Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 7 minor 42 references

The paper claims that decomposing a complex prompt into LLM-generated bounding boxes and routing each region through specialized diffusion experts improves compositional fidelity and style diversity over a single-model backbone.

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

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

MEPG combines LLM-based spatial planning with a mixture of SDXL experts and staged local/global denoising, but the reported gains are modest and the main quality/diversity claims are not backed by experiments.

T0 review reviewed 2026-08-05 challenge →

load-bearing objection Plausible framework, but the load-bearing spatial-routing gate has no specified input and the promised FID/LPIPS evidence is missing. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2509.04126 v2 pith:HZZWE7NK submitted 2025-09-04 cs.CV cs.AI

MEPG:Multi-Expert Planning and Generation for Compositionally-Rich Image Generation

Yuan Zhao , Lin Liu This is my paper
classification cs.CV cs.AI
keywords text-to-image generationmixture of expertsspatial layout planningLLM planningLoRA fine-tuningstyle diversitycompositional promptsGenEval benchmark
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper claims that text-to-image diffusion can follow densely packed, multi-object prompts much better if the prompt is first turned into a spatial plan and the image is then generated by a mixture of expert models, with each expert responsible for a region or style. It pairs a LoRA-finetuned language model that outputs bounding boxes and region descriptions with a mixture-of-experts diffusion block that routes each region to specialized style or realism experts, alternating local and global denoising to keep the composite coherent. The result, measured on the GenEval benchmark, is a total score of 0.58 against 0.55 for the same backbone and a jump in positional correctness from 0.15 to 0.27, plus qualitatively broader style diversity across experts. If this works as described, it points to a cheap upgrade path: expert modules can be added or swapped without retraining the base diffusion model, and users could edit layouts and region styles interactively.

Core claim

MEPG aims to establish that compositional image generation can be decomposed into a planning step and a regional generation step. The Position-Style-Aware module uses a LoRA-tuned LLM to turn a complex prompt into element lists, descriptions, and rectangular coordinates (x1,y1)-(x2,y2), yielding prompt-mask pairs. The Multi-Expert Diffusion module then routes each region: a gating function assigns weights to expert models and fuses their outputs, with local denoising dominating the first 70% of steps and a global pass consolidating the result. Evidence is the GenEval table, where the framework reaches 0.58 overall and 0.27 on position versus 0.55 and 0.15 for the SDXL backbone, plus qualitat

What carries the argument

The load-bearing mechanism is the Sparse-MoeBlock, which replaces the query/key/value and feed-forward modules of the diffusion backbone with weighted sums of corresponding modules from several expert models, the weights being wi = sigmoid(G(X))_i. Around it, cross-denoising schedules local generation first (p1 = 0.7 of steps) and global generation second, fusing expert outputs by xt = sum_i alpha_i(t) x_i(t), so regional detail and global coherence are both served. The PSA module supplies the spatial structure: a LoRA-tuned LLM converts text prompts into bounding-box coordinates and prompt-mask pairs.

Load-bearing premise

The whole 'spatial expert routing' claim rests on the gate actually seeing region-specific information, but the paper defines the gate input only as 'usually a scalar' and never shows that changing a region box changes the weights.

What would settle it

Run a fixed prompt with only the bounding-box coordinates moved between regions (e.g., the cat box on the left vs the right) and log the gate weights; if the weights do not change, or if reassigning a region to a realism expert instead of an anime expert does not change the output style, then the per-region routing claim is false and the measured gains would come from the text-to-box planner.

Watch this falsifier. Get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

If this is right

  • The base diffusion model's parameters stay frozen; only the gate and the LLM adapter are trained, so expert models can be swapped in or out without re-tuning the backbone.
  • Compositional accuracy improves on the tasks the framework targets: GenEval overall goes from 0.55 to 0.58 and position from 0.15 to 0.27 over SDXL, with two-object accuracy at 0.76.
  • Layout becomes an editable variable: the PSA module's coordinates can be changed at inference, and users can assign different style experts to different regions.
  • Style diversity is decoupled from a single model's aesthetic: mixing photorealistic, anime, and character-prone expert checkpoints yields distinct but globally coherent outputs.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • A direct test the paper does not run: sweep the bounding-box coordinates of one object while holding text fixed and inspect the gate weights; if they are unchanged, the 'spatial' expert routing is actually global style mixing, and the position gains come from the PSA planner.
  • The same planning-plus-routing decomposition could be wrapped around any diffusion backbone with replaceable qkv/feed-forward blocks; the paper only demonstrates it on four SDXL-style experts.
  • The per-region expert mixture, trained on style-sorted data, suggests an untested compositionality claim: arbitrary style checkpoints could be plugged in without retraining, making the gate a general-purpose style blender.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 7 minor

