Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 4 cited by

StyleMaster: Stylize Your Video with Artistic Generation and Translation

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read StyleMaster claims that splitting style extraction into a global contrastive projection and prompt-filtered texture patches lets a diffusion model restyle videos to match a reference image without leaking the image's content.

desk verdict A clever, coherent video stylization system with a genuinely novel dataset idea, but the triplet supervision has a same-style negative flaw and the experimental evidence is too thin to back the 'significant improvement' claim. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.07744 v1 pith:BTBREQFQ submitted 2024-12-10 cs.CV

Zixuan Ye , Huijuan Huang , Xintao Wang , Pengfei Wan , Di Zhang , Wenhan Luo This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.CV
keywords videostylizationstyletransfergenerationdiffusionmodelscontrastivelearningmodelillusionextractionmotionadapter
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 failures in video stylization — output far from the reference style, or content copied from it — trace back to the style-extraction stage, and that this stage needs both global style cues and local texture. To get global cues without content leakage, the authors train a projection on top of CLIP using contrastive pairs generated by 'model illusion': one image is a jigsaw rearrangement of the other, so the pair shares a style by construction while differing in content. For texture, they keep only the CLIP image patches least similar to the text prompt, which carry brushwork and material feel without carrying the subject. A lightweight motion adapter trained on still videos, used at a negative scale at inference, bridges the image-to-video gap and pushes outputs further from the real-world domain, strengthening the stylized look. The paper reports that the resulting system, StyleMaster, outperforms prior stylized video generators and transfer pipelines on style resemblance, text alignment, and motion quality.

What carries the argument

Four mechanisms carry the argument: (1) the illusion dataset — pairs produced by running a text-to-image sampler in parallel on an image and a jigsaw-rearranged copy with two different object prompts, so the paired outputs are pixel rearrangements with identical style by construction; (2) the global projection — an MLP over the CLIP image embedding trained with triplet loss so that the anchor and its rearranged twin map close together while unrelated images map apart; (3) the local selection — keeping only the $k=15$ CLIP patch tokens with the lowest cosine similarity to the text prompt, so the Q-Former texture tokens carry strokes and materials rather than the subject; (4) the motion adapter — LoRA weights on the temporal-attention query, key, and value matrices trained on still videos and applied with a negative scale $\alpha=-0.3$ at inference, which restores dynamics and, because the training data was real-world, exaggerates departure from the real-world domain, strengthening stylization. Style enters the denoising transformer through a dedicated style cross-attention that runs in parallel with text cross-attention, and a gray tile ControlNet supplies layout-preserving content guidance for transfer.

What would settle it

A concrete check: take style categories with strong spatial composition (formal portraits, symmetrical architecture, scenes with a clear horizon) and have human raters or a style-similarity metric judge whether each illusion pair looks like the same style. If a substantial share of composition-heavy pairs are rated as different styles — or if a global projection trained on illusion pairs fails to beat one trained on the existing Style30K groupings when both are evaluated on real reference images outside the training distribution — then the claimed benefit of 'absolute style consistency' is not the source of the reported gains.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the central discovery is that style can be decomposed into two complementary signals and that both can be extracted without content leakage: a global style description from a contrastively trained MLP projection over the CLIP image embedding, and a local texture description from the roughly fifteen CLIP patches least similar to the text prompt, aggregated by a Q-Former. The enabling ingredient is a training dataset of pairs that are guaranteed to share a style: using the model-illusion trick, one image is generated as a jigsaw rearrangement of the other under a different object prompt, so the two pictures are pixel rearrangements of each other and 'absolute style consistency' holds within every pair. Contrastive triplet training on these pairs teaches the projection to encode style rather than content. Style is then injected through a separate style cross-attention alongside text cross-attention, and the same module handles both stylized generation and, with a grayscale tile ControlNet for content guidance, video-to-video style transfer.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that jigsaw-rearranging an image's pixels leaves its style unchanged in the way viewers actually perceive it, so pairs produced by the model-illusion trick really are two different subjects sharing one style; if the rearrangement destroys composition or texture, the contrastive projection learns a signal that has little to do with the style users want.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Style extraction, not just style injection, is the bottleneck: contrastive training on guaranteed-consistent pairs plus prompt-filtered texture patches raises style resemblance while improving text alignment over methods that inject all reference tokens.
  • A single image-trained pipeline transfers to video by swapping in a motion adapter, so the same model serves stylized generation and video style transfer without per-video optimization.
  • The negative motion-adapter scale converts real-world-domain training data into an implicit stylization boost: as the scale moves from 0 to -1, the reported CSD style score rises from 0.443 to 0.465.
  • Removing color from the tile ControlNet condition prevents the content guide from contaminating the injected style, which is what enables clean video-to-video transfer.
  • Ablations show the two streams are complementary: global projection alone or texture selection alone underperforms their combination on both style resemblance and text-video alignment.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Editorial extension: the illusion-pair recipe is a general substitute for manually grouped style datasets; any contrastive style or attribute extractor that suffers from noisy group labels could adopt pixel-rearrangement pairs, not just video stylizers.
  • Editorial extension: the negative-scale trick on a domain-trained adapter generalizes beyond motion — training an adapter on any unwanted domain and inverting its scale at inference is a cheap way to push generation away from that domain.
  • Editorial extension: a testable prediction of the paper is that the global projection's advantage grows as style categories become more compositional (e.g., portraits, scenes), where jigsaw rearrangement breaks layout; if the advantage instead vanishes there, the 'absolute style consistency' claim is doing less work than the contrastive objective alone.
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 / 5 minor

