Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 6 minor 53 references

MoCLIP: Motion-Aware Fine-Tuning and Distillation of CLIP for Human Motion Generation

T0 review · 4 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Fine-tuning CLIP's text encoder on motion sequences improves text-motion alignment in CLIP-based generators while keeping generation quality nearly unchanged.

desk verdict A clean, clearly written idea with a load-bearing experimental confound: the gains may come from extra fine-tuning, not from MoCLIP. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.10810 v1 pith:DHUHUCVW submitted 2025-05-16 cs.CV

Gabriel Maldonado , Armin Danesh Pazho , Ghazal Alinezhad Noghre , Vinit Katariya , Hamed Tabkhi This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.CV
keywords text-to-motiongenerationCLIPfine-tuningmotion-awareembeddingscontrastivelearningknowledgedistillationtetheringlossR-Precisionhumanmotion
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

MoCLIP sets out to fix a mismatch: CLIP's text encoder, trained on image–text pairs, lacks the temporal and kinematic cues needed to turn a sentence into realistic 3D human motion. The paper claims that fine-tuning that text encoder while pairing it with a motion encoder—using contrastive learning, a cosine alignment term, and a tethering loss that keeps the new embeddings near the original CLIP space—produces text embeddings that downstream text-to-motion generators can use directly. Integrated by swapping CLIP for MoCLIP and then fine-tuning three existing generators, the new embeddings raise Top-1, Top-2, and Top-3 R-Precision for MoMask and BAMM while leaving FID roughly unchanged. This matters because it promises a low-cost, drop-in upgrade for CLIP-based motion pipelines rather than a redesign of the generator. The paper also reports that one architecture, BAD, does not benefit, so the gains are not universal.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing mechanism is the MoCLIP fine-tuning objective applied to CLIP's text encoder. A motion encoder adapted from M2T-Interpretable, with added cross-limb attention between hands and feet and temporal attention before pooling, maps a motion sequence into an embedding; a symmetric contrastive loss aligns motion and text embeddings in a shared space; a cosine alignment loss pushes each motion-text pair together directly; and a tethering loss (mean-squared error to the frozen, original CLIP text encoder) keeps the student embeddings close enough to CLIP's semantics to avoid catastrophic forgetting. The tethering weight controls that trade-off. The frozen MoCLIP encoder then replaces standard CLIP in downstream generators, and the downstream models are fine-tuned on the new embedding space.

What would settle it

Run the exact MoMask and BAMM fine-tuning protocol of the paper with the original, unmodified CLIP text encoder frozen in place of MoCLIP; if Top-1 R-Precision improves as much as or more than the reported 0.521 to 0.533 and 0.522 to 0.531 moves, the central claim is refuted.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that a motion-fine-tuned CLIP text encoder, called MoCLIP, improves text-to-motion alignment in downstream generative models. On HumanML3D, replacing the standard CLIP text encoder with frozen MoCLIP embeddings raises MoMask Top-1 R-Precision from 0.521 to 0.533 and BAMM from 0.522 to 0.531, with similar Top-2 and Top-3 gains and only a small FID increase (0.045 to 0.047 for MoMask; 0.055 to 0.064 for BAMM). The authors attribute the improvement to a joint motion-text latent space built by the motion encoder and the tethering loss, which lets the text embeddings become motion-aware without losing CLIP's general semantic structure. They describe the result as a versatile upgrade that works with existing CLIP-based pipelines by simply replacing the encoder and fine-tuning the generator.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the retrieval gains come from MoCLIP's motion-aware embeddings themselves, not from the additional 200 epochs of downstream fine-tuning that accompanied the embedding swap in every comparison.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Existing CLIP-based text-to-motion generators can adopt MoCLIP by swapping the text encoder and fine-tuning, without changing the generator architecture.
  • For token-based models such as MoMask and BAMM, the reported gains are roughly 0.9 to 1.7 percentage points in Top-1, Top-2, and Top-3 R-Precision, plus a 2 to 3 percent reduction in multimodal distance.
  • FID stays nearly flat for MoMask and rises slightly for BAMM, so better text-motion alignment comes at a small or negligible perceptual-quality cost in these models.
  • The failure on BAD shows that architecture matters: not every CLIP-based motion generator will benefit from the same embeddings, and models with bidirectional autoregressive diffusion may need adapted fine-tuning.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Editorial inference: The reported gains are not yet isolated from the effect of extra downstream training, because the paper fine-tunes each generator for 200 epochs with MoCLIP but reports no identical fine-tuning control with the original CLIP encoder; a matched control would determine whether the embedding shift, rather than the extra compute, drives the R-Precision gains.
  • Editorial inference: The tethering loss anchors the student to the original CLIP space, so the method inherits whichever biases CLIP already has; testing on far out-of-distribution motion text would probe whether that anchor helps or limits.
  • Editorial inference: The same recipe—a domain encoder aligned to CLIP's text space under a tethering constraint—could transfer to other temporally structured CLIP-based tasks such as text-to-audio or text-to-video, where the frozen text encoder also lacks temporal awareness.
  • Editorial inference: Because the tethering weight and fine-tuning epochs are chosen from test-set behavior in the paper's own ablations, the headline numbers likely reflect favourable choices; a pre-registered validation split would give a more neutral estimate.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

