Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 59 references

This paper proposes ScaleEdit, a test-time optimization method that lets a pretrained low-resolution diffusion editor produce 2K image edits by aligning diffusion trajectories patch-wise and synchronizing the patches.

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 ↗

T0 review · deepseek-v4-flash

2026-08-03 20:23 UTC pith:J57HWE3I

load-bearing objection The core idea is clean and clearly presented, but the paper's own evaluation doesn't yet show that the edits actually follow the user's instruction at high resolution. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2511.19945 v3 pith:J57HWE3I submitted 2025-11-25 cs.CV

Low-Resolution Editing is All You Need for High-Resolution Editing

Junsung Lee , Hyunsoo Lee , Yong Jae Lee , Bohyung Han This is my paper
classification cs.CV
keywords high-resolution image editingdiffusion modelstest-time optimizationpatch-wise inferencedetail transferfeature modulationTweedie blendingsynchronization
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 paper introduces the task of high-resolution image editing and claims that a pretrained low-resolution diffusion editor can be repurposed for 2K edits without any retraining. The method, ScaleEdit, divides the high-resolution source into model-native patches, optimizes a lightweight 1x1 convolution in the diffusion model's feature space so that the low-resolution source trajectory follows the high-resolution source trajectory, and then injects that learned transfer function while denoising a low-resolution reference edit. A blended-Tweedie and resampling synchronization step keeps adjacent patches consistent without overlapping inference. If the claim holds, high-resolution editing becomes accessible using existing low-resolution editing pipelines, and the method generalizes to both U-Net and transformer-based backbones.

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the central discovery is that fine-grained detail transfer can be formulated as a timestep-dependent feature-space transformation learned at test time. The optimization objective (Eq. 6) aligns the reverse diffusion trajectory of the low-resolution source with that of the high-resolution source by modifying an intermediate feature via a 1x1 convolution; the same learned transformation is then applied during the reverse process of the low-resolution reference (Eq. 9) to produce the high-resolution edited image. The paper's experiments report that this yields better masked-SSIM, PSNR, and HaarPSI than super-resolution baselines at 1K and 2K resolutions, and that the m

What carries the argument

The central object is the parameterized transfer function φ_θ(h_t, t), a 1x1 convolution applied to a chosen intermediate feature block of a pretrained diffusion model at each timestep t. It is optimized per patch to minimize the distance between the low-resolution source trajectory and the high-resolution source trajectory, and then reused to modulate the denoising of the reference patch. The supporting mechanism is a synchronization strategy that constructs an auxiliary boundary latent, blends its Tweedie estimate with those of adjacent patches using a linear weight mask, and resamples latents without re-injecting the transfer function, avoiding overlapping inference.

Load-bearing premise

The transfer function optimized on the source pair (low-res source aligned to high-res source) is assumed to generalize to the reference pair (low-res reference degraded to high-res output), even when the reference has different semantics or content; the paper offers no theoretical guarantee and explicitly acknowledges failure for large semantic gaps like cat-to-dog.

What would settle it

Measure the alignment error of Eq. 6 on the reference pair: after optimizing φ_θ on the source pair, apply the same transfer function during denoising of the reference and compute the distance between the resulting trajectory and a ground-truth high-res reference (if available). If the error rises sharply with semantic distance between source and reference, the generalization assumption fails. A simpler observational test: run a cat-to-dog edit and check whether the output preserves the cat's fur texture while actually looking like a dog; the paper expects this case to fail.

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

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

If this is right

  • Existing low-resolution editing models can be lifted to 2K and beyond without training or fine-tuning.
  • The method works with both U-Net and transformer-based diffusion backbones, as demonstrated with Stable Diffusion and FLUX.
  • The hyperparameter τ provides a tunable trade-off between detail transfer and content preservation, so users can adjust editing strength per image.
  • Because synchronization avoids overlapping inference, the per-patch cost stays close to the base model's native resolution cost.
  • If the generalization claim holds, the approach could be applied to any instruction-based editor that can produce a low-res reference.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The success of the transfer function suggests that low-resolution edit trajectories are a sufficient conditioning signal for high-resolution appearance; this could be tested by ablating the reference and measuring output variance.
  • The same trajectory-alignment principle might extend to other generative modalities (video, 3D) by aligning trajectories in a shared latent space.
  • Since the method relies on a per-image optimization loop, a natural extension is to amortize the transfer function across images through a lightweight adapter, enabling faster inference.
  • The paper's own limitation note implies that artifacts from the low-res editor propagate to the high-res output; a testable extension is to add a consistency term that penalizes divergence from the reference's spatial layout.

