Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 1 cited by

DCI: Dual-Conditional Inversion for Boosting Diffusion-Based Image Editing

T0 review · 4 major / 5 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 Dual-Conditional Inversion formulates diffusion inversion as a fixed-point problem conditioned on both the source prompt and the source image, and reports state-of-the-art reconstruction and editing fidelity on PIE-Bench with…

desk verdict DCI has a genuinely new combination and large reported gains, but the core equations as written are ill-typed and the fixed-point step contradicts the algorithm, so the central claim is not yet supported. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.02560 v1 pith:LF2QD2IB submitted 2025-06-03 cs.CV

Zixiang Li , Haoyu Wang , Wei Wang , Chuangchuang Tan , Yunchao Wei , Yao Zhao This is my paper
classification cs.CV
keywords Dual-ConditionalInversiondiffusionimageeditingfixed-pointoptimizationreference-guidednoisecorrectionlatentmodelsPrompt-to-Prompt
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

Diffusion image editing needs an inversion step that turns a real image back into a latent noise code, and existing methods typically sacrifice either how faithfully the original image is rebuilt or how freely the result can be edited. This paper claims that both goals can be pursued at once by making the inversion process depend on two conditions instead of one: the source text prompt and the source image itself. The proposed Dual-Conditional Inversion (DCI) casts inversion as a fixed-point optimization problem that minimizes both the gap between predicted and reference noise and the reconstruction error, reporting reduced latent noise gap and improved editing precision on the PIE-Bench benchmark with a standard editing engine. If the claim holds, DCI would be a retraining-free plug-in improvement for existing diffusion editing pipelines.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the dual-condition fixed-point formulation of inversion. DCI defines the update $z_t = C_{t,1} z_{t-1} + C_{t,2} \hat{\epsilon}$, where $\hat{\epsilon}$ is a prompt-predicted noise corrected by a one-step gradient descent on $\|\hat{\epsilon}_{raw} - E(z_0)\|^2$, then enforces self-consistency by minimizing $\|f_\theta(z_t) - z_t\|^2$ with $f_\theta(z_t) = C_{t,1} z_{t-1} + C_{t,2} \epsilon_\theta(z_t, t, p_s)$. The reference term supplies visual grounding; the fixed-point term stabilizes the trajectory against error accumulation. Together they aim to make the final latent $z_T$ approximate the ideal generative noise that a perfect inversion would recover.

What would settle it

Replace $\epsilon_{ref}=E(z_0)$ in DCI with a fixed random vector of the same norm while keeping all other steps identical; if the reported PIE-Bench improvement over SPDInv survives this substitution, then the reference anchoring is not what drives the gain, and the paper's central mechanism is falsified.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

DCI's central claim is that the ideal inversion noise should be anchored not only to the text prompt but to the visual content of the image. The method adds a reference-guided noise correction stage, in which the raw prompt-conditioned noise prediction is nudged toward a reference noise $\epsilon_{ref}=E(z_0)$ extracted from the VAE-encoded source latent, and a fixed-point latent refinement stage, in which each latent $z_t$ is iteratively updated to satisfy the DDIM inversion equation $z_t = f_\theta(z_t)$. The paper reports that the resulting inversion noise $z_T$ is closer to the ideal generative noise and achieves the best scores across DINO, PSNR, LPIPS, MSE, SSIM, and CLIP on PIE-Bench with Prompt-to-Prompt editing, including a 31.1% DINO improvement over the previous best method SPDInv.