4 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper proposes MoCLIP, a fine-tuning strategy for CLIP's text encoder that introduces a motion encoder head with contrastive learning, a tethering (distillation) loss, and a cosine alignment loss to produce motion-aware text embeddings. The authors replace the standard CLIP encoder in three text-to-motion generation models (MoMask, BAMM, and BAD) with MoCLIP, freeze it, and fine-tune the downstream models for 200 epochs. They report R-Precision gains for MoMask (Top-1 from 0.521 to 0.533) and BAMM (Top-1 from 0.522 to 0.531), with slightly worse FID, while BAD shows a Top-1 decline (0.517 to 0.510). Ablations examine the tethering loss weight and the number of fine-tuning epochs.

Significance. If the central claim were established, MoCLIP would be a practical, drop-in enhancement for CLIP-based text-to-motion pipelines: it preserves compatibility with existing architectures and requires no changes at inference time. The paper also honestly reports a negative result for BAD and includes uncertainty intervals on all main metrics. However, the experimental design currently does not isolate the effect of MoCLIP's embeddings from the effect of additional downstream fine-tuning, and the final numbers are selected using test-set metrics. As a result, the evidence for the claimed improvement is not yet convincing.

major comments (4)
  1. [Section 4.3 and Table 1] The comparison between baseline models and MoCLIP-integrated models is confounded by an additional 200-epoch fine-tuning of the downstream models in the MoCLIP condition. The baseline rows in Table 1 are the originally published checkpoints, whereas the +MoCLIP rows are obtained after fine-tuning each downstream model for 200 epochs at learning rate 1e-6 with the MoCLIP text encoder frozen. Since the only channel through which MoCLIP can influence the output is its embedding space, a control that fine-tunes the same downstream models with the original, frozen CLIP encoder under the identical 200-epoch protocol is required. Without this control, the reported Top-1 gains of +0.012 (MoMask) and +0.009 (BAMM) cannot be attributed to MoCLIP's motion-aware embeddings rather than to the extra training itself. The BAD result (-0.007) underscores that the effect of additional training is not uniform, making the missing control critical for the paper's central claim.
  2. [Section 6.4 and Table 2] The final configurations, including the tethering loss weight λ and the number of fine-tuning epochs, are selected by evaluating FID and MM-Dist on the test split of HumanML3D. For example, the text states that 'model selection prioritized optimal FID' and selects λ=0.4 for MoMask and BAMM and 10-epoch naive training for BAD based on these test-set metrics. Because the same test set is then used to report the final numbers in Table 1, the reported improvements are selected estimates rather than unbiased held-out evaluations. The paper should either use a validation split for hyperparameter selection or explicitly acknowledge that the reported test metrics are post-selection and provide a corrected evaluation on a truly held-out set.
  3. [Section 6.4, Table 2, and Table 1] The BAD+MoCLIP result reported in Table 1 is obtained from the naive-trained MoCLIP variant (10 epochs of text-encoder unfreezing), not from the full MoCLIP method described in Section 3, which includes the tethering loss, cosine alignment, and cross-limb attention. Section 6.4 states: 'the naive-trained BAD model was selected for final use.' This is inconsistent with the paper's framing of MoCLIP as a single model with contrastive learning, tethering loss, and cosine alignment, and it means the BAD row does not evaluate the proposed method. Consequently, the claim that MoCLIP 'seamlessly integrates into various CLIP-based methods' is not supported by the BAD experiment, and the paper's method description and final results are not aligned.
  4. [Section 6.2 and Section 4.3] The naive-versus-advanced ablation confounds the fine-tuning schedule with the architectural and loss changes. In the naive condition the text encoder is unfrozen for only 2, 5, 7, or 10 epochs, while the advanced condition unfreezes it for 15 epochs (Section 4.3). Thus the comparison between naive and advanced MoCLIP changes at least two factors simultaneously: the fine-tuning duration and the presence of positional encodings, cross-limb attention, tethering loss, and cosine alignment. This makes it impossible to attribute observed differences to the tethering loss or the attention mechanisms, which are presented as key contributions. The ablation should hold the fine-tuning schedule fixed when isolating the effect of each proposed component.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Section 4.2] The FID definition refers to Inception v3 image features, but the paper evaluates motions; please clarify which feature extractor (e.g., the T2M motion encoder) is used for the reported FID values.
  2. [Section 6.1] The notation 'λ∈ 0, 0.2, 0.4, 0.6, 0.8, 1.0' should be written as a set, e.g., λ∈{0, 0.2, 0.4, 0.6, 0.8, 1.0}.
  3. [Figure 3] The caption refers to 'green axis' and 'blue axis,' but the figure appears to be in color; if the final version is grayscale, the line styles should be distinguished clearly.
  4. [Table 2] Please state the criterion for bold and underline: which metric or combination of metrics determined the best and second-best entries.
  5. [Section 5] The sentence 'MoCLIP improves retrieval accuracy across multiple models' is too absolute given the BAD drop; rephrase to 'in MoMask and BAMM'.
  6. [Section 4.1] The absence of KIT-ML experiments is a limitation; please mention it explicitly in the experimental setup and in the conclusion, beyond noting that 'pre-trained models for KIT-ML were unavailable.'