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 / 5 minor

Summary. The paper introduces the task of high-resolution image editing (resolutions above 1K) and proposes ScaleEdit, a test-time optimization framework. ScaleEdit first applies an existing low-resolution editor to a downsampled source to obtain a low-resolution reference, then edits each high-resolution patch by optimizing a timestep-dependent 1x1 convolution transfer function (Eq. 6) that aligns the reverse diffusion trajectory of the low-resolution source patch with the high-resolution source patch trajectory. The optimized transfer function is then injected while denoising the low-resolution reference patch (Eq. 9), and a synchronization mechanism based on blended Tweedie estimates and a resampling strategy is introduced to remove patch-boundary artifacts. Experiments compare ScaleEdit with diffusion-based super-resolution baselines on 1K and 2K editing scenarios using masked MSE/SSIM/PSNR and HaarPSI, plus ablations and qualitative results on Stable Diffusion and FLUX.

Significance. If the central claim were properly validated, this would be a useful contribution: the task of high-resolution editing is timely, and the proposed mechanism—per-image optimization of a lightweight feature-space transfer function plus non-overlapping patch synchronization—is technically interesting and potentially applicable to multiple backbone architectures. The paper also ships a detailed algorithm, an ablation of the synchronization mechanism, and a generalization experiment to FLUX. However, the empirical evaluation does not currently measure whether the edited output actually reflects the low-resolution reference or the text instruction. Because the reported metrics all reward source preservation, a degenerate method that outputs the unedited high-resolution source would score perfectly on M-MSE, M-SSIM, and M-PSNR. The central claim therefore rests on an unverified generalization assumption: that the transfer function optimized on the source pair (Eq. 6) transfers correctly to the reference pair (Eq. 9). The paper's significance is conditional on adding semantic-fidelity evaluation that directly tests this assumption.

major comments (3)
  1. [§5.3, Table 1] The quantitative evaluation does not measure the central claim. M-MSE, M-SSIM, and M-PSNR are computed on masked unchanged regions, and HaarPSI is described as measuring similarity to the source image. A method that simply copies the high-resolution source would achieve M-MSE=0, M-SSIM=1, and infinite M-PSNR, and would score perfectly on HaarPSI, while completely ignoring the edit instruction. The reported superiority over SR baselines therefore only establishes better source-texture preservation, not that the edits are faithfully transferred. The paper needs to add metrics that compare the output to the low-resolution reference or to the text instruction in the edited region (e.g., CLIP text-image alignment, region-wise LPIPS to the reference, or a human study), and report them alongside the existing metrics.
  2. [§5.1 vs. Appendix D] There is an internal inconsistency in the key hyperparameter τ. Section 5.1 states τ=15 for all experiments, while Appendix D says the default setting is τ=35 and reports that τ=35 achieves the best results in the ablation. It is therefore unclear which configuration produced the main results in Table 1 and the qualitative figures. This must be clarified, because the trade-off controlled by τ is central to the method and the reported numbers are not reproducible without knowing the actual value.
  3. [§4.4, Eqs. (6) and (9)] The core mechanism is a domain-shift assumption that is not directly tested. The transfer function φθ is optimized entirely on the source pair—mapping the low-resolution source trajectory to the high-resolution source trajectory—and is then applied to the reference trajectory without ever having seen the reference or the target semantics. The paper itself notes that a constant-vector version 'fails to produce reliable transformations, especially when the source and reference differ in semantics, e.g., cat-to-dog,' and the adaptive 1×1 convolution is proposed to mitigate this, but no experiment measures whether the adaptive version actually preserves reference semantics. The current evaluation does not include any reference-to-output or instruction-following metric, so the claimed semantic transfer is unverified. A concrete test would be to measure whether the output's edited region is cl
minor comments (5)
  1. [§4.1] The terminology is confusing: I_low_ref is called the 'reference' and I_high_ref is the 'target,' but the reader may expect the reference to be the desired output. Suggest using 'reference' consistently for the low-resolution edited image and 'output' for the generated high-resolution image.
  2. [§4.4] The transfer function is first denoted φ(i,t) and later φθ(h_t[i],t); please unify notation and make clear that θ is optimized per image at test time.
  3. [Algorithm 1, lines 15–20] The algorithm appears to overwrite tilde y_{t-1}[i] first with Eq. (9) and then again with Eq. (14) in the same loop iteration. Please clarify which value is used in subsequent steps and whether Eq. (14) replaces the Eq. (9) result.
  4. [Table 1] No standard deviations or significance tests are reported. Given the small margins over baselines on several metrics, it would be helpful to report variance across the 400 evaluation pairs.
  5. [Appendix G] The acknowledged limitation that artifacts from the low-resolution reference can propagate to the final output is relevant to the evaluation. The paper should discuss how often this occurs and whether the reported metrics are affected.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged

