Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 41 references

MotionRAG-Diff: A Retrieval-Augmented Diffusion Framework for Long-Term Music-to-Dance Generation

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

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

Pith's one-line read MotionRAG-Diff proposes a retrieval-then-diffusion pipeline that generates long, music-synchronized dance, reporting best beat alignment on AIST++ and FineDance.

desk verdict A sensible but incremental retrieval-plus-diffusion pipeline whose own tables do not support its SOTA claim, and whose abstract contradicts its method on 'unsupervised' learning. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.02661 v1 pith:L4JGCIDR submitted 2025-06-03 cs.SD cs.CVcs.GReess.AS

Mingyang Huang , Peng Zhang , Bang Zhang This is my paper
classification cs.SDcs.CVcs.GReess.AS
keywords music-to-dancegenerationmotiongraphdiffusionmodelcontrastivelearningretrieval-augmentedlong-termsynthesisbeatalignment
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

This paper proposes a two-stage framework for generating dance that matches arbitrarily long music inputs. It first aligns music and motion in a shared latent space through contrastive learning, then retrieves compatible motion segments from a motion graph and refines them with a diffusion model conditioned on raw music, beats, music embeddings, and top-k motion candidates. On AIST++ and FineDance, the authors report the best beat-alignment scores among the compared methods, along with low FID scores at the retrieval stage. If the claim holds, long-form music-driven dance can combine the kinematic realism of recorded motion with the novel motion produced by generative diffusion.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing machinery is the retrieval-augmented loop around a paired embedding space. In stage 1, MoMask-style motion encoding and a Wav2Clip-style music encoder are aligned with an InfoNCE contrastive loss, and a TANGO-style motion graph connects motion clips whose last N frames have compatible position and velocity, prunes to the largest strongly connected component, and stitches retrieved segments with joint-angle smoothing. In stage 2, a Diffusion Transformer (DiT) based diffusion model, following the EDGE formulation, is conditioned through a multi-condition pairwise fusion network that cross-attends four signals, raw music (encoded with Jukebox), extracted beats, top-k retrieved motions, and contrastive music embeddings, under the objective $L_{\mathrm{total}}=L_{\mathrm{simple}}+\lambda_{\mathrm{pos}}L_{\mathrm{pos}}+\lambda_{\mathrm{vel}}L_{\mathrm{vel}}+\lambda_{\mathrm{contact}}L_{\mathrm{contact}}$. The pairwise fusion of these conditions is what lets the diffusion stage refine global music-motion synchronization rather than only local pose quality.

What would settle it

Measure frame-to-frame acceleration discontinuities at every stitching boundary in the stage-1 motion graph output. If those discontinuities are no smaller than at random concatenation boundaries, the Algorithm-1 compatibility rule is not creating seamless transitions, and the retrieval stage cannot be the source of the reported temporal coherence.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that retrieval and generation do not have to be competing strategies: a contrastive encoder can select semantically relevant motion segments from a motion graph, and a multi-condition diffusion model can refine those segments so the final dance is both physically realistic and musically synchronized. The authors support this with two-stage results: MotionRAG-Diff reports the highest BAS on AIST++ (0.2874 at stage 1) and the highest BAS on FineDance (0.2631 at stage 2), and stage 1 achieves the lowest FIDk on FineDance (10.51). The same tables show the trade-offs: diffusion refinement lowers FIDk on AIST++ but reduces diversity relative to stage 1, and the paper explicitly acknowledges that motion diversity remains constrained by the pre-built motion graph. The paper frames the overall result as establishing a new paradigm for music-driven dance generation by synergizing retrieval-based template fidelity with diffusion-based creative enhancement.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that connecting motion clips whose last N frames have small position and velocity differences by threshold T yields seamless, kinematically valid transitions, with N and T left unspecified and pruning assumed to preserve the dance distribution.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Long music inputs can be processed in arbitrary duration by stitching graph-retrieved motion segments and then refining the whole sequence with diffusion.
  • Beat alignment, measured by BAS, is highest for MotionRAG-Diff on both benchmarks: 0.2874 on AIST++ (stage 1) and 0.2631 on FineDance (stage 2) among the compared methods.
  • On FineDance, the stage-1 retrieval output reaches FIDk=10.51, a 73.1% improvement over the previous best compared method, Lodge++, indicating that graph retrieval alone supplies high kinematic fidelity.
  • Diffusion refinement improves synchronization but can sacrifice diversity: on FineDance, Divk drops from 10.67 (stage 1) to 8.94 (stage 2).