Summary. The paper proposes StyleMaster, a DiT-based video stylization system that combines local texture selection from CLIP patch features, a global style projection trained on a self-generated 'model illusion' paired dataset, a motion adapter with a negative scale, and a gray-tile ControlNet for content guidance. The authors claim state-of-the-art style resemblance and temporal coherence in both stylized video generation and video/image style transfer, and introduce model-illusion-based paired style data as a novel resource for contrastive style learning. The manuscript includes quantitative comparisons against StyleID, InstantStyle, CSGO, VideoComposer, StyleCrafter, and DomoAI, plus ablations of the proposed components.

Significance. If the claims hold, the model-illusion dataset construction is a clever and low-cost alternative to manually curated style datasets, and the combined global-local style description with a negative-scale motion adapter is a practical recipe for reference-image video stylization. The paper also makes a useful attempt at image-to-video transfer by training a lightweight motion adapter on still videos, and the gray-tile ControlNet idea is simple and effective for style-transfer content control. However, the absence of released code or data, the small evaluation sets, and the lack of statistical significance testing leave the central claim of 'significant improvement' under-supported; the paper's own ablations and tables reveal several metric trade-offs that are explained post hoc rather than established.

major comments (4)
  1. [Sec. 3.1 and Sec. 3.2, Eq. (1)] The triplet loss treats 'any image outside this pair' as a negative, but the illusion dataset is generated from only 65 style descriptions (Supplement, Sec. 7.2). With 10K pairs, each anchor has roughly 300 other images that share the same style but belong to different pairs. Randomly sampled negatives will therefore include about 1.5% same-style images, and the loss explicitly pulls them apart, contradicting the goal of learning a style-invariant representation. The manuscript does not specify negative mining or grouping by style label. This is load-bearing for the global style extractor: if mislabeled negatives dominate gradients, the reported CSD gains may come from a shortcut unrelated to style. Please either group negatives by style description, track and exclude same-style negatives, or provide evidence (e.g., measuring same-style embedding distances before and after training) that the effect is negligible.
  2. [Sec. 3.1, Fig. 4] The 'absolute style consistency' claim relies on the assumption that jigsaw-rearranged images are perceived as having the same style. Jigsaw scrambling also breaks composition, creates artificial boundaries, and may introduce low-level artifacts that a projector could exploit as a shortcut. The paper provides no human evaluation or style-classifier validation that these pairs actually share the intended artistic style. Please add a perceptual or classifier-based check on the illusion pairs, and ideally analyze what the global projector attends to, to rule out jigsaw-specific artifacts.
  3. [Sec. 4, Tables 1 and 2] The evaluation is based on very small test sets (192 style-prompt pairs, 96 content-style pairs, and 4 videos for transfer) with no error bars, confidence intervals, or significance tests. The word 'significant' in the abstract is therefore not supported statistically. Moreover, Table 2 shows that on the main style metric (CSD-Score), StyleMaster scores 0.463, below VideoComposer's 0.680; the explanation that VideoComposer copies content is plausible but is offered post hoc and not backed by analysis. Please report per-pair distributions, pairwise significance tests, and a content-copying measure to substantiate the claim.
  4. [Sec. 4.1, Table 1] The proposed method is worse than StyleID on LPIPS (0.61 vs 0.55) and much worse on CFSD (2.37 vs 1.06). The paper says it 'slightly underperforms' in content alignment, but without error bars one cannot tell whether this is significant, and CFSD is a direct content-preservation metric. Because the central claim includes 'both style resemblance and temporal coherence' plus implicit content preservation, the trade-off should be quantified and discussed in a falsifiable way, e.g., by reporting the Pareto frontier or a human preference study that weighs style fidelity against content retention.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Abstract] The title and abstract contain typos: 'Y our' in the header and 'casual V AE' in Sec. 4 should be 'Your' and 'causal VAE', respectively.
  2. [Sec. 3.4, Eq. (2)] The symbol α is used both as the margin in the triplet loss (Eq. 1) and as the motion-adapter scale in Eq. (2). Please use distinct symbols to avoid confusion.
  3. [Sec. 4, Dataset paragraph] The main text says the video stylized-generation test set has 12 style images, but the supplement's video style transfer comparison uses 16 style images (Table 8). Please reconcile these numbers.
  4. [Sec. 4.4.2, Table 4] The narrative states that α = −0.3 'owns the best visual quality', but the table reports VisualQuality 2.370 at −0.3 versus 2.279 at 0; while plausible, no statistical significance is given, and the reader cannot tell whether this is within noise.
  5. [References] Several references are incomplete (e.g., StyleID lacks page numbers, and the StyleMaster project page appears as two different URLs: zixuan-ye.github.io/stylemaster in the abstract and style-master.github.io in the supplement). Please unify and complete.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No derivation in StyleMaster reduces to its inputs; the central claims are empirically benchmarked against external methods and metrics, with only non-load-bearing self-citations.