Quantitative source-preservation metrics certify the Eq. (6) fitting objective, leaving the reference-semantics half of the editing claim untested; no load-bearing self-citation.

specific steps
  1. fitted input called prediction [Sec. 4.4, Eq. (6); Sec. 5.3, Metrics]
    "The transfer function is optimized to align the low-resolution trajectory with the high-resolution trajectory by minimizing L:=||x^{high}_{t-1}[i]-f^{rev}(x~_t[i], t; Δh_t[i])||^2_2 ... We evaluate the results using four widely adapted metrics: MSE, SSIM, PSNR and HaarPSI ... the masked metrics allow us to quantify how well each method preserves the regions of the source image that are intended to remain unchanged ... HaarPSI ... evaluate how effectively fine-grained details from the source image are transferred into the target image."

    Eq. (6) is a per-test-image fit whose target is the high-resolution source trajectory, and the reported metrics (masked MSE/SSIM/PSNR plus HaarPSI) all score similarity to that same high-resolution source. The quantitative gains over SR baselines therefore mostly confirm that the test-time optimization achieved its own objective, not that the transfer function generalizes from the source pair to the reference pair (Eq. 9). The semantic half of the claim is unquantified: a method that simply copied the high-res source would score perfectly on the masked metrics while performing no edit. The paper itself concedes failure when source and reference differ in semantics (cat-to-dog), and Appendix G acknowledges low-res reference artifacts propagate.

full rationale

The only load-bearing transfer is from the optimized source pair to the reference pair: Eq. (6) fits 1x1 convolutions to make low-res source latents denoise toward high-res source latents, and Eq. (9) injects those convolutions into the reference trajectory. This is an unproven domain-shift assumption; the paper explicitly reports failure when source and reference differ in semantics (cat-to-dog) and Appendix G concedes low-res reference artifacts propagate. The quantitative evaluation (Sec. 5.3) uses only source-similarity metrics (masked MSE/SSIM/PSNR and HaarPSI), which are the same property Eq. (6) directly optimizes; a degenerate source-copy would score perfectly. Therefore the Table 1 gains mainly verify the fit, not the semantic edit. I found no load-bearing self-citation: the two author-overlap references [24,25] are related-work background, and the method relies on external pretrained models and datasets. I also note an internal reporting inconsistency: Sec. 5.1 fixes tau=15, while Appendix D calls tau=35 the default and best; this weakens reproducibility but is not circularity. Overall, the source-preservation prediction is partially circular by construction, while the central editing claim retains independent qualitative content, so the score is 6.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

2 free parameters · 4 axioms · 0 invented entities

The paper introduces no new physical entities. Its free parameters are the timestep threshold tau (chosen post hoc and inconsistently reported) and the per-image transfer-function weights. The main assumptions are the empirical generalizability of the feature-space transfer and the fidelity of the low-res reference. No machine-checked proof or independent external benchmark supports these assumptions.