Reading between the lines

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

  • Beyond the paper, the contrastive retrieval's contribution could be isolated by replacing the learned retriever with random motion-graph retrieval; if BAS gains persist, the reported synchronization improvement comes mainly from graph structure or diffusion rather than the learned music-motion alignment.
  • A testable scaling prediction follows from the design: enlarging the motion library should improve FID more than adding diffusion compute, since retrieval is the main source of kinematic fidelity in the two-stage pipeline.
  • The separate stage-1 and stage-2 results suggest a deployment choice the paper does not fully explore: stage 1 alone is preferable where diversity and fidelity matter most, while stage 2 is preferable where beat-level synchronization is the priority.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

4 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper proposes MotionRAG-Diff, a two-stage pipeline for long-term music-to-dance generation. Stage1 uses a contrastively trained music/motion embedding and a motion graph to retrieve and stitch motion segments; stage2 refines the retrieved motion with a multi-condition diffusion model conditioned on raw music, beat, top-k retrieved motions, and contrastive embeddings. The paper claims state-of-the-art quality, diversity, and beat alignment on AIST++ and FineDance, positioning the work as a new paradigm for music-driven dance synthesis. The core technical contribution is the retrieval-augmented design with pairwise fusion of multiple conditioning signals.

Significance. If the reported results held for the full system, the hybrid retrieval-plus-diffusion design would be a useful contribution to long-form dance synthesis. The paper is clearly structured and the two-stage idea is coherent, and using standard metrics (FID, DIV, BAS) facilitates comparison. However, its central empirical claim is unsupported by its own tables, and the paper switches between stage1 and stage2 results when claiming superiority. The claimed 'unsupervised' correspondence is also not consistent with the supervised contrastive training described. These issues undermine the paper's main conclusion rather than being cosmetic.

major comments (4)
  1. [§4.4, Tables 1–2] The paper's headline claim that MotionRAG-Diff achieves state-of-the-art performance is not supported by the reported numbers for the full pipeline. On AIST++ (Table 1), Ours(stage2) is not best on any metric: FID_k=26.23 vs. Bailando++ 17.59, FID_g=17.66 vs. 10.10, DIV_k=5.62 vs. 8.64, DIV_g=3.79 vs. 6.50, and BAS=0.2545 vs. 0.2720. On FineDance (Table 2), Ours(stage2) is best only on BAS (0.2631), while FID_k=32.25 is worse than Ours(stage1) 10.51, and FID_g=57.63 is worse than Lodge 35.52. The only comparisons that beat prior methods use the stage1 output, i.e., retrieval without diffusion refinement. The sentence in §4.4 claiming a 73.1% FID_k reduction versus Lodge++ uses the stage1 value (10.51), not the end-to-end stage2 value (32.25), and is therefore misleading about the complete system.
  2. [§4.3, §4.4, §5] The evaluation mixes results from the two stages as if they were one method. Section 4.3 reports 'the highest score of 0.2874 in stage1' on AIST++, but Table 1 lists stage2 BAS as 0.2545, which is lower than Bailando++ (0.2720). The abstract and conclusion refer to 'our approach' and 'our method' without distinguishing the intermediate retrieval output from the final diffusion-refined output. Since the claimed SOTA status is entirely an artifact of this stage mixing, the paper's central conclusion is not established for the end-to-end system.
  3. [§2, §3.1, Abstract] The claim of 'unsupervised semantic correspondence without paired data' is contradicted by the methodology. The motion encoder is fine-tuned on AIST++ and FineDance, the music encoder is trained with an adaptive layer, and Eq. (1) is an InfoNCE loss over <music, motion> pairs. These are supervised or self-supervised uses of paired data, not unsupervised learning in the sense claimed. This overclaim appears in the abstract and Section 2 and should be corrected or removed.
  4. [§3.2, Algorithm 1] The motion graph edge-building rule depends on two free parameters, N (frames for mean calculation) and T (joint count threshold), but neither is specified in Section 4.2 or elsewhere, and no sensitivity analysis is provided. Because stage1 retrieval is the foundation of the whole pipeline, the reported results cannot be reproduced and the robustness of the graph construction to these thresholds is unknown. The notation 'Count Sp < Tp' and 'Count Sv < Tv' also needs clarification: it is not clear what is being counted or compared.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Table 1] The Bailando row appears to have missing spacing: '28.169.627.83' should likely read '28.16 9.62 7.83'.
  2. [Figure 3 caption] The caption contains duplicated text: 'music-motion similarity matrixmusic-motion similarity matrix'.
  3. [§3.3] The introduction mentions a 'DiT architecture' and Section 3.3 says the diffusion model builds on EDGE, but no specific DiT blocks are identified; please clarify which components are DiT-based and where they are inserted.
  4. [§4] The paper reports only aggregate quantitative metrics and does not provide qualitative motion visualizations or a user study, which makes claims about 'naturalness' and 'seamless transitions' hard to verify.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the pipeline is trained and evaluated on external benchmark data, and the reported weaknesses are acknowledged rather than hidden.