Summary. The paper proposes MEPG (also called MEPT), a text-to-image framework that combines an LLM-based planning module (PSA) with a Mixture-of-Experts diffusion module (MED). The PSA module uses a LoRA-fine-tuned LLM to decompose complex prompts into spatial coordinates and per-region descriptions. The MED module is intended to route different expert models to different spatial regions during denoising, with a cross-denoising schedule that interleaves local and global generation. The authors claim improved compositional fidelity and style diversity, and report GenEval results showing Ours-MEPT at 0.58 overall vs. SDXL's 0.55, with qualitative style and edit examples.

Significance. If the central mechanism were sound, the idea of combining an LLM-based spatial planner with a lightweight portfolio of off-the-shelf SDXL experts would be practically useful, especially for editable layout control and style diversity. The use of public datasets (LAHR and LAION-SG) and open expert models is a strength, and the modular expert-swapping design is a worthwhile goal. However, the paper's load-bearing technical component—the spatially-aware gating mechanism—is not actually specified, and the quantitative evaluation does not measure the dimensions advertised in the introduction and abstract. The current manuscript does not provide a verifiable implementation of its core novelty, so the significance of the claimed results cannot be assessed.

major comments (3)
  1. [§3.2, gating formula w_i = σ(G(X))_i] The gating mechanism is the load-bearing component for the paper's central claim of 'spatial-semantic expert allocation' and 'cross-region generation'. However, the text states that G(X) is 'usually a scalar', while the formula indexes the output as σ(G(X))_i; a scalar cannot carry an index i, so the equation is dimensionally incoherent as written. More importantly, the input X to the gate is never specified. No spatial coordinates, region masks, or attention features are shown being passed into the gate. If X is only a global text embedding or denoising timestep, as in previous MoE text-to-image work, the expert selection is not spatially conditioned and the claimed per-region expert activation has no mechanism. The authors must define X explicitly, show how region information enters the gate, and verify that different spatial regions can select different experts.
  2. [§1 vs. §5.1, Table 1] The Introduction promises '+12.3% FID improvement' and '+18.7% LPIPS gain', and the Abstract claims significant improvement in 'image quality and style diversity'. Yet the experiments section reports only GenEval scores; no FID or LPIPS values appear anywhere in the paper. Table 1 therefore cannot support the headline quantitative claims. The authors should either report the promised metrics or remove the unsupported claims from the abstract and introduction.
  3. [Table 1, §5.1 and §5.3] The reported GenEval gains are small and inconsistent. Ours-MEPT overall is 0.58 vs. SDXL's 0.55, with position improving from 0.15 to 0.27, but counting drops from 0.39 to 0.35 and color from 0.85 to 0.80. No error bars, variance, or significance tests are provided, so it is unclear whether the overall difference is meaningful. The comparison is also not 'same backbone' in a strict sense: the MED module uses four different SDXL-derived expert models (e.g., RealVisXL, nijiseven), not the original SDXL. The authors should clarify what the baseline actually is and provide statistical evaluation.
minor comments (7)
  1. [Throughout] The framework is called MEPG in the title and abstract but MEPT in several places (e.g., §1, §5.1, Table 1). Please use one consistent name.
  2. [§3.2] The text says the SparseMoeBlock consists of a gating function, a softmax function, and expert modules, but the formula uses a sigmoid function. Clarify which nonlinearity is actually used.
  3. [§4.1 and §5.1] The setup sets p1 = 0.7, while §5.1 states 'MEPT framework adopts p1 = 0.5'. Also, the fusion weights α_i^(t) in Eq. (2) are only described as 'empirically determined'. Please report the values and how they were chosen.
  4. [§3.2 and §3.3] The number of experts is denoted n in §3.2 and M in Eq. (2). Use a single notation.
  5. [§5.3, Figure 5] The conditions 'BaseModel', 'PSA+Global', 'PSA+MED', and 'prompt+MED' are not all defined in the text. Please define each ablation condition precisely.
  6. [Table 1] The table formatting is inconsistent (e.g., missing spaces in some entries) and no details are given for the baseline implementations. Also, the caption says 'Geneval' but the benchmark is 'GenEval'.
  7. [References] The LoRA reference (Hu 2021) is missing author and title details. Please complete all references.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: central evaluation is external and independent.

