

    High-resolution image synthesis with latent diffusion models, 2022

    Robin Rombach, Andreas Blattmann, Dominik Lorenz, Patrick Esser, and Björn Ommer. High-resolution image synthesis with latent diffusion models, 2022. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2112.10752

    2022 arXiv

  31. [39]

    Pathways on the image manifold: Image editing via video generation, 2025

    Noam Rotstein, Gal Yona, Daniel Silver, Roy Velich, David Bensaïd, and Ron Kimmel. Pathways on the image manifold: Image editing via video generation, 2025. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2411. 16819

    2025

  32. [40]

    Dreambooth: Fine tuning text-to-image diffusion models for subject-driven generation, 2023

    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, 2023. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2208.12242

    2023 arXiv

  33. [41]

    Roformer: Enhanced transformer with rotary position embedding, 2023

    Jianlin Su, Yu Lu, Shengfeng Pan, Ahmed Murtadha, Bo Wen, and Yunfeng Liu. Roformer: Enhanced transformer with rotary position embedding, 2023. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2104.09864

    2023 arXiv

  34. [42]

    Outfitanyone: Ultra-high quality virtual try-on for any clothing and any person

    Ke Sun, Jian Cao, Qi Wang, Linrui Tian, Xindi Zhang, Lian Zhuo, Bang Zhang, Liefeng Bo, Wenbo Zhou, Weiming Zhang, et al. Outfitanyone: Ultra-high quality virtual try-on for any clothing and any person. arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.16224, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  35. [43]

    Ominicontrol: Minimal and universal control for diffusion transformer, 2025

    Zhenxiong Tan, Songhua Liu, Xingyi Yang, Qiaochu Xue, and Xinchao Wang. Ominicontrol: Minimal and universal control for diffusion transformer, 2025. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2411.15098

    2025 arXiv

  36. [44]

    Emo: Emote portrait alive generating expressive portrait videos with audio2video diffusion model under weak conditions

    Linrui Tian, Qi Wang, Bang Zhang, and Liefeng Bo. Emo: Emote portrait alive generating expressive portrait videos with audio2video diffusion model under weak conditions. In European Conference on Computer Vision, pages 244–260. Springer, 2024

    2024

  37. [45]

    Wan: Open and advanced large-scale video generative models, 2025

    Team Wan, Ang Wang, Baole Ai, Bin Wen, Chaojie Mao, Chen-Wei Xie, Di Chen, Feiwu Yu, Haiming Zhao, Jianxiao Yang, Jianyuan Zeng, Jiayu Wang, Jingfeng Zhang, Jingren Zhou, Jinkai Wang, Jixuan Chen, Kai Zhu, Kang Zhao, Keyu Yan, Lianghua Huang, Mengyang Feng, Ningyi Zhang, Pande...

    2025 arXiv

  38. [46]

    Ms-diffusion: Multi-subject zero-shot image personalization with layout guidance, 2025

    Xierui Wang, Siming Fu, Qihan Huang, Wanggui He, and Hao Jiang. Ms-diffusion: Multi-subject zero-shot image personalization with layout guidance, 2025. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2406.07209

    2025 arXiv

  39. [47]

    Images speak in images: A generalist painter for in-context visual learning, 2023

    Xinlong Wang, Wen Wang, Yue Cao, Chunhua Shen, and Tiejun Huang. Images speak in images: A generalist painter for in-context visual learning, 2023. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2212.02499. 12

    2023 arXiv

  40. [48]

    Bovik, H.R

    Zhou Wang, A.C. Bovik, H.R. Sheikh, and E.P. Simoncelli. Image quality assessment: from error visibility to structural similarity. IEEE Transactions on Image Processing, 13(4):600–612, 2004. doi: 10.1109/TIP.2003.819861

    2004

  41. [49]

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

    Yuxiang Wei, Yabo Zhang, Zhilong Ji, Jinfeng Bai, Lei Zhang, and Wangmeng Zuo. Elite: Encoding visual concepts into textual embeddings for customized text-to-image generation, 2023. URL https: //arxiv.org/abs/2302.13848

    2023 arXiv

  42. [50]

    Less-to-more generaliza- tion: Unlocking more controllability by in-context generation, 2025

    Shaojin Wu, Mengqi Huang, Wenxu Wu, Yufeng Cheng, Fei Ding, and Qian He. Less-to-more generaliza- tion: Unlocking more controllability by in-context generation, 2025. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/ 2504.02160

    2025 arXiv

  43. [51]

    Omnigen: Unified image generation, 2024

    Shitao Xiao, Yueze Wang, Junjie Zhou, Huaying Yuan, Xingrun Xing, Ruiran Yan, Chaofan Li, Shuting Wang, Tiejun Huang, and Zheng Liu. Omnigen: Unified image generation, 2024. URL https://arxiv. org/abs/2409.11340

    2024 arXiv

  44. [52]

    Depth anything: Unleashing the power of large-scale unlabeled data, 2024

    Lihe Yang, Bingyi Kang, Zilong Huang, Xiaogang Xu, Jiashi Feng, and Hengshuang Zhao. Depth anything: Unleashing the power of large-scale unlabeled data, 2024

    2024

  45. [53]

    Cogvideox: Text-to-video diffusion models with an expert transformer,

    Zhuoyi Yang, Jiayan Teng, Wendi Zheng, Ming Ding, Shiyu Huang, Jiazheng Xu, Yuanming Yang, Wenyi Hong, Xiaohan Zhang, Guanyu Feng, Da Yin, Yuxuan Zhang, Weihan Wang, Yean Cheng, Bin Xu, Xiaotao Gu, Yuxiao Dong, and Jie Tang. Cogvideox: Text-to-video diffusion models with an ex...