full rationale

The paper's central contribution is a trained system, not a mathematical derivation, so there is no chain of equations whose output is equivalent to an input by construction. The global style extractor is trained with contrastive learning on pairs generated by model illusion, where the positive pairs are pixel rearrangements of one another; the paper explicitly states, 'Since the paired images in model illusion are merely pixel rearrangements, we can ensure style consistency within a group.' This is an assumption about what style is, not a circular derivation: the paper does not claim to predict the CSD score from that dataset; instead, it evaluates the trained extractor on external style-transfer benchmarks (CSD, ArtFID, UMT, CLIP-Text) against independent baselines such as StyleCrafter, VideoComposer, InstantStyle, StyleID, and CSGO. The skeptical observation that many randomly sampled negatives share the anchor's style is a real training-label concern, but it is a correctness issue about the triplet loss, not a case where the reported prediction is forced by the input. Citations to prior work (e.g., VisualAnagrams for model illusion, StyleCrafter for Q-Former and test-set construction, StillMoving for motion adapter) are external or group-internal but non-load-bearing: none is invoked as an unverified uniqueness theorem, and the method's components are ablated against variants in Table 3 and Table 4 rather than being asserted from a self-citation. The 'absolute style consistency' claim is definitional within each generated pair, but the paper's practical claims are validated by external metrics and qualitative comparisons, so the overall circularity score is low.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests principally on two synthetic-data assumptions that the paper does not independently validate: that pixel rearrangement guarantees identical style, and that low prompt-patch similarity implies texture-without-content. The remaining parameters are conventional diffusion-training choices. No new physical entities are postulated.

free parameters (3)
  • k (number of selected CLIP patches) = 15
    Sec. 3.3: authors set k=15. No sensitivity analysis; if too few patches, texture is lost; if too many, content leakage returns.
  • motion adapter scale alpha = -0.3
    Sec. 4.4.2 and Table 4: swept from 0 to -1, with -0.3 chosen as the best trade-off on UMT, CSD, MotionSmooth, and VisualQuality. This is tuning on the same reported evaluation metrics, with no held-out validation described.
  • text CFG and style CFG = 12.5 and 6
    Sec. 4 Implementation Details: chosen by hand and reported without ablation; these are standard classifier-free-guidance hyperparameters that affect style strength and text alignment.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption CLIP image embeddings contain style information separable from content by a linear projection.
    The global style extractor trains an MLP on top of frozen CLIP image embedding (Sec. 3.2), assuming style is linearly accessible in CLIP space.
  • ad hoc to paper Model-illusion paired images generated by pixel rearrangement share identical style.
    Sec. 3.1 states 'we can ensure style consistency within a group'; this is the core premise of the contrastive dataset and is not independently validated against human style judgments.
  • ad hoc to paper CLIP patch features with low similarity to the text prompt carry texture but not content.
    Sec. 3.3: patch selection by prompt-patch similarity assumes content resides in high-similarity patches and texture in low-similarity patches; selection could also drop style-relevant content or retain content in abstract prompts.
  • ad hoc to paper Training a motion adapter on real-world still images and using a negative scale moves outputs away from realism and toward the reference style.
    Sec. 3.4 and Table 4: this is inferred from CSD improvements, not from a measurable definition of 'real-world domain'; it is a heuristic.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of StyleMaster: Stylize Your Video with Artistic Generation and Translation." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/BTBREQFQ

@misc{pith2026241207744,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: StyleMaster: Stylize Your Video with Artistic Generation and Translation},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/BTBREQFQ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.07744}
}
read the original abstract