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 4.0 of 10

Partial circularity: the reported FID values are selected minima from the test-set hyperparameter search, while the R-Precision gains are not directly optimized and retain independent content.

  1. fitted input called prediction [Section 6.4 (Ablation Study: Analysis and Findings), Table 2; final Table 1]
    "model selection prioritized optimal FID along with consistency across metrics. MoMask demonstrated its strongest performance at a moderate tethering weight of λ = 0.4, achieving the best overall FID (0.047) ... Similarly, BAMM attained its lowest FID (0.064) ... at λ = 0.4, supporting this choice for final deployment. ... BAD ... achieving the best naive FID (0.062) at 10 epochs. Given this performance relative to advanced methods, the naive-trained BAD model was selected for final use."

    The final MoCLIP configurations are chosen by minimizing FID on the test split, and the same optimum values are then presented in Table 1 as MoCLIP's results (MoMask 0.047, BAMM 0.064, BAD 0.062). The 'maintaining competitive FID' claim is therefore the argmin of the hyperparameter search rather than an independent prediction: the reported FID is selected, not forecast. The Top-1 R-Precision values at the selected configurations were not the selection criterion (e.g., MoMask λ=0.4 gives Top-1 0.533 while λ=0.8 gives 0.536), so the retrieval-accuracy claim retains independent content.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain contains no equation-level circularity: the contrastive, tethering, and cosine-alignment losses (Eqs. 1, 3, 4, 5) do not presuppose the downstream R-Precision or FID results, and the evaluation uses an external T2M evaluator rather than MoCLIP's own embeddings. The central issue is an indirect fitting loop in the experimental protocol: Section 6.4 selects lambda_distill and fine-tuning epochs by the best test-set FID, and Table 1 then reports those same selected FID values as MoCLIP's performance. This makes the FID comparison partially circular by construction for the tested configurations. The R-Precision improvement (MoMask +0.012, BAMM +0.009) is not directly optimized by that selection and is therefore a real, though confounded, empirical claim; a control fine-tuning the baselines for the same 200 epochs with the original CLIP would be needed to rule out the extra-training confound. That missing control is a correctness risk, not a circularity. No load-bearing self-citation was found.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central result rests on the motion encoder's embedding quality, the distillation loss preserving CLIP semantics, and the compatibility of pre-trained VQ-VAE pipelines with a new text encoder. The free parameters are the tethering weight and the fine-tuning duration, both selected using test-set metrics, which means part of the reported gain is fitted to the evaluation.