full rationale

The derivation chain is not circular. Stage1 (contrastive retrieval + motion graph) and stage2 (diffusion refinement) are optimized with external objectives (InfoNCE Eq. 1; diffusion reconstruction Eq. 3; auxiliary losses Eqs. 4-7) and evaluated on held-out test sets from AIST++ and FineDance using metrics (FID, DIV, BAS) whose formulas do not consume any fitted parameter of the model. The motion-graph edge rule (Algorithm 1) and pruning are defined from kinematics of the database, not from evaluation targets. Contrastive embeddings are used both for retrieval and as a diffusion condition, but the diffusion model is trained to reconstruct ground-truth motion from those conditions and is scored on motion quality; this is an architectural reuse, not a definitional reduction. All citations (MoMask, Wav2Clip, EDGE, TANGO, DiffDance) are external prior work used for architectural components, so there is no load-bearing self-citation chain. The main weakness is not circularity but an evaluative inconsistency: Tables 1 and 2 show the stage2 full pipeline is not best on most metrics, and the best entries are split between stage1 and stage2 (e.g., AIST++ BAS 0.2874 in stage1 vs 0.2545 in stage2; FineDance FID_k 10.51 in stage1 vs 32.25 in stage2). Thus the SOTA claim depends on selecting different stages per metric. Section 5 explicitly acknowledges constrained diversity and two-stage computational cost, so the limitations are not concealed.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The system relies on standard background of diffusion models, contrastive learning, and motion graphs, plus several domain assumptions about kinematic compatibility and beat extraction. No new entities are introduced. The main free parameters (graph thresholds N and T, top-k count, and unspecified fusion details) are not disclosed or tuned in a principled way.

free parameters (3)
  • N (motion graph mean frames)
    Number of frames for position/velocity mean in Algorithm 1; not specified in the paper.
  • T (joint count threshold)
    Threshold for adding graph edges in Algorithm 1; not specified.
  • top-k retrieval count
    Number of motion candidates fed to the diffusion model; k is not reported.
assumptions (5)
  • standard math DDPM forward and reverse diffusion processes (Eq. 2-3) as defined in Ho et al.
    The diffusion formulation is taken from the cited DDPM paper and used without modification.
  • standard math InfoNCE contrastive loss (Eq. 1) for aligning music and motion embeddings.
    The contrastive objective is standard and the paper cites the original InfoNCE work.
  • domain assumption Position and velocity compatibility between adjacent motion clips is sufficient for seamless kinematic concatenation.
    The graph edge rule in Algorithm 1 assumes that low boundary error in position and velocity yields visually smooth transitions.
  • domain assumption Pruning to the largest strongly connected component preserves enough dance variety for the target music.
    The paper prunes the graph and assumes the remaining nodes still cover the motion distribution needed for arbitrary long inputs.
  • ad hoc to paper The multi-condition pairwise fusion network improves music-motion synchronization.
    The architecture is introduced in Section 3.3 without a theoretical justification or ablation isolating its contribution.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of MotionRAG-Diff: A Retrieval-Augmented Diffusion Framework for Long-Term Music-to-Dance Generation." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/L4JGCIDR