Style control has been popular in video generation models. Existing methods often generate videos far from the given style, cause content leakage, and struggle to transfer one video to the desired style. Our first observation is that the style extraction stage matters, whereas existing methods emphasize global style but ignore local textures. In order to bring texture features while preventing content leakage, we filter content-related patches while retaining style ones based on prompt-patch similarity; for global style extraction, we generate a paired style dataset through model illusion to facilitate contrastive learning, which greatly enhances the absolute style consistency. Moreover, to fill in the image-to-video gap, we train a lightweight motion adapter on still videos, which implicitly enhances stylization extent, and enables our image-trained model to be seamlessly applied to videos. Benefited from these efforts, our approach, StyleMaster, not only achieves significant improvement in both style resemblance and temporal coherence, but also can easily generalize to video style transfer with a gray tile ControlNet. Extensive experiments and visualizations demonstrate that StyleMaster significantly outperforms competitors, effectively generating high-quality stylized videos that align with textual content and closely resemble the style of reference images. Our project page is at https://zixuan-ye.github.io/stylemaster

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.07744 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Our StyleMaster demonstrates superior video style transfer and stylized generation. The top section shows our method effectively applying various styles to videos, outperforming VideoComposer [46] and the combination of InstantStyle [44] with AnyV2V [22]. The bottom highlights our high-quality text-driven stylized synthesis, surpassing VideoComposer [46] and StyleCrafter [28]. Abstract Style control has been popular… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Existing image and video stylization methods either fail in keeping local texture or suffer from content leakage. Note: * means StyleCrafter does not support transfer, we use text and reference style image to generate results. hibited in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Comparison between Style30K with our dataset gen￾erated by model illusion. Style30K cannot ensure consistency within a style group (highlighted by the same color), while ours owns absolute consistency. texture, resulting in sub-optimal stylization. Additionally, it focuses on stylized generation only, rather than style trans￾fer, which is an important aspect of video stylization. 3. Method In this section, we illust… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (11 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: The pipeline of our proposed StyleMaster. We first obtain patch features and image embedding of the style image from CLIP, then we select the patches sharing less similarity with text prompt as texture guidance, and use a global projection module to transform it into g…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Similarity between the extracted global style repre￾sentations among image patches. Without our global projection, the CLIP image embedding only attends to specific regions; while after the projection, the attention shows an even distribution. focus on style-oriented f…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: , the first row demonstrates the kept patches with vary￾ing drop ratios, the patches of the face and body are gradu￾ally dropped due to higher similarity with the prompt, which includes the description of a human. Additionally, without selection, directly using all pat…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Uncurated image style transfer results. We compare with the recent state-of-the-art methods InstantStyle [44], StyleID [10] and CSGO [51]. Best viewed in Color. lina DiT block will be added to the corresponding style DiT block as the content guidance. 4. Experiments Im…
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Qualitative comparison of single-reference and multi-reference style-guided T2V generation. We compare with Style￾Crafter [28] and VideoComposer [46]. Best viewed in color. VideoComposer [46] (NeurIPS’24) StyleCrafter [28] (SIGGRAPH Asia’24) Ours CLIP-Text ↑ 0.057 0.29…
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Video style transfer results compared with DomoAI. Their results disrupt semantics, shown in red bounding box. hanced visual and dynamic quality, and smoother motion. Our CSD score falls behind VideoComposer. The reason lies in that it directly copies the content in th…
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Ablation of different conditions of ControlNet in our method. The gray tile achieves the best performance. RGB tile images. As shown in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_10.png]
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: The model illusion process during T2I generation. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_12.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: The structure of our base model. Our model is a DiT-based structure, which consists of a 3D Variational AutoEncoder to convert the video to la￾tent space. Then, the latent feature will pass several DiT blocks [33]. As shown in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_11.png]
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: The image style transfer results generated by four different methods. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_13.png]
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: More stylized video generation results. We compare our method with VideoComposer [46] and StyleCrafter [28]. object style a dog oil painting a rabbit black and white film a waterfall cyberpunk picture a duck watercolor painting a teddy bear vintage photograph a tudor …

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. UNIC: Unified In-Context Video Editing

    cs.CV 2025-06 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    One diffusion transformer handles ID insert, swap, delete, stylization, propagation, and re-camera control in a single model using in-context token concatenation with task-aware positional encoding and bias.

  2. Let Them Talk: Audio-Driven Multi-Person Conversational Video Generation

    cs.CV 2025-05 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    MultiTalk is the first framework to generate multi-person conversational videos from multi-stream audio, using Label Rotary Position Embedding to bind each voice to the correct person.

  3. DAM-VSR: Disentanglement of Appearance and Motion for Video Super-Resolution

    cs.CV 2025-07 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    DAM-VSR improves video super-resolution by first enhancing a key frame with an image super-resolution model, then using Stable Video Diffusion with a video ControlNet to propagate details while keeping motion aligned.