full rationale

I found no circular reduction in the paper's derivation chain. The PSA module is trained on the LAHR/GoT dataset and the MED gate is trained on LAION-SG, both separate from the GenEval benchmark used for evaluation. The central claims are therefore tested against an external benchmark not used to fit the method's components. The fusion weights are described as 'empirically determined' rather than predicted from data, so they do not constitute fitted inputs relabeled as predictions. The undefined gate input X in Section 3.2 is a serious soundness/implementation gap—it does not show how spatial information reaches the gate—but it is not circularity: no equation, fitted value, or self-citation is reused as the evidence for the same claim. There is no load-bearing self-citation, no imported uniqueness theorem, and no renaming of a known result. The missing FID/LPIPS quantification is a reporting gap, not a circular step. After checking the claimed derivation chain, I found no step that reduces to its own inputs by construction.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

5 free parameters · 4 axioms · 1 invented entities

The central claims rest on several unverified assumptions: the spatial annotations in LAHR are reliable training signals, the LAION-SG style distribution is appropriate for gate training, the MoE replacement of QKV projections does not break the denoiser, and the gating input actually carries spatial information. The free parameters (p1, fusion weights, expert set) are chosen by hand or tuned empirically, and the paper provides no external evidence for them. No new physical entities are introduced; the only invented component is the SparseMoeBlock architecture, which lacks independent verification.

free parameters (5)
  • local-dominant proportion p1 = 0.7 default, 0.5 for GenEval
    Chosen by hand; different values are used in the qualitative experiments and in the GenEval evaluation, indicating tuning to the benchmark (Sections 4.1 and 5.1).
  • fusion weights alpha_i^(t) = not reported
    Described as 'empirically determined' in Section 4.1; these weights control how local and global expert outputs are combined at each denoising step, and their values are not given.
  • coordinate range [0,1000) = 0 to 1000
    Arbitrary normalization imposed on spatial coordinates in Section 3.1; harmless but unstated as a design choice.
  • max_elements in LoRA prompt = not specified
    The supplementary prompt limits the element list to 'at most {max_elements}', but the actual value is never provided.
  • expert model portfolio = RealVisXL, RealismEngine, sdxlnijiseven, halcyon-sdxl-photorealism
    Four SDXL variants selected by hand for style complementarity (realism vs anime); not learned and not justified by data.
axioms (4)
  • domain assumption LAHR dataset coordinates are reliable spatial ground truth for LoRA training
    The PSA LoRA is trained on LAHR (GoT) coordinate-element annotations; if those annotations are noisy or biased to GoT's prompt style, the PSA module inherits that bias (Section 4.1).
  • domain assumption LAION-SG aesthetic rating >6 selects for style diversity suitable for gate training
    The gate is trained to route experts using LAION-SG images with aesthetic scores greater than 6; whether this correlates with the intended spatial-semantic routing objective is assumed (Section 4.1).
  • domain assumption Replacing QKV projections in a frozen UNet with a weighted sum of expert projections preserves denoising validity
    Section 3.2 states that the MED module replaces the qkv components of FF and Attn with SparseMoeBlock, but no demonstration is given that the resulting denoiser remains consistent or stable.
  • ad hoc to paper Gating output G(X) encodes spatial-semantic region features
    Section 3.2 describes G(X) as 'usually a scalar' with no spatial input, yet the framework claims expert routing across spatial regions. The formula provides no mechanism for spatial conditioning.
invented entities (1)
  • SparseMoeBlock no independent evidence
    purpose: Routes input to multiple expert projections in the UNet for cross-region style and content control
    The paper introduces this module but ships no code, checkpoints, or isolated ablation showing its behavior; it is not formally verified and cannot be evaluated outside this manuscript.