Load-bearing premise

The whole correction stage rests on treating the VAE-encoded source latent, $E(z_0)$, as a meaningful reference noise for the diffusion model to align with, even though $z_0$ is not a noise sample from the forward diffusion process.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • DCI can be added to existing diffusion editing pipelines that use DDIM inversion without retraining or architecture changes, so its reported gains should transfer to any Prompt-to-Prompt style editor.
  • Because it shrinks the latent noise gap, DCI should improve any downstream task that starts from the inverted latent, including mask-guided and attention-controlled editing.
  • The fixed-point refinement converges in a few iterations, with $K=5$ already saturating performance and $K=2$ competitive, so the added computational cost is modest.
  • The same dual-condition objective also applies to pure reconstruction, where DCI reports lower MSE and higher CLIP than DDIM and SPDInv.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Beyond the paper, the reference-noise correction is a generic mechanism that could be attached to any inversion method with access to a VAE encoder, and its contribution could be isolated by testing editors other than Prompt-to-Prompt.
  • A natural extension is to adapt the correction strength per timestep or iterate the correction step, since the paper's ablation shows that a single global weight $\lambda$ is sensitive and degrades at larger values.
  • Read as an ODE solver, DCI's per-timestep fixed-point iteration resembles a Picard-like correction for the discretization error of DDIM, which suggests that convergence analyses from numerical analysis could be brought to bear on inversion quality.
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 Dual-Conditional Inversion (DCI), a training-free inversion method intended to improve diffusion-based image editing. Given a source image latent z0 and source prompt p_s, DCI computes a prompt-conditioned noise prediction at each DDIM step, defines a reference noise vector through a VAE encoder (Eq. 5), and uses an L2 loss with one gradient step to correct the prediction (Eqs. 6-7). It then applies a fixed-point self-consistency refinement on the latent z_t (Eqs. 9-12) and reports large improvements over SPDInv and other baselines on PIE-Bench under Prompt-to-Prompt editing (Table 1), with an ablation over hyperparameters (Table 2). The paper is clearly written and the experiments are broad, but the core derivation has serious type and consistency errors.

Significance. If the method were valid, DCI would be a practically attractive contribution: it is plug-and-play, requires no retraining, and the reported gains (31.1% DINO, 8.3% LPIPS, 13.3% MSE over SPDInv) are substantial. The paper also provides a useful benchmark comparison and a careful ablation. However, the central mechanism is not adequately grounded: Eq. (5) defines epsilon_ref = E(z0), which is ill-typed because z0 is already a VAE latent and E is an image encoder; reinterpreting the reference as z0 would still leave the correction without a diffusion-process justification. Because this reference-guided correction is the main claimed source of improvement, the empirical results do not currently substantiate the theoretical contribution. The paper does not provide code to resolve the ambiguity.

major comments (4)
  1. [Sec. 3.2.1, Eqs. (5)-(7)] Section 3.2.1, Eqs. (5)-(7): The reference noise epsilon_ref = E(z0) is not a valid object. In Stable Diffusion, z0 is the 4-channel latent produced by the VAE encoder E, while E expects a 3-channel RGB image; applying E to z0 is a type mismatch, and no implementation detail is given. If the intended definition is epsilon_ref = z0, then Eq. (6) compares a high-timestep noise prediction with a clean latent, which has no justification from the diffusion forward process. Since this anchor is the only image-derived signal in the method, the correction is either unimplementable or an arbitrary perturbation.
  2. [Sec. 3.2.2, Eqs. (9)-(11) vs. Algorithm 1] Section 3.2.2, Eqs. (9)-(11) vs. Algorithm 1: The fixed-point objective Lfix = || f_theta(z_t) - z_t ||^2 is defined with f_theta(z_t) = C_{t,1} z_{t-1} + C_{t,2} epsilon_theta(z_t, t, p_s), using the raw noise prediction, whereas Algorithm 1 (line 7) updates z_t with the corrected noise epsilon_hat. Consequently, Eq. (11) does not measure the residual of the update actually applied, and the gradient step in Eq. (12) is not minimizing the self-consistency error of the actual trajectory.
  3. [Algorithm 1, lines 1-11] Algorithm 1, lines 1-11: The inner loop begins by recomputing z_t from z_{t-1} using Eq. (3) on every iteration, so any refinement performed on line 9 is overwritten before the next iteration. This contradicts the statement that the fixed-point update 'is repeated for up to K iterations' and Eq. (12), and it makes the algorithm as printed equivalent to a single, unrepeated correction.
  4. [Sec. 4.4, Tables 1-2] Section 4.4, Tables 1-2: The hyperparameters K=5, lambda=2, eta=0.001 are chosen by optimizing the same metrics on PIE-Bench that are then reported as the headline results in Table 1. No validation split or unbiased selection procedure is described, and no error bars are provided, so the claimed superiority over baselines may partly reflect tuning on the evaluation set.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Table 1 and Sec. 4.1] The notation 'DirectINV' in Table 1 and 'DirecInv' in Section 4.1 refer to the same method; please make it consistent.
  2. [Sec. 4.1, Table 1] The DINO score is reported with a downward arrow and values around 6e-3, but the metric definition is not given; a citation to DINO embeddings does not clarify whether this is a distance or a similarity.
  3. [Sec. 3.1, Eq. (2)] The 'ideal inversion' in Eq. (2) uses an undefined condition c_ideal, which makes the derivation of the ideal noise hard to follow.
  4. [Sec. 4.3] Section 4.3 describes a fixed random seed as the ideal noise for every image; the computation of Dnoi and Drec is not formalized, so Figure 4 and the reported gap numbers are difficult to interpret.
  5. [Conclusions and Abstract] The conclusion claims state-of-the-art results across multiple editing tasks, but Table 1 evaluates only P2P on PIE-Bench; results for other engines are deferred to the supplementary material, so the claim should be qualified.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the inversion equations are self-contained; the flagged issues are correctness and evaluation-validity concerns, not definitional reductions.

