Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 6 minor 51 references

Hidden content must be restored from history, not regenerated from scratch

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 · glm-5.2

2026-07-09 20:56 UTC pith:F7I3IA5Q

load-bearing objection Solid benchmark + simple method; main gap is unreported detection failure rate affecting metric validity the 2 major comments →

arxiv 2607.07051 v1 pith:F7I3IA5Q submitted 2026-07-08 cs.CV cs.AI

Making Implicit Preservation Intent Explicit in Conversational Image Editing

Soomin Han , Jihyung Ahn , Bumsoo Kim , Buru Chang This is my paper
classification cs.CV cs.AI
keywords conversational image editingtemporal preservationocclusion and revelationhistorical reference groundingvision-language modelsimage editing benchmarktraining-free editing
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.

When an image editing conversation covers and then uncovers part of an image—say, adding flowers over an owl's chest and then removing them—the original feathers should reappear, because they were never actually changed. This paper argues that current editing systems fail at this because they treat the current image as the only source of truth: once content is occluded, it no longer exists visually, so the model hallucinates a plausible but wrong replacement. The core claim is that faithful recovery requires grounding the edit in the editing history—specifically, by identifying what content should persist, retrieving the historical image state where it was last visible, and explicitly instructing the editor to restore from that reference. The paper introduces OCCUR-Bench, a benchmark of 4,400 occlusion-and-revelation scenarios, and ReSpec, a training-free framework that uses a vision-language model to perform this historical grounding at inference time. On Flux.2, ReSpec raises temporal consistency from 0.455 to 0.584, with restoration consistency improving from 0.386 to 0.547.

Core claim

The paper identifies a specific failure mode in conversational image editing: when content is temporarily occluded by an edit and later revealed, existing systems regenerate the revealed region from the current image alone rather than recovering the original content, because visual absence is conflated with semantic absence. The proposed solution is to make preservation intent explicit by selecting a historical reference image that contains the correct visual evidence and rewriting the editing instruction to reference it. The key empirical finding is that this history-grounded approach substantially improves restoration fidelity, and that the benefit grows as editing trajectories get longer—

What carries the argument

ReSpec is a three-step, training-free pipeline: (1) a vision-language model analyzes the editing history and current instruction to identify content that should persist but is currently hidden; (2) it selects the latest historical image where that content is visible and valid as a restoration reference; (3) it rewrites the current instruction into a restoration-aware form that explicitly names the preservation target. The editor then receives the current image, the rewritten instruction, and the selected historical reference, rather than the current image and instruction alone.

Load-bearing premise

The evaluation pipeline relies on automated object detection and segmentation to identify which pixels constitute the occluded-and-revealed region and the unchanged background region. If these automated masks systematically misidentify the relevant areas, the restoration consistency metric may not faithfully measure whether the original content was actually recovered.

What would settle it

If a conversational editing system could recover occluded-but-unchanged content from the current image alone—without any historical reference—then the entire premise that history-grounding is necessary for temporal preservation would be undermined.

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

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

2 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper addresses temporal preservation in conversational image editing—specifically, recovering content that was temporarily occluded but never semantically modified. It introduces OCCUR-Bench (4,400 occlusion-and-revelation scenarios) and ReSpec, a training-free framework that uses a VLM controller to infer preservation targets, select historical reference images, and rewrite instructions for in-context editors. Experiments on Flux.2, OmniGen2, and Gemini-2.5 show improvements in restoration and preservation consistency. The problem formulation is well-motivated, the benchmark fills a genuine evaluation gap, and the method is practical. The central concern is that the benchmark's validity depends on an automated mask pipeline whose failure rate and impact on reported scores are not reported.