free parameters (2)
  • tau (timestep threshold) = 15 (main text) / 35 (Appendix D)
    Controls how many denoising steps receive detail transfer. Tuned on a 60-pair evaluation subset in Appendix D; the main text reports 15 while the appendix reports 35 as default.
  • Transfer-function weights theta (1x1 convs) = per-image, per-patch optimized via Eq. 6
    The central learnable component; optimized at test time to align the low-res source trajectory to the high-res source trajectory. No release of these weights or the optimization details (learning rate, number of steps).
axioms (4)
  • domain assumption DDIM forward-reverse reconstruction is lossless under negligible discretization error
    Invoked in Sec. 3 to justify trajectory alignment; null-text inversion partially compensates but is itself approximate.
  • ad hoc to paper A 1x1 convolution applied to intermediate diffusion features can transfer fine-grained detail from the source trajectory to the reference trajectory
    Core design choice in Sec. 4.4; no theoretical guarantee, and the paper notes failures for large semantic gaps (cat-to-dog).
  • ad hoc to paper Blending Tweedie estimates across patch boundaries yields spatially coherent output
    Empirical heuristic in Sec. 4.5; no consistency proof, only qualitative ablation.
  • domain assumption The low-resolution reference produced by an existing editor faithfully represents the user's intended high-resolution edit
    Sec. 4.1 relies on this; Appendix G acknowledges that artifacts from the low-res reference propagate to the output.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 14500 in / 11586 out tokens · 134518 ms · 2026-08-03T20:23:06.985759+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Low-Resolution Editing is All You Need for High-Resolution Editing." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/J57HWE3I

@misc{pith2026251119945,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Low-Resolution Editing is All You Need for High-Resolution Editing},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/J57HWE3I}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2511.19945}
}
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN
read the original abstract

High-resolution content creation is rapidly emerging as a central challenge in both the vision and graphics communities. Images serve as the most fundamental modality for visual expression, and content generation that aligns with the user intent requires effective, controllable high-resolution image manipulation mechanisms. However, existing approaches remain limited to low-resolution settings, typically supporting only up to 1K resolution. In this work, we introduce the task of high-resolution image editing and propose a test-time optimization framework to address it. Our method performs patch-wise optimization on high-resolution source images, followed by a fine-grained detail transfer module and a novel synchronization strategy to maintain consistency across patches. Extensive experiments show that our method produces high-quality edits, facilitating high-resolution content creation.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2511.19945 by Bohyung Han, Hyunsoo Lee, Junsung Lee, Yong Jae Lee.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Generated images using the proposed method, ScaleEdit. Our method successfully generates high-resolution edited images by [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p001_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Overview of the proposed method. (Left) We first optimize the transfer function [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Overview of the synchronization strategy. Starting from the detail enhancement process (Eq. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: [Best visualized when magnified.] Qualitative comparison of the ScaleEdit with diffusion-based super-resolution baselines [7, 9, 11, 44]. First three rows show the results of 1K-editing, while the last three rows visualize 2K-editing scenario. Here, we use the pretrained Stable Diffusion [37] for ScaleEdit. Metrics. We evaluate the results using four widely adapted metrics: MSE, SSIM, PSNR and HaarPSI [36]… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: [Best visualized when magnified.] We visualize the effect of synchronization strategy in part (a), while we show the results of our method combined with the pretrained FLUX 1-dev [23] model in part (b). intended to remain unchanged during editing. HaarPSI mea￾sures perceptual similarity in a wavelet-aware manner, allow￾ing us to evaluate how effectively fine-grained details from the source image are transf… view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: [Best visualized when magnified.] We visualize the re￾sults of our method combined with the pretrained FLUX 1-dev [23] model. F. Additional qualitative results We show the additional results of ScaleEdit in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: [Best visualized when magnified.] Effectiveness of the proposed synchronization strategy. While images sampled without synchronization incorporates a significant artifact on the patch boundaries, our method effectively alleviates the edge artifacts. 13 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: [Best visualized when magnified.] We visualize the additional results of 1K-editing and 2K-editing. By conditioning on low-resolution reference images, our method is successfully synthesizes high-resolution edited images. 14 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_8.png] 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

59 extracted references · 3 linked inside Pith

  1. [1]

    Dream- clear: High-capacity real-world image restoration with privacy-safe dataset curation.NeurIPS, 2024

    Yuang Ai, Xiaoqiang Zhou, Huaibo Huang, Xiaotian Han, Zhengyu Chen, Quanzeng You, and Hongxia Yang. Dream- clear: High-capacity real-world image restoration with privacy-safe dataset curation.NeurIPS, 2024. 2

    2024

  2. [2]

    Blended diffusion for text-driven editing of natural images

    Omri Avrahami, Dani Lischinski, and Ohad Fried. Blended diffusion for text-driven editing of natural images. InCVPR,

  3. [3]

    Align your latents: High-resolution video synthesis with la- tent diffusion models

    Andreas Blattmann, Robin Rombach, Huan Ling, Tim Dock- horn, Seung Wook Kim, Sanja Fidler, and Karsten Kreis. Align your latents: High-resolution video synthesis with la- tent diffusion models. InCVPR, 2023. 1