  4. FullDiT2: Efficient In-Context Conditioning for Video Diffusion Transformers

    cs.CV 2025-06 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    FullDiT2 accelerates FullDiT-style in-context conditioning for video by dynamic token selection and selective context caching, cutting per-step time by 2-3x with minimal quality loss.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

59 extracted references · 18 canonical work pages · cited by 4 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    Video generation models as world simulators, 2024

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

    2024

  2. [2]

    Clap: Isolating content from style through contrastive learning with augmented prompts

    Yichao Cai, Yuhang Liu, Zhen Zhang, and Javen Qinfeng Shi. Clap: Isolating content from style through contrastive learning with augmented prompts. European conference on computer vision, 2024. 3

    work page 2024

  3. [3]

    A computational approach to edge detection

    John Canny. A computational approach to edge detection. IEEE Transactions on pattern analysis and machine intelli- gence, pages 679–698, 1986. 3

    work page 1986

  4. [4]

    Still-moving: Customized video generation without customized video data

    Hila Chefer, Shiran Zada, Roni Paiss, Ariel Ephrat, Omer Tov, Michael Rubinstein, Lior Wolf, Tali Dekel, Tomer Michaeli, and Inbar Mosseri. Still-moving: Customized video generation without customized video data. arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.08674, 2024. 2, 3, 5

    arXiv 2024

  5. [5]

    Coherent online video style transfer

    Dongdong Chen, Jing Liao, Lu Yuan, Nenghai Yu, and Gang Hua. Coherent online video style transfer. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision , pages 1105–1114, 2017. 3

    2017

  6. [6]

    Ar- tadapter: Text-to-image style transfer using multi-level style encoder and explicit adaptation

    Dar-Yen Chen, Hamish Tennent, and Ching-Wen Hsu. Ar- tadapter: Text-to-image style transfer using multi-level style encoder and explicit adaptation. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 8619–8628, 2024. 3

    work page 2024

  7. [7]

    Videocrafter1: Open diffusion models for high-quality video generation, 2023

    Haoxin Chen, Menghan Xia, Yingqing He, Yong Zhang, Xiaodong Cun, Shaoshu Yang, Jinbo Xing, Yaofang Liu, Qifeng Chen, Xintao Wang, Chao Weng, and Ying Shan. Videocrafter1: Open diffusion models for high-quality video generation, 2023. 1, 2, 3

    work page 2023

  8. [8]

    Training-free layout control with cross-attention guidance

    Minghao Chen, Iro Laina, and Andrea Vedaldi. Training-free layout control with cross-attention guidance. In Proceed- ings of the IEEE/CVF Winter Conference on Applications of Computer Vision, pages 5343–5353, 2024. 3

    2024

Show all 59 references
  1. [9]

    Anydoor: Zero-shot object-level im- age customization

    Xi Chen, Lianghua Huang, Yu Liu, Yujun Shen, Deli Zhao, and Hengshuang Zhao. Anydoor: Zero-shot object-level im- age customization. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Con- ference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 6593–6602, 2024. 2

    2024

  2. [10]

    Style injec- tion in diffusion: A training-free approach for adapting large- scale diffusion models for style transfer

    Jiwoo Chung, Sangeek Hyun, and Jae-Pil Heo. Style injec- tion in diffusion: A training-free approach for adapting large- scale diffusion models for style transfer. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 8795–8805, 2024. 3, 6, 1

    2024

  3. [11]

    Arbitrary video style transfer via multi-channel correlation

    Yingying Deng, Fan Tang, Weiming Dong, Haibin Huang, Chongyang Ma, and Changsheng Xu. Arbitrary video style transfer via multi-channel correlation. In Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 1210– 1217, 2021. 3

    2021

  4. [12]

    Implicit style-content separation using b-lora

    Yarden Frenkel, Yael Vinker, Ariel Shamir, and Daniel Cohen-Or. Implicit style-content separation using b-lora. arXiv preprint arXiv:2403.14572, 2024. 3

    2024 arXiv

  5. [13]

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

    Rinon Gal, Yuval Alaluf, Yuval Atzmon, Or Patash- nik, Amit H Bermano, Gal Chechik, and Daniel Cohen- Or. An image is worth one word: Personalizing text-to- image generation using textual inversion. arXiv preprint arXiv:2208.01618, 2022. 3

    2022 arXiv

  6. [14]

    Fast video multi-style transfer

    Wei Gao, Yijun Li, Yihang Yin, and Ming-Hsuan Yang. Fast video multi-style transfer. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF winter conference on applications of computer vision, pages 3222–3230, 2020. 3

    2020

  7. [15]

    Visual ana- grams: Generating multi-view optical illusions with diffu- sion models

    Daniel Geng, Inbum Park, and Andrew Owens. Visual ana- grams: Generating multi-view optical illusions with diffu- sion models. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 24154– 24163, 2024. 2, 3