full rationale

The derivation chain is explicit: the method defines a reference loss (Eq. 6) and a fixed-point latent consistency loss (Eq. 11), then optimizes them; the reported reconstructions and editing metrics are empirical outputs, not identities. The reference anchor ε_ref=E(z0) (Eq. 5) is ill-typed or at least semantically unjustified as a diffusion noise target, and the hyperparameters (K=5, λ=2, η=0.001) are selected on the same PIE-Bench metrics later reported in Table 1; both are material validity threats, but neither makes a headline quantity equal to an input by construction. The only self-citation [25] appears in a contextual related-work list and is not load-bearing. Under the requirement to exhibit a specific equation-level reduction or a fitted parameter renamed as a prediction, no circular step is established.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 1 invented entities

The central claim rests on a set of ad hoc assumptions about the representation of noise and latent spaces. The invented reference noise has no grounding in the diffusion process, and the fixed-point objective does not match the update rule. The free parameters are tuned on the same evaluation benchmark, which further increases the circularity burden.

free parameters (4)
  • image guidance strength λ = 2
    Chosen in Section 4.4 by ablation on PIE-Bench; λ=5 and λ=1 degrade metrics.
  • fixed-point learning rate η = 0.001
    Selected by ablation; η=0.01 collapses performance and η=0.0001 is worse.
  • optimization rounds K = 5
    Ablation shows K=2,5,10 all similar; K=5 chosen as the default.
  • convergence threshold δ
    Referenced in Algorithm 1 but no value or sensitivity analysis is given.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption The DDIM practical inversion formula (Eq. 3) is a valid approximation, with the error characterized only by the temporal mismatch.
    Used as the base update in Eq. 8 and Algorithm 1 without independent justification.
  • ad hoc to paper Applying the VAE encoder E to the latent z0 produces a meaningful reference noise for aligning predicted noise.
    Eq. 5 defines $\epsilon_{ref} = E(z_0)$, but E expects an image and z0 is already a latent; this assumption is central to the correction stage.
  • ad hoc to paper The predicted noise and the VAE latent live in the same space and can be compared with an L2 loss.
    Eq. 6 computes $||\hat\epsilon_{raw} - \epsilon_{ref}||^2$ without defining why these two tensors should be close.
  • ad hoc to paper The fixed-point iteration z_t = f_θ(z_t) with f using raw noise is consistent with the actual update that uses corrected noise.
    Eqs. 9-11 define the fixed-point loss with raw noise, while Algorithm 1 updates z_t using the corrected $\hat\epsilon$; this inconsistency is never resolved.
  • domain assumption The evaluation metrics (DINO, PSNR, LPIPS, MSE, SSIM, CLIP) faithfully measure editing quality.
    The paper uses these metrics without validating them for the specific editing task.
invented entities (1)
  • Reference noise $\epsilon_{ref}$ extracted via $E(z_0)$
    purpose: Anchors the predicted noise to the source image during inversion.
    The paper gives no external validation that this quantity is meaningful. It is simply the VAE encoder applied to a latent, which is an ill-defined operation, and there is no falsifiable prediction outside the reported benchmark numbers.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of DCI: Dual-Conditional Inversion for Boosting Diffusion-Based Image Editing." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/LF2QD2IB