free parameters (2)
  • lambda_distill (tethering loss weight) = 0.4 for MoMask and BAMM; BAD uses naive model without tethering
    Chosen from ablation over {0, 0.2, 0.4, 0.6, 0.8, 1.0} in Section 6.1, selecting the value that gives lowest FID on the HumanML3D test set (Table 2). This is a free parameter fitted to the evaluation metric.
  • Fine-tuning epochs for text encoder unfreeze = 15 unfrozen epochs after 35 frozen (total 50) for MoMask/BAMM; BAD final uses 10 epochs naive
    The schedule is set by the authors; the BAD configuration is selected from {2, 5, 7, 10} epochs based on test FID and R-Precision in Section 6.2 and Table 2. Another fitted choice.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption M2T-Interpretable's motion embeddings are an appropriate semantic space for aligning text and motion.
    Used as the fixed motion encoder in contrastive training (Section 3). The paper cites [34] as SOTA motion captioning but provides no independent evidence that its embeddings are the right target for the downstream generation task.
  • domain assumption L2 distillation loss preserves CLIP's pre-trained semantic knowledge and prevents catastrophic forgetting.
    Adopted from CLIP-CITE [20] and LDIFS [23] (Section 3.1); the paper does not verify semantic retention beyond the reported metrics.
  • domain assumption The pre-trained VQ-VAE and generative modules of MoMask, BAMM, and BAD remain functional when the text encoder is replaced and the model is fine-tuned at lr 1e-6.
    Central to the integration strategy in Section 4.3; the BAD regression shows this assumption can fail, so it is load-bearing.
  • standard math HumanML3D R-Precision computed with a fixed pre-trained motion encoder is a valid measure of text-to-motion alignment of generated motions.
    Standard evaluation protocol in the field (Section 4.2); accepted as background.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of MoCLIP: Motion-Aware Fine-Tuning and Distillation of CLIP for Human Motion Generation." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/DHUHUCVW

@misc{pith2026250510810,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: MoCLIP: Motion-Aware Fine-Tuning and Distillation of CLIP for Human Motion Generation},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/DHUHUCVW}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.10810}
}
read the original abstract

Human motion generation is essential for fields such as animation, robotics, and virtual reality, requiring models that effectively capture motion dynamics from text descriptions. Existing approaches often rely on Contrastive Language-Image Pretraining (CLIP)-based text encoders, but their training on text-image pairs constrains their ability to understand temporal and kinematic structures inherent in motion and motion generation. This work introduces MoCLIP, a fine-tuned CLIP model with an additional motion encoding head, trained on motion sequences using contrastive learning and tethering loss. By explicitly incorporating motion-aware representations, MoCLIP enhances motion fidelity while remaining compatible with existing CLIP-based pipelines and seamlessly integrating into various CLIP-based methods. Experiments demonstrate that MoCLIP improves Top-1, Top-2, and Top-3 accuracy while maintaining competitive FID, leading to improved text-to-motion alignment results. These results highlight MoCLIP's versatility and effectiveness, establishing it as a robust framework for enhancing motion generation.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2505.10810 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Overview of our MoCLIP training framework, which fine-tunes CLIP for human motion representation. We adopt M2T [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Example integration of the MoCLIP model into existing text-to-motion generation pipelines. MoCLIP serves as a direct replace [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Ablation studies examining the impact of fine-tuning duration in naive training (top row) and tethering loss weight [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_3.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

53 extracted references · 43 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Skeleton- aware networks for deep motion retargeting

    Kfir Aberman, Peizhuo Li, Dani Lischinski, Olga Sorkine- Hornung, Daniel Cohen-Or, and Baoquan Chen. Skeleton- aware networks for deep motion retargeting. ACM Trans. Graph., 39(4), 2020. 1

    work page 2020

  2. [2]

    Text2action: Generative adversarial synthesis from language to action, 2017

    Hyemin Ahn, Timothy Ha, Yunho Choi, Hwiyeon Yoo, and Songhwai Oh. Text2action: Generative adversarial synthesis from language to action, 2017. 2

    work page 2017

  3. [3]