    2024

  8. [16]

    Animatediff: Animate your personalized text-to- image diffusion models without specific tuning

    Yuwei Guo, Ceyuan Yang, Anyi Rao, Zhengyang Liang, Yaohui Wang, Yu Qiao, Maneesh Agrawala, Dahua Lin, and Bo Dai. Animatediff: Animate your personalized text-to- image diffusion models without specific tuning. Interna- tional Conference on Learning Representations, 2024. 3

    2024

  9. [17]

    Denoising dif- fusion probabilistic models

    Jonathan Ho, Ajay Jain, and Pieter Abbeel. Denoising dif- fusion probabilistic models. Advances in neural information processing systems, 33:6840–6851, 2020. 1

    2020

  10. [18]

    Cogvideo: Large-scale pretraining for text-to-video generation via transformers

    Wenyi Hong, Ming Ding, Wendi Zheng, Xinghan Liu, and Jie Tang. Cogvideo: Large-scale pretraining for text-to-video generation via transformers. arXiv preprint arXiv:2205.15868, 2022. 1, 2

    2022 arXiv

  11. [19]

    Lora: Low-rank adaptation of large language models

    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. arXiv preprint arXiv:2106.09685, 2021. 5

    2021 arXiv

  12. [20]

    Real-time neural style transfer for videos

    Haozhi Huang, Hao Wang, Wenhan Luo, Lin Ma, Wenhao Jiang, Xiaolong Zhu, Zhifeng Li, and Wei Liu. Real-time neural style transfer for videos. InIEEE Conference on Com- puter Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), pages 7044– 7052, 2017. 3

    2017

  13. [21]

    Vbench: Comprehensive bench- mark suite for video generative models

    Ziqi Huang, Yinan He, Jiashuo Yu, Fan Zhang, Chenyang Si, Yuming Jiang, Yuanhan Zhang, Tianxing Wu, Qingyang Jin, Nattapol Chanpaisit, et al. Vbench: Comprehensive bench- mark suite for video generative models. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and P...

    2024

  14. [22]

    Anyv2v: A plug-and-play framework for any video- to-video editing tasks

    Max Ku, Cong Wei, Weiming Ren, Huan Yang, and Wenhu Chen. Anyv2v: A plug-and-play framework for any video- to-video editing tasks. arXiv preprint arXiv:2403.14468 ,

    arXiv

  15. [23]

    Blip-2: Bootstrapping language-image pre-training with frozen image encoders and large language models

    Junnan Li, Dongxu Li, Silvio Savarese, and Steven Hoi. Blip-2: Bootstrapping language-image pre-training with frozen image encoders and large language models. In In- ternational conference on machine learning , pages 19730– 19742. PMLR, 2023. 5

    2023

  16. [24]

    Style- tokenizer: Defining image style by a single instance for con- trolling diffusion models

    Wen Li, Muyuan Fang, Cheng Zou, Biao Gong, Ruobing Zheng, Meng Wang, Jingdong Chen, and Ming Yang. Style- tokenizer: Defining image style by a single instance for con- trolling diffusion models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2409.02543,

    arXiv

  17. [25]

    Amt: All-pairs multi-field transforms for efficient frame interpolation

    Zhen Li, Zuo-Liang Zhu, Ling-Hao Han, Qibin Hou, Chun- Le Guo, and Ming-Ming Cheng. Amt: All-pairs multi-field transforms for efficient frame interpolation. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pat- tern Recognition, pages 9801–9810, 2023. 6 9

    2023

  18. [26]

    Photomaker: Customizing re- alistic human photos via stacked id embedding

    Zhen Li, Mingdeng Cao, Xintao Wang, Zhongang Qi, Ming- Ming Cheng, and Ying Shan. Photomaker: Customizing re- alistic human photos via stacked id embedding. In Proceed- ings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 8640–8650, 2024. 3

    2024

  19. [27]

    Flow matching for generative mod- eling

    Yaron Lipman, Ricky TQ Chen, Heli Ben-Hamu, Maximil- ian Nickel, and Matt Le. Flow matching for generative mod- eling. arXiv preprint arXiv:2210.02747, 2022. 1

    2022 arXiv

  20. [28]

    Stylecrafter: Enhancing stylized text-to-video gener- ation with style adapter

    Gongye Liu, Menghan Xia, Yong Zhang, Haoxin Chen, Jinbo Xing, Yibo Wang, Xintao Wang, Yujiu Yang, and Ying Shan. Stylecrafter: Enhancing stylized text-to-video gener- ation with style adapter. arXiv preprint arXiv:2312.00330 ,

    arXiv

  21. [29]

    Umt: Unified multi-modal transformers for joint video moment retrieval and highlight detection