@misc{pith2026250602661,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: MotionRAG-Diff: A Retrieval-Augmented Diffusion Framework for Long-Term Music-to-Dance Generation},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/L4JGCIDR}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.02661}
}
abstract

Generating long-term, coherent, and realistic music-conditioned dance sequences remains a challenging task in human motion synthesis. Existing approaches exhibit critical limitations: motion graph methods rely on fixed template libraries, restricting creative generation; diffusion models, while capable of producing novel motions, often lack temporal coherence and musical alignment. To address these challenges, we propose $\textbf{MotionRAG-Diff}$, a hybrid framework that integrates Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) with diffusion-based refinement to enable high-quality, musically coherent dance generation for arbitrary long-term music inputs. Our method introduces three core innovations: (1) A cross-modal contrastive learning architecture that aligns heterogeneous music and dance representations in a shared latent space, establishing unsupervised semantic correspondence without paired data; (2) An optimized motion graph system for efficient retrieval and seamless concatenation of motion segments, ensuring realism and temporal coherence across long sequences; (3) A multi-condition diffusion model that jointly conditions on raw music signals and contrastive features to enhance motion quality and global synchronization. Extensive experiments demonstrate that MotionRAG-Diff achieves state-of-the-art performance in motion quality, diversity, and music-motion synchronization accuracy. This work establishes a new paradigm for music-driven dance generation by synergizing retrieval-based template fidelity with diffusion-based creative enhancement.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2506.02661 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. The overall framework of our work. It contains three core components: the contrastive [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. The music-motion similarity matrix after the contrastive learning model. The left im￾age depicts the similarity computed directly from the raw features of motion and music, whereas the right image shows the result obtained from their embeddings after being processed by the contrastive learning model. Motion Encoding. We leverage the motion encoding capability provided by MoMask [7] and follow the architectural setti… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. The comparison of motion graph pruning results. The first and second graphs are constructed [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: The diffusion model. We propose the multi-condition pairwise fusion network to fuse the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_5.png]

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

41 extracted references · 26 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Self-supervised multimodal versatile networks.Advances in neural information processing systems, 33:25–37, 2020

    Jean-Baptiste Alayrac, Adria Recasens, Rosalia Schneider, Relja Arandjelovi´c, Jason Ramapu- ram, Jeffrey De Fauw, Lucas Smaira, Sander Dieleman, and Andrew Zisserman. Self-supervised multimodal versatile networks.Advances in neural information processing systems, 33:25–37, 2020

    work page 2020

  2. [2]

    Groovenet: Real-time music-driven dance movement generation using artificial neural networks.networks, 8(17):26, 2017

    Omid Alemi, Jules Françoise, and Philippe Pasquier. Groovenet: Real-time music-driven dance movement generation using artificial neural networks.networks, 8(17):26, 2017

    work page 2017

  3. [3]

    wav2vec 2.0: A framework for self-supervised learning of speech representations.Advances in neural information processing systems, 33:12449–12460, 2020

    Alexei Baevski, Yuhao Zhou, Abdelrahman Mohamed, and Michael Auli. wav2vec 2.0: A framework for self-supervised learning of speech representations.Advances in neural information processing systems, 33:12449–12460, 2020

    2020

  4. [4]

    Choreomaster: choreography-oriented music-driven dance synthesis.ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG), 40(4):1–13, 2021

    Kang Chen, Zhipeng Tan, Jin Lei, Song-Hai Zhang, Yuan-Chen Guo, Weidong Zhang, and Shi-Min Hu. Choreomaster: choreography-oriented music-driven dance synthesis.ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG), 40(4):1–13, 2021

    work page 2021

  5. [5]

    Jukebox: A generative model for music.arXiv preprint arXiv:2005.00341, 2020

    Prafulla Dhariwal, Heewoo Jun, Christine Payne, Jong Wook Kim, Alec Radford, and Ilya Sutskever. Jukebox: A generative model for music.arXiv preprint arXiv:2005.00341, 2020

    arXiv 2005

  6. [6]