@misc{pith2026250602560,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: DCI: Dual-Conditional Inversion for Boosting Diffusion-Based Image Editing},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/LF2QD2IB}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.02560}
}
read the original abstract

Diffusion models have achieved remarkable success in image generation and editing tasks. Inversion within these models aims to recover the latent noise representation for a real or generated image, enabling reconstruction, editing, and other downstream tasks. However, to date, most inversion approaches suffer from an intrinsic trade-off between reconstruction accuracy and editing flexibility. This limitation arises from the difficulty of maintaining both semantic alignment and structural consistency during the inversion process. In this work, we introduce Dual-Conditional Inversion (DCI), a novel framework that jointly conditions on the source prompt and reference image to guide the inversion process. Specifically, DCI formulates the inversion process as a dual-condition fixed-point optimization problem, minimizing both the latent noise gap and the reconstruction error under the joint guidance. This design anchors the inversion trajectory in both semantic and visual space, leading to more accurate and editable latent representations. Our novel setup brings new understanding to the inversion process. Extensive experiments demonstrate that DCI achieves state-of-the-art performance across multiple editing tasks, significantly improving both reconstruction quality and editing precision. Furthermore, we also demonstrate that our method achieves strong results in reconstruction tasks, implying a degree of robustness and generalizability approaching the ultimate goal of the inversion process.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2506.02560 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Pipelines of different inversion methods in diffusion-based image editing. Each sub-figure illustrates the specific process: (a) DDIM inversion; (b) NTI and NPI; (c) DirectInv; (d) SPDInv; (e) our Dual-Conditional Inversion(DCI). Obviously, DCI significantly reduces both latent noise gap(Dnoi) and reconstruction error(Drec). methods, such as null-text embedding(NTI) [31] and negative prompt(NPI) [30] in the inversio… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Inversion process of DCI. The green box on the left illustrates DCI, which use dual￾conditional guidance to reduce the latent gap. The right describes how DCI modifies the inversion process and generate the latent noise code. It also shows our method can improve the editing method. edited. However, diffusion models inherently lack an explicit and exact inverse process to convert an image back to its corresponding la… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Visual results of different inversion methods with P2P on PIE-Bench. Each method is identified at the top of its respective column, while detailed editing information appears beneath each corresponding row. DCI(ours) demonstrates significant enhancements over existing methods. 4 Experiments We conduct extensive experiments to evaluate the effectiveness of Dual-Conditional Inversion (DCI). This section is organized a… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Illustration of our framework. We initialize zT with a fixed random seed, treating it as the ideal noise input for every image at the initial timestep of the diffusion process. The final gener￾ated image serves as a reference for reconstruction accuracy assessment. We …

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. StructGen: Disambiguating Multi-Reference Image Generation via Structured Context Modeling

    cs.CV 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Using identifier-based structured context instead of plain-language instructions improves multi-reference image generation in semantic alignment and reference consistency.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

57 extracted references · 17 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    Schramowski, K

    Manuel Brack, Felix Friedrich, Katharina Kornmeier, Linoy Tsaban, P. Schramowski, K. Kerst- ing, and Apolin’ario Passos. Ledits++: Limitless image editing using text-to-image models. 2024 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), pages 8861–8870, 2023

    work page 2024

  2. [2]

    Instructpix2pix: Learning to follow image editing instructions

    Tim Brooks, Aleksander Holynski, and Alexei A Efros. Instructpix2pix: Learning to follow image editing instructions. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pages 18392–18402, 2023

    2023

  3. [3]

    Masactrl: Tuning-free mutual self-attention control for consistent image synthesis and editing

    Mingdeng Cao, Xintao Wang, Zhongang Qi, Ying Shan, Xiaohu Qie, and Yinqiang Zheng. Masactrl: Tuning-free mutual self-attention control for consistent image synthesis and editing. arXiv preprint arXiv:2304.08465, 2023

    arXiv 2023

  4. [4]