    Ye Liu, Siyuan Li, Yang Wu, Chang-Wen Chen, Ying Shan, and Xiaohu Qie. Umt: Unified multi-modal transformers for joint video moment retrieval and highlight detection. InPro- ceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 3042–3051, 2022. 6

    2022

  22. [30]

    Sit: Explor- ing flow and diffusion-based generative models with scalable interpolant transformers

    Nanye Ma, Mark Goldstein, Michael S Albergo, Nicholas M Boffi, Eric Vanden-Eijnden, and Saining Xie. Sit: Explor- ing flow and diffusion-based generative models with scalable interpolant transformers. arXiv preprint arXiv:2401.08740,

    arXiv

  23. [31]

    Latte: Latent diffusion transformer for video generation

    Xin Ma, Yaohui Wang, Gengyun Jia, Xinyuan Chen, Zi- wei Liu, Yuan-Fang Li, Cunjian Chen, and Yu Qiao. Latte: Latent diffusion transformer for video generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:2401.03048, 2024. 1

    2024 arXiv

  24. [32]

    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, and Ying Shan. T2i-adapter: Learning adapters to dig out more controllable ability for text-to-image diffusion models. In Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 4296–4304, 2024. 3

    2024

  25. [33]

    Scalable diffusion models with transformers

    William Peebles and Saining Xie. Scalable diffusion models with transformers. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Inter- national Conference on Computer Vision, pages 4195–4205,

  26. [34]

    Dead- iff: An efficient stylization diffusion model with disentan- gled representations

    Tianhao Qi, Shancheng Fang, Yanze Wu, Hongtao Xie, Ji- awei Liu, Lang Chen, Qian He, and Yongdong Zhang. Dead- iff: An efficient stylization diffusion model with disentan- gled representations. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Con- ference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognit...

    2024

  27. [35]

    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. In International conference on machine learning, ...

    2021

  28. [36]

    High-resolution image synthesis with latent diffusion models

    Robin Rombach, Andreas Blattmann, Dominik Lorenz, Patrick Esser, and Bj ¨orn Ommer. High-resolution image synthesis with latent diffusion models. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pages 10684–10695, 2022. 1, 2

    2022

  29. [37]

    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. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition , pages 2250...

    2023

  30. [38]

    Laion-5b: An open large-scale dataset for training next generation image-text models

    Christoph Schuhmann, Romain Beaumont, Richard Vencu, Cade Gordon, Ross Wightman, Mehdi Cherti, Theo Coombes, Aarush Katta, Clayton Mullis, Mitchell Worts- man, et al. Laion-5b: An open large-scale dataset for training next generation image-text models. Advances in Neural In- f...

    2022

  31. [39]

    Styledrop: Text-to-image generation in any style

    Kihyuk Sohn, Nataniel Ruiz, Kimin Lee, Daniel Castro Chin, Irina Blok, Huiwen Chang, Jarred Barber, Lu Jiang, Glenn Entis, Yuanzhen Li, et al. Styledrop: Text-to-image generation in any style. arXiv preprint arXiv:2306.00983 ,

    arXiv

  32. [40]

    Measuring style similarity in diffusion models

    Gowthami Somepalli, Anubhav Gupta, Kamal Gupta, Shra- may Palta, Micah Goldblum, Jonas Geiping, Abhinav Shri- vastava, and Tom Goldstein. Measuring style similarity in diffusion models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.01292, 2024. 6

    2024 arXiv

  33. [41]

    Score-based generative modeling through stochastic differential equa- tions

    Yang Song, Jascha Sohl-Dickstein, Diederik P Kingma, Ab- hishek Kumar, Stefano Ermon, and Ben Poole. Score-based generative modeling through stochastic differential equa- tions. arXiv preprint arXiv:2011.13456, 2020. 1

    2011 arXiv

  34. [42]

    Raft: Recurrent all-pairs field transforms for optical flow

    Zachary Teed and Jia Deng. Raft: Recurrent all-pairs field transforms for optical flow. In Computer Vision–ECCV 2020: 16th European Conference, Glasgow, UK, August 23– 28, 2020, Proceedings, Part II 16, pages 402–419. Springer,

    2020

  35. [43]

    Attention is all you need

    A Vaswani. Attention is all you need. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 2017. 5

    2017

  36. [44]

    Instantstyle: Free lunch towards style-preserving in text-to-image generation

    Haofan Wang, Matteo Spinelli, Qixun Wang, Xu Bai, Zekui Qin, and Anthony Chen. Instantstyle: Free lunch towards style-preserving in text-to-image generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.02733, 2024. 1, 3, 6, 2, 4

    2024 arXiv

  37. [45]

    Instantstyle-plus: Style transfer with content-preserving in text-to-image generation