reviewed 2026-08-05 · how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of MEPG:Multi-Expert Planning and Generation for Compositionally-Rich Image Generation." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/HZZWE7NK

@misc{pith2026250904126,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: MEPG:Multi-Expert Planning and Generation for Compositionally-Rich Image Generation},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/HZZWE7NK}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2509.04126}
}
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN
read the original abstract

Text-to-image diffusion models have achieved remarkable image quality, but they still struggle with complex, multiele ment prompts, and limited stylistic diversity. To address these limitations, we propose a Multi-Expert Planning and Gen eration Framework (MEPG) that synergistically integrates position- and style-aware large language models (LLMs) with spatial-semantic expert modules. The framework comprises two core components: (1) a Position-Style-Aware (PSA) module that utilizes a supervised fine-tuned LLM to decom pose input prompts into precise spatial coordinates and style encoded semantic instructions; and (2) a Multi-Expert Dif fusion (MED) module that implements cross-region genera tion through dynamic expert routing across both local regions and global areas. During the generation process for each lo cal region, specialized models (e.g., realism experts, styliza tion specialists) are selectively activated for each spatial par tition via attention-based gating mechanisms. The architec ture supports lightweight integration and replacement of ex pert models, providing strong extensibility. Additionally, an interactive interface enables real-time spatial layout editing and per-region style selection from a portfolio of experts. Ex periments show that MEPG significantly outperforms base line models with the same backbone in both image quality and style diversity.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2509.04126 by Lin Liu, Yuan Zhao.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Compare MEPT with other models. The first two [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p001_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: The overall framework of our proposed Multi-Expert Planning and Generation (MEPG), which contains three stages: [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: A comparison between using only the LLM chain of thought and using Low-rank Model-assisted LLM chain of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: The process of cross-denoising. The following sec [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Ablation Mudules Experiment p1 = 0.7, meaning that the first 35 steps focus on local de￾noising and the last 15 steps focus on global denoising. The fusion weights α (t) i are empirically determined. 4.2Evaluation Metrics GenEval (Ghosh, Hajishirzi, and Schmidt 2023) is an object-level alignment benchmark specifically designed for evaluating Text-to-Image models. It overcomes the limita￾tions of traditiona… view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Comparison using different expert models and Mixture of Experts ( MOE) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: In this picture, we exchange the coordination be [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Experts Config Fan, Y.; Watkins, O.; Du, Y.; Liu, H.; Ryu, M.; Boutilier, C.; Abbeel, P.; Ghavamzadeh, M.; Lee, K.; and Lee, K. 2023. Reinforcement learning for fine-tuning text-to-image diffu￾sion models. In Conference on Neural Information Process￾ing Systems (NeurIPS). Fang, R.; Duan, C.; Wang, K.; Huang, L.; Li, H.; Yan, S.; Tian, H.; Zeng, X.; Zhao, R.; Dai, J.; Liu, X.; and Li, H. 2025. GoT: Unleashi… view at source ↗

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

42 extracted references · 29 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Balaji, Y.; Nah, S.; Huang, X.; Vahdat, A.; Song, J.; Kreis, K.; Aittala, M.; Aila, T.; Laine, S.; Catanzaro, B.; et al. 2022. eDiffi: Text-to-Image Diffusion Models with an Ensemble of Expert Denoisers. arXiv preprint arXiv:2211.01324

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  2. [2]

    Batifol, S.; Blattmann, A.; Boesel, F.; Consul, S.; Diagne, C.; Dockhorn, T.; English, J.; English, Z.; Esser, P.; Kulal, S.; et al. 2025. FLUX. 1 Kontext: Flow Matching for In-Context Image Generation and Editing in Latent Space. arXiv e-prints, arXiv--2506

    work page 2025

  3. [3]

    Betker, J.; Goh, G.; Jing, L.; Brooks, T.; Wang, J.; Li, L.; Ouyang, L.; Zhuang, J.; Lee, J.; Guo, Y.; et al. 2023. Improving image generation with better captions. Computer Science. https://cdn. openai. com/papers/dall-e-3. pdf, 2(3): 8

    work page 2023

  4. [4]