    Emerging properties in self-supervised vision transformers

    Mathilde Caron, Hugo Touvron, Ishan Misra, Hervé Jégou, Julien Mairal, Piotr Bojanowski, and Armand Joulin. Emerging properties in self-supervised vision transformers. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF international conference on computer vision, pages 9650–9660, 2021

    2021

  5. [5]

    Noise map guidance: Inversion with spatial context for real image editing.arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.04625, 2024

    Hansam Cho, Jonghyun Lee, Seoung Bum Kim, Tae-Hyun Oh, and Yonghyun Jeong. Noise map guidance: Inversion with spatial context for real image editing.arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.04625, 2024

    arXiv 2024

  6. [6]

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

    Jiwoo Chung, Sangeek Hyun, and Jae-Pil Heo. Style injection in diffusion: A training-free approach for adapting large-scale diffusion models for style transfer. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pages 8795–8805, 2024

    2024

  7. [7]

    Diffedit: Diffusion- based semantic image editing with mask guidance.arXiv preprint arXiv:2210.11427, 2022

    Guillaume Couairon, Jakob Verbeek, Holger Schwenk, and Matthieu Cord. Diffedit: Diffusion- based semantic image editing with mask guidance.arXiv preprint arXiv:2210.11427, 2022

    arXiv 2022

  8. [8]

    Diffusion schrödinger bridge with applications to score-based generative modeling.Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 34:17695–17709, 2021

    Valentin De Bortoli, James Thornton, Jeremy Heng, and Arnaud Doucet. Diffusion schrödinger bridge with applications to score-based generative modeling.Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 34:17695–17709, 2021

    2021

Show all 57 references
  1. [9]

    Diffusion models beat gans on image synthesis

    Prafulla Dhariwal and Alexander Nichol. Diffusion models beat gans on image synthesis. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS), 34:8780–8794, 2021

    2021

  2. [10]

    Prompt tuning inversion for text- driven image editing using diffusion models

    Wenkai Dong, Song Xue, Xiaoyue Duan, and Shumin Han. Prompt tuning inversion for text- driven image editing using diffusion models. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision, pages 7430–7440, 2023

    2023

  3. [11]

    An image is worth one word: Personalizing text-to-image generation using textual inversion.arXiv preprint arXiv:2208.01618, 2022

    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.arXiv preprint arXiv:2208.01618, 2022

    2022 arXiv

  4. [12]

    Renoise: Real image inversion through iterative noising

    Daniel Garibi, Or Patashnik, Andrey V oynov, Hadar Averbuch-Elor, and Daniel Cohen-Or. Renoise: Real image inversion through iterative noising. InEuropean Conference on Computer Vision, pages 395–413. Springer, 2024

    2024

  5. [13]

    Improving negative-prompt inversion via proximal guidance.arXiv preprint arXiv:2306.05414, 2023

    Ligong Han, Song Wen, Qi Chen, Zhixing Zhang, Kunpeng Song, Mengwei Ren, Ruijiang Gao, Yuxiao Chen, Di Liu, Qilong Zhangli, et al. Improving negative-prompt inversion via proximal guidance.arXiv preprint arXiv:2306.05414, 2023

    2023 arXiv

  6. [14]

    Prompt-to-prompt image editing with cross attention control.arXiv preprint arXiv:2208.01626, 2022

    Amir Hertz, Ron Mokady, Jay Tenenbaum, Kfir Aberman, Yael Pritch, and Daniel Cohen-Or. Prompt-to-prompt image editing with cross attention control.arXiv preprint arXiv:2208.01626, 2022

    2022 arXiv

  7. [15]

    Denoising diffusion probabilistic models.Advances in neural information processing systems, 33:6840–6851, 2020

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

    2020

  8. [16]

    Region-aware diffusion for zero-shot text-driven image editing.arXiv preprint arXiv:2302.11797, 2023