    Lan- guage2pose: Natural language grounded pose forecasting,

    Chaitanya Ahuja and Louis-Philippe Morency. Lan- guage2pose: Natural language grounded pose forecasting,

    work page

  4. [4]

    Make-an-animation: Large-scale text- conditional 3d human motion generation

    Samaneh Azadi, Akbar Shah, Thomas Hayes, Devi Parikh, and Sonal Gupta. Make-an-animation: Large-scale text- conditional 3d human motion generation. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vi- sion, pages 15039–15048, 2023. 1

    work page 2023

  5. [5]

    MoFM: A Large-Scale Human Motion Foundation Model

    Mohammadreza Baharani, Ghazal Alinezhad Noghre, Armin Danesh Pazho, Gabriel Maldonado, and Hamed Tabkhi. Mofm: A large-scale human motion foundation model. arXiv preprint arXiv:2502.05432, 2025. 1, 2

    work page Pith review arXiv 2025

  6. [6]

    Executing your commands via motion diffusion in latent space

    Xin Chen, Biao Jiang, Wen Liu, Zilong Huang, Bin Fu, Tao Chen, and Gang Yu. Executing your commands via motion diffusion in latent space. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), pages 18000–18010, 2023. 5

    work page 2023

  7. [7]

    Livephoto: Real image animation with text-guided motion control

    Xi Chen, Zhiheng Liu, Mengting Chen, Yutong Feng, Yu Liu, Yujun Shen, and Hengshuang Zhao. Livephoto: Real image animation with text-guided motion control. In Eu- ropean Conference on Computer Vision , pages 475–491. Springer, 2024. 1

    work page 2024

  8. [8]

    Channel-wise topology refinement graph convolution for skeleton-based action recognition

    Yuxin Chen, Ziqi Zhang, Chunfeng Yuan, Bing Li, Ying Deng, and Weiming Hu. Channel-wise topology refinement graph convolution for skeleton-based action recognition. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV), pages 13359–13368, 2021. 3

    work page 2021

Show all 53 references
  1. [9]

    Mofusion: A framework for denoising-diffusion-based motion synthesis

    Rishabh Dabral, Muhammad Hamza Mughal, Vladislav Golyanik, and Christian Theobalt. Mofusion: A framework for denoising-diffusion-based motion synthesis. In Proceed- ings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), pages 9760–9770, 2023. 1

    2023

  2. [10]

    Avatars grow legs: Generating smooth human motion from sparse tracking in- puts with diffusion model

    Yuming Du, Robin Kips, Albert Pumarola, Sebastian Starke, Ali Thabet, and Artsiom Sanakoyeu. Avatars grow legs: Generating smooth human motion from sparse tracking in- puts with diffusion model. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recogniti...

    2023

  3. [11]

    Transformer- based generative adversarial networks in computer vision: A comprehensive survey

    Shiv Ram Dubey and Satish Kumar Singh. Transformer- based generative adversarial networks in computer vision: A comprehensive survey. IEEE Transactions on Artificial In- telligence, 2024. 2

    2024

  4. [12]

    Esser, R

    P. Esser, R. Rombach, and B. Ommer. Taming transform- ers for high-resolution image synthesis. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), pages 12873–12883, 2021. 2

    2021

  5. [13]

    Ac- tion2motion: Conditioned generation of 3d human motions

    Chuan Guo, Xinxin Zuo, Sen Wang, Shihao Zou, Qingyao Sun, Annan Deng, Minglun Gong, and Li Cheng. Ac- tion2motion: Conditioned generation of 3d human motions. In Proceedings of the 28th ACM International Conference on Multimedia. ACM, 2020. 1, 5

    2020

  6. [14]

    Generating diverse and natural 3d human motions from text

    Chuan Guo, Shihao Zou, Xinxin Zuo, Sen Wang, Wei Ji, Xingyu Li, and Li Cheng. Generating diverse and natural 3d human motions from text. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), pages 5152–5161, 2022. 1, 2, 4, 5

    2022

  7. [15]

    Tm2t: Stochastic and tokenized modeling for the reciprocal genera- tion of 3d human motions and texts

    Chuan Guo, Xinxin Zuo, Sen Wang, and Li Cheng. Tm2t: Stochastic and tokenized modeling for the reciprocal genera- tion of 3d human motions and texts. InEuropean Conference on Computer Vision, pages 580–597. Springer, 2022. 2, 5