    Black, K.; Janner, M.; Du, Y.; Kostrikov, I.; and Levine, S. 2023. Training Diffusion Models with Reinforcement Learning. In ICML 2023 Workshop on Structured Probabilistic Inference backslash Generative Modeling

    work page 2023

  5. [5]

    Changpinyo, S.; Sharma, P.; Ding, N.; and Soricut, R. 2021. Conceptual 12m: Pushing web-scale image-text pre-training to recognize long-tail visual concepts. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 3558--3568

    work page 2021

  6. [6]

    X.; Gao, H.; Chen, D.; Li, J.; Zeng, W.; Yu, X.; Wu, Y.; Xie, Z.; Li, Y

    Dai, D.; Deng, C.; Zhao, C.; Xu, R. X.; Gao, H.; Chen, D.; Li, J.; Zeng, W.; Yu, X.; Wu, Y.; Xie, Z.; Li, Y. K.; Huang, P.; Luo, F.; Ruan, C.; Sui, Z.; and Liang, W. 2024. DeepSeekMoE: Towards Ultimate Expert Specialization in Mixture-of-Experts Language Models. arXiv:2401.06066

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  7. [7]

    Dhariwal, P.; and Nichol, A. 2021. Diffusion Models Beat GANs on Image Synthesis. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS), 34: 8780--8794

    work page 2021

  8. [8]

    M.; et al

    Du, N.; Huang, Y.; Dai, A. M.; et al. 2022. GLaM : Efficient Scaling of Language Models with Mixture-of-Experts. In International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML), 5547--5569

    work page 2022

  9. [9]

    Esser, P.; Kulal, S.; Blattmann, A.; Entezari, R.; M \"u ller, J.; Saini, H.; Levi, Y.; Lorenz, D.; Sauer, A.; Boesel, F.; et al. 2024. Scaling rectified flow transformers for high-resolution image synthesis. In Forty-first international conference on machine learning

    2024

  10. [10]

    Fan, Y.; Watkins, O.; Du, Y.; Liu, H.; Ryu, M.; Boutilier, C.; Abbeel, P.; Ghavamzadeh, M.; Lee, K.; and Lee, K. 2023. Reinforcement learning for fine-tuning text-to-image diffusion models. In Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS)

    work page 2023

  11. [11]

    Fang, R.; Duan, C.; Wang, K.; Huang, L.; Li, H.; Yan, S.; Tian, H.; Zeng, X.; Zhao, R.; Dai, J.; Liu, X.; and Li, H. 2025. GoT: Unleashing Reasoning Capability of Multimodal Large Language Model for Visual Generation and Editing. arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.10639

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  12. [12]

    Fedus, W.; Zoph, B.; and Shazeer, N. 2022. Switch Transformers: Scaling to Trillion Parameter Models with Simple and Efficient Sparsity. Journal of Machine Learning Research (JMLR), 23(120): 1--39

    work page 2022

  13. [13]

    E.; and Wang, W

    Feng, W.; Zhu, W.; Fu, T.-J.; Jampani, V.; Akula, A.; He, X.; Basu, S.; Wang, X. E.; and Wang, W. Y. 2023. LayoutGPT: Compositional Visual Planning and Generation with Large Language Models. In Oh, A.; Naumann, T.; Globerson, A.; Saenko, K.; Hardt, M.; and Levine, S., eds., Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, volume 36, 18225--18250. Curran...

    work page 2023

  14. [14]

    Ghosh, D.; Hajishirzi, H.; and Schmidt, L. 2023. GenEval: An Object-Focused Framework for Evaluating Text-to-Image Alignment. NIPS

    work page 2023

  15. [15]

    Ho, J.; Jain, A.; and Abbeel, P. 2020. Denoising Diffusion Probabilistic Models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2006.11239

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  16. [16]

    Hu, E. J. e. a. 2021. LoRA: Low-Rank Adaptation of Large Language Models. ICLR

    work page 2021

  17. [17]

    Hu, X.; Wang, R.; Fang, Y.; Fu, B.; Cheng, P.; and Yu, G. 2024. ELLA: Equip Diffusion Models with LLM for Enhanced Semantic Alignment. arXiv:2403.05135

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  18. [18]

    A.; Jordan, M

    Jacobs, R. A.; Jordan, M. I.; Nowlan, S. J.; and Hinton, G. E. 1991. Adaptive Mixtures of Local Experts. Neural Computation, 79--87

    work page 1991

  19. [19]