    Fairmotion-tools to load, process and visualize motion capture data

    Deepak Gopinath and Jungdam Won. Fairmotion-tools to load, process and visualize motion capture data. 2020

    work page 2020

  7. [7]

    Momask: Generative masked modeling of 3d human motions

    Chuan Guo, Yuxuan Mu, Muhammad Gohar Javed, Sen Wang, and Li Cheng. Momask: Generative masked modeling of 3d human motions. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), pages 1900–1910, June 2024

    work page 1900

  8. [8]

    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

Show all 41 references
  1. [9]

    Dance revolution: Long-term dance generation with music via curriculum learning

    Ruozi Huang, Huang Hu, Wei Wu, Kei Sawada, Mi Zhang, and Daxin Jiang. Dance revolution: Long-term dance generation with music via curriculum learning. InInternational conference on learning representations, 2020

    2020

  2. [10]

    Beat-it: Beat-synchronized multi-condition 3d dance generation

    Zikai Huang, Xuemiao Xu, Cheng Xu, Huaidong Zhang, Chenxi Zheng, Jing Qin, and Shengfeng He. Beat-it: Beat-synchronized multi-condition 3d dance generation. InEuro- pean Conference on Computer Vision, pages 273–290. Springer, 2024

    2024

  3. [11]

    Morag - multi- fusion retrieval augmented generation for human motion

    Sai Shashank Kalakonda, Shubh Maheshwari, and Ravi Kiran Sarvadevabhatla. Morag - multi- fusion retrieval augmented generation for human motion. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Winter Conference on Applications of Computer Vision (WACV), 2025

    2025

  4. [12]

    A brand new dance partner: Music-conditioned pluralistic dancing controlled by multiple dance genres

    Jinwoo Kim, Heeseok Oh, Seongjean Kim, Hoseok Tong, and Sanghoon Lee. A brand new dance partner: Music-conditioned pluralistic dancing controlled by multiple dance genres. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 3490–3500, 2022

    2022

  5. [13]

    Exponential moving average versus moving exponential average.Mathematische Semesterberichte, 58:97–107, 2011

    Frank Klinker. Exponential moving average versus moving exponential average.Mathematische Semesterberichte, 58:97–107, 2011

    2011

  6. [14]

    Danceformer: Music conditioned 3d dance generation with parametric motion transformer

    Buyu Li, Yongchi Zhao, Shi Zhelun, and Lu Sheng. Danceformer: Music conditioned 3d dance generation with parametric motion transformer. InProceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, volume 36, pages 1272–1279, 2022

    2022

  7. [15]

    Learning to generate diverse dance motions with transformer.arXiv preprint arXiv:2008.08171, 2020

    Jiaman Li, Yihang Yin, Hang Chu, Yi Zhou, Tingwu Wang, Sanja Fidler, and Hao Li. Learning to generate diverse dance motions with transformer.arXiv preprint arXiv:2008.08171, 2020

    2008 arXiv

  8. [16]

    Lodge++: High-quality and long dance generation with vivid choreography patterns.arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.20389, 2024

    Ronghui Li, Hongwen Zhang, Yachao Zhang, Yuxiang Zhang, Youliang Zhang, Jie Guo, Yan Zhang, Xiu Li, and Yebin Liu. Lodge++: High-quality and long dance generation with vivid choreography patterns.arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.20389, 2024. 10

    arXiv

  9. [17]

    Lodge: A coarse to fine diffusion network for long dance generation guided by the characteristic dance primitives

    Ronghui Li, YuXiang Zhang, Yachao Zhang, Hongwen Zhang, Jie Guo, Yan Zhang, Yebin Liu, and Xiu Li. Lodge: A coarse to fine diffusion network for long dance generation guided by the characteristic dance primitives. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and...