    2023

  4. [4]

    In- structpix2pix: Learning to follow image editing instructions

    Tim Brooks, Aleksander Holynski, and Alexei A Efros. In- structpix2pix: Learning to follow image editing instructions. InCVPR, 2023. 2

    2023

  5. [5]

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

    Mingdeng Cao, Xintao Wang, Zhongang Qi, Ying Shan, Xi- aohu Qie, and Yinqiang Zheng. Masactrl: Tuning-free mutual self-attention control for consistent image synthesis and edit- ing. InICCV, 2023. 2, 3

    2023

  6. [6]

    Dc-videogen: Efficient video generation with deep compression video autoencoder.arXiv:2509.25182,

    Junyu Chen, Wenkun He, Yuchao Gu, Yuyang Zhao, Jincheng Yu, Junsong Chen, Dongyun Zou, Yujun Lin, Zhekai Zhang, Muyang Li, et al. Dc-videogen: Efficient video generation with deep compression video autoencoder.arXiv:2509.25182,

    arXiv

  7. [7]

    Effective diffusion transformer architecture for image super- resolution

    Kun Cheng, Lei Yu, Zhijun Tu, Xiao He, Liyu Chen, Yong Guo, Mingrui Zhu, Nannan Wang, Xinbo Gao, and Jie Hu. Effective diffusion transformer architecture for image super- resolution. InAAAI, 2025. 1, 2, 6, 7

    2025

  8. [8]

    Diffedit: Diffusion-based semantic image editing with mask guidance.ICLR, 2023

    Guillaume Couairon, Jakob Verbeek, Holger Schwenk, and Matthieu Cord. Diffedit: Diffusion-based semantic image editing with mask guidance.ICLR, 2023. 2

    2023

  9. [9]

    Tsd-sr: One-step diffusion with target score distillation for real-world image super-resolution

    Linwei Dong, Qingnan Fan, Yihong Guo, Zhonghao Wang, Qi Zhang, Jinwei Chen, Yawei Luo, and Changqing Zou. Tsd-sr: One-step diffusion with target score distillation for real-world image super-resolution. InCVPR, 2025. 1, 2, 6, 7

    2025

  10. [10]

    Demofusion: Democratising high- resolution image generation with no $$$

    Ruoyi Du, Dongliang Chang, Timothy Hospedales, Yi-Zhe Song, and Zhanyu Ma. Demofusion: Democratising high- resolution image generation with no $$$. InCVPR, 2024. 1

    2024

  11. [11]

    Dit4sr: Taming diffusion transformer for real-world image super-resolution

    Zheng-Peng Duan, Jiawei Zhang, Xin Jin, Ziheng Zhang, Zheng Xiong, Dongqing Zou, Jimmy Ren, Chun-Le Guo, and Chongyi Li. Dit4sr: Taming diffusion transformer for real-world image super-resolution. InICCV, 2025. 1, 2, 6, 7

    2025

  12. [12]

    Diffusion self-guidance for controllable image generation.NeurIPS, 2023

    Dave Epstein, Allan Jabri, Ben Poole, Alexei Efros, and Aleksander Holynski. Diffusion self-guidance for controllable image generation.NeurIPS, 2023. 2

    2023

  13. [13]

    Scaling rectified flow transformers for high-resolution image synthesis

    Patrick Esser, Sumith Kulal, Andreas Blattmann, Rahim En- tezari, Jonas Müller, Harry Saini, Yam Levi, Dominik Lorenz, Axel Sauer, Frederic Boesel, et al. Scaling rectified flow transformers for high-resolution image synthesis. InICML,

  14. [14]

    Nano Banana

    Google. Introducing Gemini 2.5 Flash Image, our state- of-the-art image model. https : / / developers . googleblog.com/en/introducing- gemini- 2- 5-flash-image/ , 2025. Codename "Nano Banana". 1, 2, 3, 6, 12

    2025

  15. [15]

    Scalecrafter: Tuning-free higher- resolution visual generation with diffusion models

    Yingqing He, Shaoshu Yang, Haoxin Chen, Xiaodong Cun, Menghan Xia, Yong Zhang, Xintao Wang, Ran He, Qifeng Chen, and Ying Shan. Scalecrafter: Tuning-free higher- resolution visual generation with diffusion models. InICLR,