    Nisha Huang, Fan Tang, Weiming Dong, Tong-Yee Lee, and Changsheng Xu. Region-aware diffusion for zero-shot text-driven image editing.arXiv preprint arXiv:2302.11797, 2023. 10

    2023 arXiv

  9. [17]

    Reversion: Diffusion- based relation inversion from images

    Ziqi Huang, Tianxing Wu, Yuming Jiang, Kelvin CK Chan, and Ziwei Liu. Reversion: Diffusion- based relation inversion from images. InSIGGRAPH Asia 2024 Conference Papers, pages 1–11, 2024

    2024

  10. [18]

    An edit friendly ddpm noise space: Inversion and manipulations.arXiv preprint arXiv:2304.06140, 2023

    Inbar Huberman-Spiegelglas, Vladimir Kulikov, and Tomer Michaeli. An edit friendly ddpm noise space: Inversion and manipulations.arXiv preprint arXiv:2304.06140, 2023

    2023 arXiv

  11. [19]

    Direct inversion: Boosting diffusion-based editing with 3 lines of code.arXiv preprint arXiv:2310.01506, 2023

    Xuan Ju, Ailing Zeng, Yuxuan Bian, Shaoteng Liu, and Qiang Xu. Direct inversion: Boosting diffusion-based editing with 3 lines of code.arXiv preprint arXiv:2310.01506, 2023

    2023 arXiv

  12. [20]

    Imagic: Text-based real image editing with diffusion models.2022 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), 2023

    Bahjat Kawar, Shiran Zada, Oran Lang, Omer Tov, Hui-Wen Chang, Tali Dekel, Inbar Mosseri, and Michal Irani. Imagic: Text-based real image editing with diffusion models.2022 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), 2023

    2022

  13. [21]

    Diffusionclip: Text-guided diffusion models for robust image manipulation

    Gwanghyun Kim, Taesung Kwon, and Jong Chul Ye. Diffusionclip: Text-guided diffusion models for robust image manipulation. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pages 2426–2435, 2022

    2022

  14. [22]

    Diffusion models already have a semantic latent space.arXiv preprint arXiv:2210.10960, 2022

    Mingi Kwon, Jaeseok Jeong, and Youngjung Uh. Diffusion models already have a semantic latent space.arXiv preprint arXiv:2210.10960, 2022

    2022 arXiv

  15. [23]

    Source prompt disentangled inversion for boosting image editability with diffusion models

    Ruibin Li, Ruihuang Li, Song Guo, and Lei Zhang. Source prompt disentangled inversion for boosting image editability with diffusion models. InEuropean Conference on Computer Vision, pages 404–421. Springer, 2024

    2024

  16. [24]

    Stylediffusion: Prompt-embedding inversion for text-based editing.arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.15649, 2023

    Senmao Li, Joost Van De Weijer, Taihang Hu, Fahad Shahbaz Khan, Qibin Hou, Yaxing Wang, and Jian Yang. Stylediffusion: Prompt-embedding inversion for text-based editing.arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.15649, 2023

    2023 arXiv

  17. [25]

    Unsuper- vised region-based image editing of denoising diffusion models

    Zixiang Li, Yue Song, Renshuai Tao, Xiaohong Jia, Yao Zhao, and Wei Wang. Unsuper- vised region-based image editing of denoising diffusion models. InProceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, volume 39, pages 18638–18646, 2025

    2025

  18. [26]

    Microsoft coco: Common objects in context

    Tsung-Yi Lin, Michael Maire, Serge Belongie, James Hays, Pietro Perona, Deva Ramanan, Piotr Dollár, and C Lawrence Zitnick. Microsoft coco: Common objects in context. InComputer vision–ECCV 2014: 13th European conference, zurich, Switzerland, September 6-12, 2014, proceedings,...