    2024

  10. [18]

    Finedance: A fine-grained choreography dataset for 3d full body dance generation

    Ronghui Li, Junfan Zhao, Yachao Zhang, Mingyang Su, Zeping Ren, Han Zhang, Yansong Tang, and Xiu Li. Finedance: A fine-grained choreography dataset for 3d full body dance generation. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision, pages 10234–10243, 2023

    2023

  11. [19]

    Ai choreographer: Music conditioned 3d dance generation with aist++

    Ruilong Li, Shan Yang, David A Ross, and Angjoo Kanazawa. Ai choreographer: Music conditioned 3d dance generation with aist++. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF international conference on computer vision, pages 13401–13412, 2021

    2021

  12. [20]

    Video motion graphs.arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.20218, 2025

    Haiyang Liu, Zhan Xu, Fa-Ting Hong, Hsin-Ping Huang, Yi Zhou, and Yang Zhou. Video motion graphs.arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.20218, 2025

    2025 arXiv

  13. [21]

    Tango: Co-speech gesture video reenactment with hierarchical audio motion embedding and diffusion interpolation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.04221, 2024

    Haiyang Liu, Xingchao Yang, Tomoya Akiyama, Yuantian Huang, Qiaoge Li, Shigeru Kuriyama, and Takafumi Taketomi. Tango: Co-speech gesture video reenactment with hierarchical audio motion embedding and diffusion interpolation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.04221, 2024

    arXiv

  14. [22]

    Matthew Loper, Naureen Mahmood, Javier Romero, Gerard Pons-Moll, and Michael J. Black. SMPL: A skinned multi-person linear model.ACM Trans. Graphics (Proc. SIGGRAPH Asia), 34(6):248:1–248:16, October 2015

    2015

  15. [23]

    Decoupled weight decay regularization.arXiv preprint arXiv:1711.05101, 2017

    Ilya Loshchilov and Frank Hutter. Decoupled weight decay regularization.arXiv preprint arXiv:1711.05101, 2017

    2017 arXiv

  16. [24]

    librosa: Audio and music signal analysis in python.SciPy, 2015:18–24, 2015

    Brian McFee, Colin Raffel, Dawen Liang, Daniel PW Ellis, Matt McVicar, Eric Battenberg, and Oriol Nieto. librosa: Audio and music signal analysis in python.SciPy, 2015:18–24, 2015

    2015

  17. [25]

    Learn2dance: Learning statistical music-to-dance mappings for choreography synthesis.IEEE Transactions on Multimedia, 14(3):747–759, 2011

    Ferda Ofli, Engin Erzin, Yücel Yemez, and A Murat Tekalp. Learn2dance: Learning statistical music-to-dance mappings for choreography synthesis.IEEE Transactions on Multimedia, 14(3):747–759, 2011

    2011

  18. [26]

    Scalable diffusion models with transformers

    William Peebles and Saining Xie. Scalable diffusion models with transformers. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF international conference on computer vision, pages 4195–4205, 2023

    2023

  19. [27]

    Film: Visual reasoning with a general conditioning layer

    Ethan Perez, Florian Strub, Harm De Vries, Vincent Dumoulin, and Aaron Courville. Film: Visual reasoning with a general conditioning layer. InProceedings of the AAAI conference on artificial intelligence, volume 32, 2018

    2018

  20. [28]

    Diffdance: Cascaded human motion diffusion model for dance generation

    Qiaosong Qi, Le Zhuo, Aixi Zhang, Yue Liao, Fei Fang, Si Liu, and Shuicheng Yan. Diffdance: Cascaded human motion diffusion model for dance generation. InProceedings of the 31st ACM International Conference on Multimedia, pages 1374–1382, 2023

    2023

  21. [29]

    Bailando: 3d dance generation via actor-critic gpt with choreographic memory

    Li Siyao, Weijiang Yu, Tianpei Gu, Chunze Lin, Quan Wang, Chen Qian, Chen Change Loy, and Ziwei Liu. Bailando: 3d dance generation via actor-critic gpt with choreographic memory. InCVPR, 2022

    2022

  22. [30]

    Bailando++: 3d dance gpt with choreographic memory.IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 45(12):14192–14207, 2023

    Li Siyao, Weijiang Yu, Tianpei Gu, Chunze Lin, Quan Wang, Chen Qian, Chen Change Loy, and Ziwei Liu. Bailando++: 3d dance gpt with choreographic memory.IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 45(12):14192–14207, 2023