  16. [16]

    Prompt-to-prompt image editing with cross attention control.ICLR, 2023

    Amir Hertz, Ron Mokady, Jay Tenenbaum, Kfir Aberman, Yael Pritch, and Daniel Cohen-Or. Prompt-to-prompt image editing with cross attention control.ICLR, 2023. 2

    2023

  17. [17]

    Denoising diffu- sion probabilistic models.NeurIPS, 2020

    Jonathan Ho, Ajay Jain, and Pieter Abbeel. Denoising diffu- sion probabilistic models.NeurIPS, 2020. 2

    2020

  18. [18]

    Lora: Low-rank adaptation of large language models.ICLR, 2022

    Edward J Hu, Yelong Shen, Phillip Wallis, Zeyuan Allen-Zhu, Yuanzhi Li, Shean Wang, Lu Wang, Weizhu Chen, et al. Lora: Low-rank adaptation of large language models.ICLR, 2022. 2

    2022

  19. [19]

    Ultragen: High-resolution video generation with hierarchical attention

    Teng Hu, Jiangning Zhang, Zihan Su, and Ran Yi. Ultragen: High-resolution video generation with hierarchical attention. arXiv:2510.18775, 2025. 1

    arXiv 2025

  20. [20]

    Fouriscale: A frequency perspective on training-free high-resolution image synthesis

    Linjiang Huang, Rongyao Fang, Aiping Zhang, Guanglu Song, Si Liu, Yu Liu, and Hongsheng Li. Fouriscale: A frequency perspective on training-free high-resolution image synthesis. InECCV, 2024. 1

    2024

  21. [21]

    Dif- fusionclip: Text-guided diffusion models for robust image manipulation

    Gwanghyun Kim, Taesung Kwon, and Jong Chul Ye. Dif- fusionclip: Text-guided diffusion models for robust image manipulation. InCVPR, 2022. 2

    2022

  22. [22]

    Auto-encoding varia- tional bayes.arXiv:1312.6114, 2013

    Diederik P Kingma and Max Welling. Auto-encoding varia- tional bayes.arXiv:1312.6114, 2013. 3, 6, 11

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  23. [23]

    Black Forest Labs. Flux. https://github.com/ black-forest-labs/flux, 2024. 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12

    2024

  24. [24]

    Conditional score guidance for text-driven image-to-image translation

    Hyunsoo Lee, Minsoo Kang, and Bohyung Han. Conditional score guidance for text-driven image-to-image translation. NeurIPS, 2023. 2

    2023

  25. [25]

    Diffusion- based image-to-image translation by noise correction via prompt interpolation

    Junsung Lee, Minsoo Kang, and Bohyung Han. Diffusion- based image-to-image translation by noise correction via prompt interpolation. InECCV, 2024. 2

    2024

  26. [26]

    Step1x-edit: A practical framework for general image editing.arXiv:2504.17761, 2025

    Shiyu Liu, Yucheng Han, Peng Xing, Fukun Yin, Rui Wang, Wei Cheng, Jiaqi Liao, Yingming Wang, Honghao Fu, Chun- rui Han, Guopeng Li, Yuang Peng, Quan Sun, Jingwei Wu, Yan Cai, Zheng Ge, Ranchen Ming, Lei Xia, Xianfang Zeng, Yibo Zhu, Binxing Jiao, Xiangyu Zhang, Gang Yu, and Daxin Jiang. Step1x-edit: A practical framework for general image editing.arXiv:2...

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  27. [27]

    lang-segment-anything

    Luca Medeiros. lang-segment-anything. https : / / github . com / luca - medeiros / lang - segment - anything, 2023. 7

    2023

  28. [28]

    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. InCVPR, 2023. 3, 6

    2023

  29. [29]

    Junbo Niu, Zheng Liu, Zhuangcheng Gu, Bin Wang, Linke Ouyang, Zhiyuan Zhao, Tao Chu, Tianyao He, Fan Wu, Qintong Zhang, et al. Mineru2. 5: A decoupled vision- language model for efficient high-resolution document pars- ing.arXiv:2509.22186, 2025. 1

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  30. [30]

    Gpt-5 technical report, 2025

    OpenAI. Gpt-5 technical report, 2025. https://openai.com/research/. 6

    2025

  31. [31]

    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. InSIGGRAPH, 2023. 2, 3 9

    2023

  32. [32]