    Lee, K.; Liu, H.; Ryu, M.; Watkins, O.; Du, Y.; Boutilier, C.; Abbeel, P.; Ghavamzadeh, M.; and Gu, S. S. 2023. Aligning text-to-image models using human feedback. arXiv preprint arXiv:2302.12192

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  20. [20]

    J.; Zhang, S.; and Shakhnarovich, G

    Li, Y.; Liu, H.; Wu, Q.; Lee, Y. J.; Zhang, S.; and Shakhnarovich, G. 2023. GLIGEN: Open-Set Grounded Text-to-Image Generation. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), 23411--23422

    work page 2023

  21. [21]

    Li, Z.; Meng, C.; Li, Y.; Yang, L.; Zhang, S.; Ma, J.; Li, J.; Yang, G.; Yang, C.; Yang, Z.; et al. 2024. Laion-sg: An enhanced large-scale dataset for training complex image-text models with structural annotations. arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.08580

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  22. [22]

    Liang, Z.; Yuan, Y.; Gu, S.; Chen, B.; Hang, T.; Cheng, M.; Li, J.; and Zheng, L. 2024. Aesthetic Post-Training Diffusion Models from Generic Preferences with Step-by-step Preference Optimization. CVPR

    work page 2024

  23. [23]

    Lin, T.-Y.; Maire, M.; Belongie, S.; Hays, J.; Perona, P.; Ramanan, D.; Doll \'a r, P.; and Zitnick, C. L. 2014. Microsoft coco: Common objects in context. In C European Conference on Computer Vision

    work page 2014

  24. [24]

    Q.; and Dhariwal, P

    Nichol, A. Q.; and Dhariwal, P. 2021. Improved Denoising Diffusion Probabilistic Models. International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML), 8162--8171

    work page 2021

  25. [25]

    Saharia, C.; Chan, W.; Saxena, S.; Li, L.; Whang, J.; Denton, E.; Ghasemipour, S. K. S.; Ayan, B. K.; Mahdavi, S. S.; Lopes, R. G.; Salimans, T.; Ho, J.; Fleet, D. J.; and Norouzi, M. 2022. Photorealistic Text-to-Image Diffusion Models with Deep Language Understanding. arXiv:2205.11487

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  26. [26]

    W.; Wightman, R.; Cherti, M.; Coombes, T.; Katta, A.; Mullis, C.; Wortsman, M.; Schramowski, P.; Kundurthy, S

    Schuhmann, C.; Beaumont, R.; Vencu, R.; Gordon, C. W.; Wightman, R.; Cherti, M.; Coombes, T.; Katta, A.; Mullis, C.; Wortsman, M.; Schramowski, P.; Kundurthy, S. R.; Crowson, K.; Schmidt, L.; Kaczmarczyk, R.; Jitsev, J.; et al. 2022. LAION-5B: An Open Large-Scale Dataset for Training Next-Generation Image-Text Models. In Advances in Neural Information Pro...

    work page 2022

  27. [27]

    V.; Hinton, G.; and Dean, J

    Shazeer, N.; Mirhoseini, A.; Maziarz, K.; Davis, A.; Le, Q. V.; Hinton, G.; and Dean, J. 2017. Outrageously Large Neural Networks: The Sparsely-Gated Mixture-of-Experts Layer. In International Conference on Learning Representations (ICLR)

    work page 2017

  28. [28]

    Sohl-Dickstein, J.; Weiss, E.; Maheswaranathan, N.; and Ganguli, S. 2015. Deep unsupervised learning using nonequilibrium thermodynamics. In International conference on machine learning, 2256--2265. pmlr

    work page 2015

  29. [29]

    Sun, P.; Jiang, Y.; Chen, S.; Zhang, S.; Peng, B.; Luo, P.; and Yuan, Z. 2024. Autoregressive Model Beats Diffusion: Llama for Scalable Image Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.06525

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  30. [30]

    Wan, T.; Wang, A.; and et al., B. A. 2025. Wan2.2: Open and Advanced Large-Scale Video Generative Models. https://github.com/Wan-Video/Wan2.2

    work page 2025

  31. [31]