    2023

  23. [31]

    Deep unsuper- vised learning using nonequilibrium thermodynamics

    Jascha Sohl-Dickstein, Eric Weiss, Niru Maheswaranathan, and Surya Ganguli. Deep unsuper- vised learning using nonequilibrium thermodynamics. InInternational conference on machine learning, pages 2256–2265. pmlr, 2015

    2015

  24. [32]

    Dance with melody: An lstm-autoencoder approach to music-oriented dance synthesis

    Taoran Tang, Jia Jia, and Hanyang Mao. Dance with melody: An lstm-autoencoder approach to music-oriented dance synthesis. InProceedings of the 26th ACM international conference on Multimedia, pages 1598–1606, 2018. 11

    2018

  25. [33]

    Motionclip: Exposing human motion generation to clip space

    Guy Tevet, Brian Gordon, Amir Hertz, Amit H Bermano, and Daniel Cohen-Or. Motionclip: Exposing human motion generation to clip space. InComputer Vision–ECCV 2022: 17th European Conference, Tel Aviv, Israel, October 23–27, 2022, Proceedings, Part XXII, pages 358–374. Springer, 2022

    2022

  26. [34]

    Human motion diffusion model.arXiv preprint arXiv:2209.14916, 2022

    Guy Tevet, Sigal Raab, Brian Gordon, Yonatan Shafir, Daniel Cohen-Or, and Amit H Bermano. Human motion diffusion model.arXiv preprint arXiv:2209.14916, 2022

    2022 arXiv

  27. [35]

    Edge: Editable dance generation from music

    Jonathan Tseng, Rodrigo Castellon, and Karen Liu. Edge: Editable dance generation from music. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 448–458, 2023

    2023

  28. [36]

    Wav2clip: Learning robust audio representations from clip

    Ho-Hsiang Wu, Prem Seetharaman, Kundan Kumar, and Juan Pablo Bello. Wav2clip: Learning robust audio representations from clip. InICASSP 2022-2022 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP), pages 4563–4567. IEEE, 2022

    2022

  29. [37]

    Adan: Adaptive nesterov momentum algorithm for faster optimizing deep models.IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 2024

    Xingyu Xie, Pan Zhou, Huan Li, Zhouchen Lin, and Shuicheng Yan. Adan: Adaptive nesterov momentum algorithm for faster optimizing deep models.IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 2024

    2024

  30. [38]

    Motiondiffuse: Text-driven human motion generation with diffusion model.IEEE transactions on pattern analysis and machine intelligence, 46(6):4115–4128, 2024

    Mingyuan Zhang, Zhongang Cai, Liang Pan, Fangzhou Hong, Xinying Guo, Lei Yang, and Ziwei Liu. Motiondiffuse: Text-driven human motion generation with diffusion model.IEEE transactions on pattern analysis and machine intelligence, 46(6):4115–4128, 2024

    2024

  31. [39]

    Remodiffuse: Retrieval-augmented motion diffusion model

    Mingyuan Zhang, Xinying Guo, Liang Pan, Zhongang Cai, Fangzhou Hong, Huirong Li, Lei Yang, and Ziwei Liu. Remodiffuse: Retrieval-augmented motion diffusion model. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision, pages 364–373, 2023

    2023

  32. [40]

    Audio-driven neural gesture reenactment with video motion graphs

    Yang Zhou, Jimei Yang, Dingzeyu Li, Jun Saito, Deepali Aneja, and Evangelos Kalogerakis. Audio-driven neural gesture reenactment with video motion graphs. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pages 3418–3428, 2022

    2022

  33. [41]

    Music2dance: Dancenet for music-driven dance generation.ACM Transactions on Multimedia Computing, Communications, and Applications (TOMM), 18(2):1–21, 2022

    Wenlin Zhuang, Congyi Wang, Jinxiang Chai, Yangang Wang, Ming Shao, and Siyu Xia. Music2dance: Dancenet for music-driven dance generation.ACM Transactions on Multimedia Computing, Communications, and Applications (TOMM), 18(2):1–21, 2022. 12

    2022

Pith tools

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