    Pytorch: An imperative style, high-performance deep learning library

    Adam Paszke, Sam Gross, Francisco Massa, Adam Lerer, James Bradbury, Gregory Chanan, Trevor Killeen, Zem- ing Lin, Natalia Gimelshein, Luca Antiga, et al. Pytorch: An imperative style, high-performance deep learning library. NeurIPS, 2019. 6

    2019

  33. [33]

    Scalable diffusion models with transformers

    William Peebles and Saining Xie. Scalable diffusion models with transformers. InICCV, 2023. 2

    2023

  34. [34]

    Sdxl: Improving latent diffusion models for high-resolution image synthesis.ICLR, 2024

    Dustin Podell, Zion English, Kyle Lacey, Andreas Blattmann, Tim Dockhorn, Jonas Müller, Joe Penna, and Robin Rombach. Sdxl: Improving latent diffusion models for high-resolution image synthesis.ICLR, 2024. 2

    2024

  35. [35]

    Freescale: Unleashing the resolution of diffusion models via tuning-free scale fusion

    Haonan Qiu, Shiwei Zhang, Yujie Wei, Ruihang Chu, Hangjie Yuan, Xiang Wang, Yingya Zhang, and Ziwei Liu. Freescale: Unleashing the resolution of diffusion models via tuning-free scale fusion. InICCV, 2025. 1, 6, 12

    2025

  36. [36]

    A haar wavelet-based perceptual similarity index for image quality assessment.Signal Processing: Image Communication, 2018

    Rafael Reisenhofer, Sebastian Bosse, Gitta Kutyniok, and Thomas Wiegand. A haar wavelet-based perceptual similarity index for image quality assessment.Signal Processing: Image Communication, 2018. 6, 7

    2018

  37. [37]

    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. InCVPR, 2022. 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 11, 12

    2022

  38. [38]

    U-net: Convolutional networks for biomedical image segmentation

    Olaf Ronneberger, Philipp Fischer, and Thomas Brox. U-net: Convolutional networks for biomedical image segmentation. InInternational Conference on Medical image computing and computer-assisted intervention, 2015. 2, 3, 11

    2015

  39. [39]

    Pho- torealistic text-to-image diffusion models with deep language understanding.NeurIPS, 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. Pho- torealistic text-to-image diffusion models with deep language understanding.NeurIPS, 2022. 2

    2022

  40. [40]

    Deep unsupervised learning using nonequilibrium thermodynamics

    Jascha Sohl-Dickstein, Eric Weiss, Niru Maheswaranathan, and Surya Ganguli. Deep unsupervised learning using nonequilibrium thermodynamics. InICML, 2015. 2

    2015

  41. [41]

    Denoising diffusion implicit models.ICLR, 2021

    Jiaming Song, Chenlin Meng, and Stefano Ermon. Denoising diffusion implicit models.ICLR, 2021. 2, 3

    2021

  42. [42]

    Score-based generative modeling through stochastic differential equations

    Yang Song, Jascha Sohl-Dickstein, Diederik P Kingma, Ab- hishek Kumar, Stefano Ermon, and Ben Poole. Score-based generative modeling through stochastic differential equations. ICLR, 2021. 2, 3

    2021

  43. [43]

    Estimation of the Mean of a Multivariate Normal Distribution.The annals of Statistics, 1981

    Charles M Stein. Estimation of the Mean of a Multivariate Normal Distribution.The annals of Statistics, 1981. 3

    1981

  44. [44]

    Pixel-level and semantic-level adjustable super-resolution: A dual-lora approach

    Lingchen Sun, Rongyuan Wu, Zhiyuan Ma, Shuaizheng Liu, Qiaosi Yi, and Lei Zhang. Pixel-level and semantic-level adjustable super-resolution: A dual-lora approach. 2025. 1, 2, 6, 7

    2025

  45. [45]

    Hunyuan3d 2.0: Scaling diffusion models for high resolution textured 3d assets generation, 2025

    Tencent Hunyuan3D Team. Hunyuan3d 2.0: Scaling diffusion models for high resolution textured 3d assets generation, 2025. 1

    2025

  46. [46]

    Hunyuan3d 2.5: Towards high- fidelity 3d assets generation with ultimate details, 2025

    Tencent Hunyuan3D Team. Hunyuan3d 2.5: Towards high- fidelity 3d assets generation with ultimate details, 2025. 1