    2022

  8. [16]

    Momask: Generative masked model- ing of 3d human motions

    Chuan Guo, Yuxuan Mu, Muhammad Gohar Javed, Sen Wang, and Li Cheng. Momask: Generative masked model- ing of 3d human motions. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition , pages 1900–1910, 2024. 4, 5

    1900

  9. [17]

    Bad: Bidirectional auto-regressive diffusion for text-to-motion generation

    S Rohollah Hosseyni, Ali Ahmad Rahmani, S Jamal Seyed- mohammadi, Sanaz Seyedin, and Arash Mohammadi. Bad: Bidirectional auto-regressive diffusion for text-to-motion generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:2409.10847, 2024. 4, 5

    2024 arXiv

  10. [18]

    A recurrent variational autoen- coder for human motion synthesis

    Taku Komura, Ikhsanul Habibie, Daniel Holden, Jonathan Schwarz, and Joe Yearsley. A recurrent variational autoen- coder for human motion synthesis. In The 28th British Ma- chine Vision Conference (BMVC 2017) , 2017. The 28th British Machine Vision Conference , BMVC 2017 ; Con-...

    2017

  11. [19]

    Omg: Towards open-vocabulary motion generation via mix- ture of controllers

    Han Liang, Jiacheng Bao, Ruichi Zhang, Sihan Ren, Yuecheng Xu, Sibei Yang, Xin Chen, Jingyi Yu, and Lan Xu. Omg: Towards open-vocabulary motion generation via mix- ture of controllers. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Con- ference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, page...

    2024

  12. [20]

    Fully fine-tuned clip models are efficient few-shot learners

    Mushui Liu, Bozheng Li, and Yunlong Yu. Fully fine-tuned clip models are efficient few-shot learners. arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.04003, 2024. 3

    2024 arXiv

  13. [21]

    Disentangling and unifying graph con- volutions for skeleton-based action recognition

    Ziyu Liu, Hongwen Zhang, Zhenghao Chen, Zhiyong Wang, and Wanli Ouyang. Disentangling and unifying graph con- volutions for skeleton-based action recognition. In Proceed- ings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), pages 143–152, 2020. 3

    2020

  14. [22]

    Amass: Archive of motion capture as surface shapes

    Naureen Mahmood, Nima Ghorbani, Nikolaus F Troje, Ger- ard Pons-Moll, and Michael J Black. Amass: Archive of motion capture as surface shapes. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF international conference on computer vision, pages 5442–5451, 2019. 5

    2019

  15. [23]

    Fine-tuning can cripple your foundation model; preserving features may be the solution

    Jishnu Mukhoti, Yarin Gal, Philip HS Torr, and Puneet K Dokania. Fine-tuning can cripple your foundation model; preserving features may be the solution. arXiv preprint arXiv:2308.13320, 2023. 2, 3

    2023 arXiv

  16. [24]

    An exploratory study on human-centric video anomaly detection through variational autoencoders and trajectory prediction

    Ghazal Alinezhad Noghre, Armin Danesh Pazho, and Hamed Tabkhi. An exploratory study on human-centric video anomaly detection through variational autoencoders and trajectory prediction. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Winter Conference on Applications of Computer Vision , pages ...

    2024

  17. [25]

    Ancilia: Scalable intelligent video surveillance for the artificial intelligence of things

    Armin Danesh Pazho, Christopher Neff, Ghazal Alinezhad Noghre, Babak Rahimi Ardabili, Shanle Yao, Moham- madreza Baharani, and Hamed Tabkhi. Ancilia: Scalable intelligent video surveillance for the artificial intelligence of things. IEEE Internet of Things Journal , 10(17):149...

    2023

  18. [26]

    A survey of graph-based deep learning for anomaly detection in distributed systems

    Armin Danesh Pazho, Ghazal Alinezhad Noghre, Arnab A Purkayastha, Jagannadh Vempati, Otto Martin, and Hamed Tabkhi. A survey of graph-based deep learning for anomaly detection in distributed systems. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering, 36(1):1–20, 2023. 1

    2023

  19. [27]

    Vt-former: An exploratory study on vehicle trajectory prediction for highway surveil- lance through graph isomorphism and transformer

    Armin Danesh Pazho, Ghazal Alinezhad Noghre, Vinit Katariya, and Hamed Tabkhi. Vt-former: An exploratory study on vehicle trajectory prediction for highway surveil- lance through graph isomorphism and transformer. In Pro- ceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision ...