    2014

  19. [27]

    Diffbir: Toward blind image restoration with generative diffusion prior

    Xinqi Lin, Jingwen He, Ziyan Chen, Zhaoyang Lyu, Bo Dai, Fanghua Yu, Yu Qiao, Wanli Ouyang, and Chao Dong. Diffbir: Toward blind image restoration with generative diffusion prior. InEuropean Conference on Computer Vision, pages 430–448. Springer, 2024

    2024

  20. [28]

    Fixed- point inversion for text-to-image diffusion models.CoRR, 2023

    Barak Meiri, Dvir Samuel, Nir Darshan, Gal Chechik, Shai Avidan, and Rami Ben-Ari. Fixed- point inversion for text-to-image diffusion models.CoRR, 2023

    2023

  21. [29]

    Sdedit: Guided image synthesis and editing with stochastic differential equations.arXiv preprint arXiv:2108.01073, 2021

    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.arXiv preprint arXiv:2108.01073, 2021

    2021 arXiv

  22. [30]

    Negative-prompt inversion: Fast image inversion for editing with text-guided diffusion models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2305.16807, 2023

    Daiki Miyake, Akihiro Iohara, Yu Saito, and Toshiyuki Tanaka. Negative-prompt inversion: Fast image inversion for editing with text-guided diffusion models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2305.16807, 2023

    2023 arXiv

  23. [31]

    Null-text inversion for editing real images using guided diffusion models

    Ron Mokady, Amir Hertz, Kfir Aberman, Yael Pritch, and Daniel Cohen-Or. Null-text inversion for editing real images using guided diffusion models. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 6038–6047, 2023

    2023

  24. [32]

    Diffeditor: Boosting accuracy and flexibility on diffusion-based image editing

    Chong Mou, Xintao Wang, Jiechong Song, Ying Shan, and Jian Zhang. Diffeditor: Boosting accuracy and flexibility on diffusion-based image editing. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 8488–8497, 2024

    2024

  25. [33]

    h-edit: Effective and flexible diffusion- based editing via doob’s h-transform.arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.02187, 2025

    Toan Nguyen, Kien Do, Duc Kieu, and Thin Nguyen. h-edit: Effective and flexible diffusion- based editing via doob’s h-transform.arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.02187, 2025. 11

    2025 arXiv

  26. [34]

    Glide: Towards photorealistic image generation and editing with text-guided diffusion models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2112.10741, 2021

    Alex Nichol, Prafulla Dhariwal, Aditya Ramesh, Pranav Shyam, Pamela Mishkin, Bob McGrew, Ilya Sutskever, and Mark Chen. Glide: Towards photorealistic image generation and editing with text-guided diffusion models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2112.10741, 2021

    2021 arXiv

  27. [35]

    Effective real image editing with accelerated iterative diffusion inversion

    Zhihong Pan, Riccardo Gherardi, Xiufeng Xie, and Stephen Huang. Effective real image editing with accelerated iterative diffusion inversion. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision, pages 15912–15921, 2023

    2023

  28. [36]

    Zero-shot image-to-image translation

    Gaurav Parmar, Krishna Kumar Singh, Richard Zhang, Yijun Li, Jingwan Lu, and Jun-Yan Zhu. Zero-shot image-to-image translation. InACM SIGGRAPH 2023 conference proceedings, pages 1–11, 2023

    2023

  29. [37]

    Learning transferable visual models from natural language supervision

    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 supervision. InInternational conference on machine learning, pag...

    2021

  30. [38]

    Hierarchical text-conditional image generation with clip latents.arXiv preprint arXiv:2204.06125, 1(2):3, 2022

    Aditya Ramesh, Prafulla Dhariwal, Alex Nichol, Casey Chu, and Mark Chen. Hierarchical text-conditional image generation with clip latents.arXiv preprint arXiv:2204.06125, 1(2):3, 2022

    2022 arXiv

  31. [39]

    High- resolution image synthesis with latent diffusion models

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

    2022

  32. [40]

    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 22500...

    2023

  33. [41]

    Photorealistic text-to-image diffusion models with deep language understanding.Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 35:36479–36494, 2022

    Chitwan Saharia, William Chan, Saurabh Saxena, Lala Li, Jay Whang, Emily L Denton, Kamyar Ghasemipour, Raphael Gontijo Lopes, Burcu Karagol Ayan, Tim Salimans, et al. Photorealistic text-to-image diffusion models with deep language understanding.Advances in Neural Information ...