    2025

  47. [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. InCVPR, 2023. 2, 3

    2023

  48. [48]

    Attention is all you need.NIPS, 2017

    Ashish Vaswani, Noam Shazeer, Niki Parmar, Jakob Uszko- reit, Llion Jones, Aidan N Gomez, Łukasz Kaiser, and Illia Polosukhin. Attention is all you need.NIPS, 2017. 2, 6, 12

    2017

  49. [49]

    Exploiting diffusion prior for real-world image super-resolution.IJCV, 2024

    Jianyi Wang, Zongsheng Yue, Shangchen Zhou, Kelvin CK Chan, and Chen Change Loy. Exploiting diffusion prior for real-world image super-resolution.IJCV, 2024. 2

    2024

  50. [50]

    Sinsr: diffusion-based image super- resolution in a single step

    Yufei Wang, Wenhan Yang, Xinyuan Chen, Yaohui Wang, Lanqing Guo, Lap-Pui Chau, Ziwei Liu, Yu Qiao, Alex C Kot, and Bihan Wen. Sinsr: diffusion-based image super- resolution in a single step. InCVPR, 2024

    2024

  51. [51]

    One-step effective diffusion network for real-world image super-resolution.NeurIPS, 2024

    Rongyuan Wu, Lingchen Sun, Zhiyuan Ma, and Lei Zhang. One-step effective diffusion network for real-world image super-resolution.NeurIPS, 2024

    2024

  52. [52]

    Seesr: Towards semantics-aware real-world image super-resolution

    Rongyuan Wu, Tao Yang, Lingchen Sun, Zhengqiang Zhang, Shuai Li, and Lei Zhang. Seesr: Towards semantics-aware real-world image super-resolution. InCVPR, 2024. 2

    2024

  53. [53]

    Drivescape: High-resolution driv- ing video generation by multi-view feature fusion

    Wei Wu, Xi Guo, Weixuan Tang, Tingxuan Huang, Chiyu Wang, and Chenjing Ding. Drivescape: High-resolution driv- ing video generation by multi-view feature fusion. InCVPR,

  54. [54]

    Efficient streaming language models with attention sinks.ICLR, 2024

    Guangxuan Xiao, Yuandong Tian, Beidi Chen, Song Han, and Mike Lewis. Efficient streaming language models with attention sinks.ICLR, 2024. 2

    2024

  55. [55]

    Scaling up to excellence: Practicing model scaling for photo- realistic image restoration in the wild

    Fanghua Yu, Jinjin Gu, Zheyuan Li, Jinfan Hu, Xiangtao Kong, Xintao Wang, Jingwen He, Yu Qiao, and Chao Dong. Scaling up to excellence: Practicing model scaling for photo- realistic image restoration in the wild. InCVPR, 2024. 2

    2024

  56. [56]

    Diffusion-4k: Ultra-high-resolution image synthesis with latent diffusion models

    Jinjin Zhang, Qiuyu Huang, Junjie Liu, Xiefan Guo, and Di Huang. Diffusion-4k: Ultra-high-resolution image synthesis with latent diffusion models. InCVPR, 2025. 1

    2025

  57. [57]

    In-context edit: Enabling instructional image editing with in-context generation in large scale diffusion transformer

    Zechuan Zhang, Ji Xie, Yu Lu, Zongxin Yang, and Yi Yang. In-context edit: Enabling instructional image editing with in-context generation in large scale diffusion transformer. NeurIPS, 2025. 2

    2025

  58. [58]

    Apply a bright cartoon style

    Tianrui Zhu, Shiyi Zhang, Jiawei Shao, and Yansong Tang. Kv-edit: Training-free image editing for precise background preservation.ICCV, 2025. 1, 2 10 Appendix A. Pseudo-code of ScaleEdit We provide an abstract overview of the proposed method by outlining its core procedure in Algorithm 1. Algorithm 1ScaleEdit 1: Inputs:Conditioning images I high src , I l...

    arXiv 2025

  59. [59]

    Replace the dragon with a jet plane in the sky

    Figure 6 shows that our method is even applicable to transformer-based [48] FLUX model [ 23], demonstrating the robustness and generalizability of our method across backbone architectures. Then, we show the additional 1K- and 2K-editing results obtained with the pretrained Stable Diffusion [37] in Figure 8. We emphasize that the proposed method effectivel...