    2024

  20. [28]

    Temos: Generating diverse human motions from textual descriptions

    Mathis Petrovich, Michael J Black, and G ¨ul Varol. Temos: Generating diverse human motions from textual descriptions. In European Conference on Computer Vision , pages 480–

  21. [29]

    Bamm: Bidirectional autoregressive motion model

    Ekkasit Pinyoanuntapong, Muhammad Usama Saleem, Pu Wang, Minwoo Lee, Srijan Das, and Chen Chen. Bamm: Bidirectional autoregressive motion model. In Computer Vi- sion – ECCV 2024, 2024. 2, 4, 5

    2024

  22. [30]

    Mmm: Generative masked motion model

    Ekkasit Pinyoanuntapong, Pu Wang, Minwoo Lee, and Chen Chen. Mmm: Generative masked motion model. In Pro- ceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), 2024. 2, 5

    2024

  23. [31]

    The kit motion-language dataset

    Matthias Plappert, Christian Mandery, and Tamim Asfour. The kit motion-language dataset. Big Data, 4(4):236–252,

  24. [32]

    Skeleton-based action recognition via spatial and temporal transformer networks

    Chiara Plizzari, Marco Cannici, and Matteo Matteucci. Skeleton-based action recognition via spatial and temporal transformer networks. Computer Vision and Image Under- standing, 208:103219, 2021. 3

    2021

  25. [33]

    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. 1, 2

    2021

  26. [34]

    Guided attention for interpretable mo- tion captioning

    Karim Radouane, Andon Tchechmedjiev, Sylvie Ranwez, and Julien Lagarde. Guided attention for interpretable mo- tion captioning. In Proceedings of the 35th British Machine Vision Conference, 2024. 3

    2024

  27. [35]

    Generat- ing diverse high-fidelity images with vq-vae-2

    Ali Razavi, Aaron van den Oord, and Oriol Vinyals. Generat- ing diverse high-fidelity images with vq-vae-2. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS), 2019. 2

    2019

  28. [36]

    Skeleton-based action recognition with multi-stream adap- tive graph convolutional networks

    Lei Shi, Yifan Zhang, Jian Cheng, and Hanqing Lu. Skeleton-based action recognition with multi-stream adap- tive graph convolutional networks. IEEE Transactions on Image Processing, 29:9532–9545, 2020. 3

    2020

  29. [37]

    Opinion unaware image quality assessment via ad- versarial convolutional variational autoencoder

    Ankit Shukla, Avinash Upadhyay, Swati Bhugra, and Manoj Sharma. Opinion unaware image quality assessment via ad- versarial convolutional variational autoencoder. In Proceed- ings of the IEEE/CVF winter conference on applications of computer vision, pages 2153–2163, 2024. 2

    2024

  30. [38]

    Curobo: Parallelized collision-free robot mo- tion generation

    Balakumar Sundaralingam, Siva Kumar Sastry Hari, Adam Fishman, Caelan Garrett, Karl Van Wyk, Valts Blukis, Alexander Millane, Helen Oleynikova, Ankur Handa, Fabio Ramos, et al. Curobo: Parallelized collision-free robot mo- tion generation. In 2023 IEEE International Conference...

    2023

  31. [39]

    Rethinking the inception archi- tecture for computer vision

    Christian Szegedy, Vincent Vanhoucke, Sergey Ioffe, Jon Shlens, and Zbigniew Wojna. Rethinking the inception archi- tecture for computer vision. In Proceedings of the IEEE con- ference on computer vision and pattern recognition , pages 2818–2826, 2016. 5

    2016

  32. [40]

    Bermano, and Daniel Cohen-Or

    Guy Tevet, Brian Gordon, Amir Hertz, Amit H. Bermano, and Daniel Cohen-Or. Motionclip: Exposing human motion generation to clip space, 2022. 1, 2

    2022

  33. [41]

    Guy Tevet, Sigal Raab, Brian Gordon, Yonatan Shafir, Daniel Cohen-Or, and Amit H. Bermano. Human motion diffusion model, 2022. 1, 5

    2022

  34. [42]

    Relmogen: Integrat- ing motion generation in reinforcement learning for mobile manipulation

    Fei Xia, Chengshu Li, Roberto Mart ´ın-Mart´ın, Or Litany, Alexander Toshev, and Silvio Savarese. Relmogen: Integrat- ing motion generation in reinforcement learning for mobile manipulation. In 2021 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA) , pages 4583–4...