    Haofan Wang, Peng Xing, Renyuan Huang, Hao Ai, Qixun Wang, and Xu Bai. Instantstyle-plus: Style transfer with content-preserving in text-to-image generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.00788, 2024. 3, 5

    2024 arXiv

  38. [46]

    Videocomposer: Compositional video synthesis with motion controllability

    Xiang Wang, Hangjie Yuan, Shiwei Zhang, Dayou Chen, Ji- uniu Wang, Yingya Zhang, Yujun Shen, Deli Zhao, and Jin- gren Zhou. Videocomposer: Compositional video synthesis with motion controllability. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 36, 2024. 1, 2, 3, 7

    2024

  39. [47]

    Styleadapter: A single-pass lora-free model for stylized image generation

    Zhouxia Wang, Xintao Wang, Liangbin Xie, Zhongang Qi, Ying Shan, Wenping Wang, and Ping Luo. Styleadapter: A single-pass lora-free model for stylized image generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:2309.01770, 2023. 3

    2023 arXiv

  40. [48]

    Artfid: Quantitative evaluation of neural style transfer

    Matthias Wright and Bj ¨orn Ommer. Artfid: Quantitative evaluation of neural style transfer. In DAGM German Con- ference on Pattern Recognition , pages 560–576. Springer,

  41. [49]

    Boxdiff: Text-to-image synthesis with training-free box-constrained diffusion

    Jinheng Xie, Yuexiang Li, Yawen Huang, Haozhe Liu, Wen- tian Zhang, Yefeng Zheng, and Mike Zheng Shou. Boxdiff: Text-to-image synthesis with training-free box-constrained diffusion. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision, pages 7452–7461, 2023. 3

    2023

  42. [50]

    Toon- crafter: Generative cartoon interpolation

    Jinbo Xing, Hanyuan Liu, Menghan Xia, Yong Zhang, Xintao Wang, Ying Shan, and Tien-Tsin Wong. Toon- crafter: Generative cartoon interpolation. arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.17933, 2024. 3 10

    2024 arXiv

  43. [51]

    Csgo: Content-style composition in text-to-image genera- tion

    Peng Xing, Haofan Wang, Yanpeng Sun, Qixun Wang, Xu Bai, Hao Ai, Renyuan Huang, and Zechao Li. Csgo: Content-style composition in text-to-image genera- tion. arXiv preprint arXiv:2408.16766, 2024. 3, 5, 6, 1

    2024 arXiv

  44. [52]

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

    Hu Ye, Jun Zhang, Sibo Liu, Xiao Han, and Wei Yang. Ip- adapter: Text compatible image prompt adapter for text-to- image diffusion models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2308.06721,

    arXiv

  45. [53]

    Adding conditional control to text-to-image diffusion models

    Lvmin Zhang, Anyi Rao, and Maneesh Agrawala. Adding conditional control to text-to-image diffusion models. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision, pages 3836–3847, 2023. 3

    2023

  46. [54]

    Inversion-based style transfer with diffusion models

    Yuxin Zhang, Nisha Huang, Fan Tang, Haibin Huang, Chongyang Ma, Weiming Dong, and Changsheng Xu. Inversion-based style transfer with diffusion models. In Pro- ceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pages 10146–10156, 2023. 3 11 StyleMas...

    2023

  47. [55]

    • Section 8: Illustrates complete results of image style transfer

    Overview This Supplementary Material is organized into four sec- tions, providing additional details and results to comple- ment the main paper: • Section 7: Provides comprehensive implementation de- tails, including the structure of the base model and the illusion dataset con...

  48. [56]

    " Noise 3DVAEEncoder A lone penguin walks on a sandy beach at sunset

    Implementation Details 7.1. Base Model Structure DiTBlock ×N … Self Attention FFN Text CrossAttention TemporalAttention RMSNorm&Scale RMSNorm&Scale RMSNorm&Scale RMSNorm&Scale"" Noise 3DVAEEncoder A lone penguin walks on a sandy beach at sunset. "# T5Encoder TimeStep 3DVAEDeco...

  49. [57]

    We use the default setting in these meth- ods

    Image Style Transfer Since our method can also be used as an image stylization method, so we compare our method with other image styl- ization methods, including StyleID [10], InstantStyle [44] and CSGO [51]. We use the default setting in these meth- ods. Here we illustrate al...

  50. [58]

    Stylized Video Generation More comparison results are shown in Fig. 14. The compared methods are VideoComposer [46] and Style- Crafter [28]. More videos can be viewed in https: //style-master.github.io/

  51. [59]

    Video Style Transfer Here we conduct a comparison with DomoAI 2 and the combination of InstantStyle [44] and AnyV2V [22]. In- stantStyle is used to transfer the style of the first frame, then, AnyV2V will use edited first frame and the video to trans- 2https://www.domoai.app/ ...

Pith tools

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