    H.; Le, Q

    Wei, J.; Wang, X.; Schuurmans, D.; Bosma, M.; Ichter, B.; Xia, F.; Chi, E. H.; Le, Q. V.; and Zhou, D. 2023. Chain-of-Thought Prompting Elicits Reasoning in Large Language Models. In International Conference on Learning Representations (ICLR), 1--23

    work page 2023

  32. [32]

    Xie, J.; Li, Y.; Huang, Y.; Zhang, H.; Zhang, Y.; and Liu, M. Z. S. 2023. BoxDiff: Text-to-Image Synthesis with Training-Free Box-Constrained Diffusion. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV), 14969--14979

    work page 2023

  33. [33]

    Xue, Z.; Song, G.; Guo, Q.; Liu, B.; Zong, Z.; Liu, Y.; and Luo, P. 2023 a . RAPHAEL: Text-to-Image Generation via Large Mixture of Diffusion Paths. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 41693--41706

    work page 2023

  34. [34]

    Xue, Z.; Song, G.; Guo, Q.; Liu, B.; Zong, Z.; Liu, Y.; and Luo, P. 2023 b . RAPHAEL: Text-to-Image Generation via Large Mixture of Diffusion Paths. In Oh, A.; Naumann, T.; Globerson, A.; Saenko, K.; Hardt, M.; and Levine, S., eds., Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, volume 36, 41693--41706. Curran Associates, Inc

    work page 2023

  35. [35]

    Yang, A.; Li, A.; Yang, B.; Zhang, B.; Hui, B.; Zheng, B.; Yu, B.; Gao, C.; Huang, C.; Lv, C.; Zheng, C.; Liu, D.; Zhou, F.; Huang, F.; Hu, F.; Ge, H.; Wei, H.; Lin, H.; Tang, J.; Yang, J.; Tu, J.; Zhang, J.; Yang, J.; Yang, J.; Zhou, J.; Zhou, J.; Lin, J.; Dang, K.; Bao, K.; Yang, K.; Yu, L.; Deng, L.; Li, M.; Xue, M.; Li, M.; Zhang, P.; Wang, P.; Zhu, Q...

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  36. [36]

    Yang, L.; Yu, Z.; Meng, C.; Xu, M.; Ermon, S.; and Cui, B. 2024. Mastering text-to-image diffusion: Recaptioning, planning, and generating with multimodal llms. In Forty-first International Conference on Machine Learning

    work page 2024

  37. [37]

    Yang, S.; Chen, T.; and Zhou, M. 2024. A Dense Reward View on Aligning Text-to-Image Diffusion with Preference. In Forty-first International Conference on Machine Learning

    work page 2024

  38. [38]

    Yang, Z.; Wang, J.; Gan, Z.; Li, L.; Lin, K.; Liu, Z.; and Wang, L. 2023. ReCo: Region-Controlled Text-to-Image Generation. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), 14246--14255

    work page 2023

  39. [39]

    Zheng, G.; Zhou, W.; Li, X.; Qi, Z.; Shan, Y.; Zheng, G.; and Yang, J. 2023. LayoutDiffusion: Controllable Diffusion Model for Layout-to-Image Generation. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), 22430--22439

    work page 2023

  40. [40]

    Zhu, J.; Chen, Y.; Ding, M.; Luo, P.; Wang, L.; and Wang, J. 2024. MoLE: Enhancing Human-centric Text-to-image Diffusion via Mixture of Low-rank Experts. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 29354--29386

    work page 2024

  41. [41]

    , " * write output.state after.block = add.period write newline

    ENTRY address archivePrefix author booktitle chapter edition editor eid eprint howpublished institution isbn journal key month note number organization pages publisher school series title type volume year label extra.label sort.label short.list INTEGERS output.state before.all mid.sentence after.sentence after.block FUNCTION init.state.consts #0 'before.a...

  42. [42]

    write newline

    " write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION n.dashify 't := "" t empty not t #1 #1 substring "-" = t #1 #2 substring "--" = not "--" * t #2 global.max substring 't := t #1 #1 substring "-" = "-" * t #2 global.max substring 't := while if t #1 #1 substring * t #2 global.max substring 't := if while FUNCTION word.in bbl.in capitalize " " * FUNCT...

This paper was first reviewed by deepseek-v4-flash on August 5, 2026.