  46. [54]

    Ip-adapter: Text compatible image prompt adapter for text-to-image diffusion models, 2023

    Hu Ye, Jun Zhang, Sibo Liu, Xiao Han, and Wei Yang. Ip-adapter: Text compatible image prompt adapter for text-to-image diffusion models, 2023. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2308.06721

    2023 arXiv

  47. [55]

    Objectmover: Generative object movement with video prior, 2025

    Xin Yu, Tianyu Wang, Soo Ye Kim, Paul Guerrero, Xi Chen, Qing Liu, Zhe Lin, and Xiaojuan Qi. Objectmover: Generative object movement with video prior, 2025. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/ 2503.08037

    2025 arXiv

  48. [56]

    Patel, Haochen Wang, Xun Huang, Ting-Chun Wang, Ming-Yu Liu, and Yogesh Balaji

    Yu Zeng, Vishal M. Patel, Haochen Wang, Xun Huang, Ting-Chun Wang, Ming-Yu Liu, and Yogesh Balaji. Jedi: Joint-image diffusion models for finetuning-free personalized text-to-image generation, 2024. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2407.06187

    2024 arXiv

  49. [57]

    URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2408.06072

    arXiv

  50. [58]

    Adding conditional control to text-to-image diffusion models, 2023

    Lvmin Zhang, Anyi Rao, and Maneesh Agrawala. Adding conditional control to text-to-image diffusion models, 2023. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2302.05543

    2023 arXiv

  51. [59]

    Framepainter: Endowing interactive image editing with video diffusion priors, 2025

    Yabo Zhang, Xinpeng Zhou, Yihan Zeng, Hang Xu, Hui Li, and Wangmeng Zuo. Framepainter: Endowing interactive image editing with video diffusion priors, 2025. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2501. 08225

    2025

  52. [60]

    Ssr-encoder: Encoding selective subject representation for subject-driven generation, 2024

    Yuxuan Zhang, Yiren Song, Jiaming Liu, Rui Wang, Jinpeng Yu, Hao Tang, Huaxia Li, Xu Tang, Yao Hu, Han Pan, and Zhongliang Jing. Ssr-encoder: Encoding selective subject representation for subject-driven generation, 2024. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2312.16272

    2024 arXiv

  53. [61]

    mixup: Beyond empirical risk minimization

    Hongyi Zhang, Moustapha Cisse, Yann N Dauphin, and David Lopez-Paz. mixup: Beyond empirical risk minimization. arXiv preprint arXiv:1710.09412, 2017

    2017 arXiv

  54. [62]

    Shihao Zhao, Dongdong Chen, Yen-Chun Chen, Jianmin Bao, Shaozhe Hao, Lu Yuan, and Kwan- Yee K. Wong. Uni-controlnet: All-in-one control to text-to-image diffusion models, 2023. URL https: //arxiv.org/abs/2305.16322

    2023 arXiv

  55. [63]

    Jun-Yan Zhu, Taesung Park, Phillip Isola, and Alexei A. Efros. Unpaired image-to-image translation using cycle-consistent adversarial networks, 2020. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/1703.10593

    2020 arXiv

  56. [64]

    [depth]

    zk. text-to-image-2m (revision e64fca4), 2024. URL https://huggingface.co/datasets/ jackyhate/text-to-image-2M . 13 A More Experimental Details In this section, we provide additional experimental details, including the configurations of LoRA and other hyperparameters. For diff...

    2024

  57. [65]

    Easycontrol: Adding efficient and flexible control for diffusion transformer, 2025

    Yuxuan Zhang, Yirui Yuan, Yiren Song, Haofan Wang, and Jiaming Liu. Easycontrol: Adding efficient and flexible control for diffusion transformer, 2025. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2503.07027

    2025 arXiv

  58. [69]

    Color: saturation, hue, brightness, and distribution

    Subject Consistency: Compare key visual attributes (Shape: main body outline, structure, and proportions. Color: saturation, hue, brightness, and distribution. Texture: realism, clarity, and aesthetic appeal. Facial: facial features, only apply when subject is a person or anim...

  59. [70]

    subject_consistency\

    Prompt Adherence: Verify if the generated image accurately reflects all elements described in the text prompt (Relevance: whether core elements in text are shown. Accuracy: objects, settings, actions, or characteristics Completeness: whether the generated image omits significa...

  60. [2022]

    URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2208.01618. 10

    arXiv

  61. [2023]

    URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2302.08453

    arXiv

  62. [2025]

    URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2412.03603

    arXiv

Pith tools

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