    2021

  35. [43]

    Autore- gressive queries for adaptive tracking with spatio-temporal transformers

    Jinxia Xie, Bineng Zhong, Zhiyi Mo, Shengping Zhang, Liangtao Shi, Shuxiang Song, and Rongrong Ji. Autore- gressive queries for adaptive tracking with spatio-temporal transformers. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 1930...

    2024

  36. [44]

    Improving viewing experiences of first-person shooter gameplays with automatically-generated motion effects

    Gyeore Yun, Hyoseung Lee, Sangyoon Han, and Seungmoon Choi. Improving viewing experiences of first-person shooter gameplays with automatically-generated motion effects. In Proceedings of the 2021 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems, pages 1–14, 2021. 1

    2021

  37. [45]

    T2m-gpt: Generating human motion from textual de- scriptions with discrete representations

    Jianrong Zhang, Yangsong Zhang, Xiaodong Cun, Shaoli Huang, Yong Zhang, Hongwei Zhao, Hongtao Lu, and Xi Shen. T2m-gpt: Generating human motion from textual de- scriptions with discrete representations. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern R...

    2023

  38. [46]

    Generating human motion from textual descrip- tions with discrete representations

    Jianrong Zhang, Yangsong Zhang, Xiaodong Cun, Yong Zhang, Hongwei Zhao, Hongtao Lu, Xi Shen, and Ying Shan. Generating human motion from textual descrip- tions with discrete representations. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, ...

    2023

  39. [47]

    Motiondif- fuse: Text-driven human motion generation with diffusion model, 2022

    Mingyuan Zhang, Zhongang Cai, Liang Pan, Fangzhou Hong, Xinying Guo, Lei Yang, and Ziwei Liu. Motiondif- fuse: Text-driven human motion generation with diffusion model, 2022. 5

    2022

  40. [48]

    Re- MoDiffuse: Retrieval-augmented motion diffusion model

    Mingyuan Zhang, Xinying Guo, Liang Pan, Zhongang Cai, Fangzhou Hong, Huirong Li, Lei Yang, and Ziwei Liu. Re- MoDiffuse: Retrieval-augmented motion diffusion model. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV), 2023. 5

    2023

  41. [49]

    Large motion model for unified multi-modal motion generation

    Mingyuan Zhang, Daisheng Jin, Chenyang Gu, Fangzhou Hong, Zhongang Cai, Jingfang Huang, Chongzhi Zhang, Xinying Guo, Lei Yang, Ying He, et al. Large motion model for unified multi-modal motion generation. In European Conference on Computer Vision , pages 397–421. Springer,

  42. [50]

    Pose-to-motion: Cross- domain motion retargeting with pose prior

    Qingqing Zhao, Peizhuo Li, Wang Yifan, Olga Sorkine- Hornung, and Gordon Wetzstein. Pose-to-motion: Cross- domain motion retargeting with pose prior. Computer Graphics Forum, 42(8):123–135, 2023. 1

    2023

  43. [51]

    Senm-vae: Semi-supervised noise modeling with hierarchical variational autoencoder

    Dihan Zheng, Yihang Zou, Xiaowen Zhang, and Chen- glong Bao. Senm-vae: Semi-supervised noise modeling with hierarchical variational autoencoder. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 25889–25899, 2024. 2

    2024

  44. [52]

    Human motion generation: A survey

    Wentao Zhu, Xiaoxuan Ma, Dongwoo Ro, Hai Ci, Jinlu Zhang, Jiaxin Shi, Feng Gao, Qi Tian, and Yizhou Wang. Human motion generation: A survey. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence , 46(4):2430– 2449, 2023. 1

    2023

  45. [497]

    Springer, 2022. 1, 2

    2022

Pith tools

Reviewed August 15, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.