    2022

  34. [42]

    Dragdiffusion: Harnessing diffusion models for interactive point-based image editing

    Yujun Shi, Chuhui Xue, Jun Hao Liew, Jiachun Pan, Hanshu Yan, Wenqing Zhang, Vincent YF Tan, and Song Bai. Dragdiffusion: Harnessing diffusion models for interactive point-based image editing. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition,...

    2024

  35. [43]

    Denoising diffusion implicit models

    Jiaming Song, Chenlin Meng, and Stefano Ermon. Denoising diffusion implicit models. In International Conference on Learning Representations (ICLR), 2020

    2020

  36. [44]

    Denoising diffusion implicit models

    Jiaming Song, Chenlin Meng, and Stefano Ermon. Denoising diffusion implicit models. In International Conference on Learning Representations, 2020

    2020

  37. [45]

    Score-based generative modeling through stochastic differential equations.arXiv preprint arXiv:2011.13456, 2020

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

    2011 arXiv

  38. [46]

    Ledits: Real image editing with ddpm inversion and semantic guidance.arXiv preprint arXiv:2307.00522, 2023

    Linoy Tsaban and Apolinário Passos. Ledits: Real image editing with ddpm inversion and semantic guidance.arXiv preprint arXiv:2307.00522, 2023

    2023 arXiv

  39. [47]

    Plug-and-play diffusion features for text-driven image-to-image translation

    Narek Tumanyan, Michal Geyer, Shai Bagon, and Tali Dekel. Plug-and-play diffusion features for text-driven image-to-image translation. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 1921–1930, 2023

    1921

  40. [48]

    Edict: Exact diffusion inversion via coupled transformations

    Bram Wallace, Akash Gokul, and Nikhil Naik. Edict: Exact diffusion inversion via coupled transformations. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 22532–22541, 2023

    2023

  41. [49]

    In- stantstyle: Free lunch towards style-preserving in text-to-image generation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.02733, 2024

    Haofan Wang, Matteo Spinelli, Qixun Wang, Xu Bai, Zekui Qin, and Anthony Chen. In- stantstyle: Free lunch towards style-preserving in text-to-image generation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.02733, 2024. 12

    2024 arXiv

  42. [50]

    Exploiting diffusion prior for real-world image super-resolution.International Journal of Computer Vision, 132(12):5929–5949, 2024

    Jianyi Wang, Zongsheng Yue, Shangchen Zhou, Kelvin CK Chan, and Chen Change Loy. Exploiting diffusion prior for real-world image super-resolution.International Journal of Computer Vision, 132(12):5929–5949, 2024

    2024

  43. [51]

    Stylediffusion: Controllable disentangled style transfer via diffusion models

    Zhizhong Wang, Lei Zhao, and Wei Xing. Stylediffusion: Controllable disentangled style transfer via diffusion models. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision, pages 7677–7689, 2023

    2023

  44. [52]

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

    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. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision, pages 15943– 15953, 2023

    2023

  45. [53]

    One-step effective diffusion network for real-world image super-resolution.Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 37:92529–92553, 2024

    Rongyuan Wu, Lingchen Sun, Zhiyuan Ma, and Lei Zhang. One-step effective diffusion network for real-world image super-resolution.Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 37:92529–92553, 2024

    2024

  46. [54]

    Ip-adapter: Text compatible image prompt adapter for text-to-image diffusion models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2308.06721, 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.arXiv preprint arXiv:2308.06721, 2023

    2023 arXiv

  47. [55]

    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. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF international conference on computer vision, pages 3836–3847, 2023

    2023

  48. [56]

    The unrea- sonable effectiveness of deep features as a perceptual metric

    Richard Zhang, Phillip Isola, Alexei A Efros, Eli Shechtman, and Oliver Wang. The unrea- sonable effectiveness of deep features as a perceptual metric. InProceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pages 586–595, 2018

    2018

  49. [57]

    Real-world image variation by aligning diffusion inversion chain.Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 36:30641– 30661, 2023

    Yuechen Zhang, Jinbo Xing, Eric Lo, and Jiaya Jia. Real-world image variation by aligning diffusion inversion chain.Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 36:30641– 30661, 2023. 13

    2023

Pith tools

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