Significance. The paper makes a solid contribution to the conversational image editing evaluation landscape. OCCUR-Bench targets a real and underexplored failure mode—temporal occlusion of unchanged content—that existing benchmarks do not test. The ReSpec framework is training-free, modular, and compatible with multiple in-context editors, which increases practical utility. The ablation study (Table 2) cleanly separates the contributions of preservation target identification and historical reference selection. The trajectory-length analysis (Figure 7) provides actionable evidence that historical grounding mitigates long-horizon degradation. The human evaluation, while small, shows strong model-level alignment with automatic metrics. These are meaningful strengths.

major comments (2)
  1. Appendix B.1 states that when detection or segmentation fails, an all-zero black mask is assigned. For the restoration region (Eq. 16), an all-zero occluder mask M_occ yields an empty R_restore, making sim(Î_N[∅], I_ref[∅]) undefined or defaulted to an arbitrary constant. These values are still included in the averages reported in Tables 1 and 2. The paper never reports the detection failure rate across the 4,400 scenarios, nor does it report results excluding failed-detection cases. Given the low confidence threshold (0.001) and acceptance threshold (0.2), the failure rate could be non-trivial. This is load-bearing because the entire benchmark's validity rests on mask quality: if a substantial fraction of scenarios have meaningless metric values, the relative rankings in Table 1 could be distorted. The authors should report the detection failure rate and provide a sensitivity analysis (
  2. Tables 1 and 2 report S_restore, S_preserve, and S_TC, but the variance or confidence intervals for these scores are not provided. Given that the improvements for OmniGen2 w/ ReSpec are modest (STC from 0.370 to 0.402, a gain of 0.032), it is unclear whether these differences are statistically significant. The ablation subset (200 samples) is especially small for drawing strong conclusions about component contributions. The authors should report standard deviations or bootstrap confidence intervals, and ideally a significance test, at least for the key comparisons in Tables 1 and 2.
minor comments (6)
  1. Table 1: Gemini-2.5 is evaluated on a 200-sample subset due to API cost, while other models use the full 4,400 scenarios. This makes cross-model comparison uneven. The authors should note this caveat explicitly in the table caption or consider reporting Flux.2 and OmniGen2 on the same 200-sample subset for direct comparability.
  2. Table 7: Qwen's reference selection accuracy is 79.0% vs. InternVL's 59.0%, but the table does not report what happens when the selection is incorrect—does restoration fail entirely, or does the editor still partially benefit from a wrong reference? A brief analysis of failure cases would strengthen the discussion.
  3. §3.3, Eq. (9): The similarity function averages normalized PSNR, LPIPS, and CLIP. The normalization procedure for each component is not specified (e.g., min-max, z-score, percentile-based). Since these three metrics have very different scales, the normalization choice could affect the final score. The authors should specify the normalization method, at least in the appendix.
  4. Figure 1: The figure caption mentions 'GT' but the term 'ground truth' is not defined in the caption text. A reader encountering the figure before reading the body may be confused. Consider expanding the caption to clarify what GT refers to and how it relates to the restoration reference introduced later.
  5. §4.1: The preservation target identification step produces a textual description D_t, but the paper does not provide examples of D_t for non-restoration turns (where D_t 'may be empty or describe visible content that should remain stable'). A concrete example of what D_t looks like in practice would help readers understand the controller's output.
  6. The paper cites several 2026-dated arXiv preprints (e.g., Shen et al. 2026, Yao et al. 2026, Ye et al. 2026). These should be verified for availability and cited consistently with their actual submission dates.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: benchmark, method, and evaluation are independently constructed.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is self-contained and does not reduce to its inputs by construction. OCCUR-Bench scenarios are built from external datasets (COCO, PIE-Bench, HQ-Edit) with manual verification (§3.2, Appendix A.1-A.2). The ground-truth restoration reference I_ref is defined as the latest historical state where the occludee is visible and semantically valid (Eq. 8, Appendix A.4), and is explicitly not provided to the editing models or to ReSpec during inference. ReSpec's VLM controller (Qwen3-VL-8B-Instruct) is a third-party model that infers preservation targets from the editing history without access to ground-truth annotations (Appendix C.1). The evaluation metrics (S_restore, S_preserve, S_TC) are computed using standard similarity functions (PSNR, LPIPS, CLIP) over automatically extracted masks (YOLO-Worldv2 + SAM), and instruction faithfulness uses GPT-4o-mini as an LLM judge. No self-citation chain is load-bearing for the central claim. The benchmark construction, method, and evaluation are each independently grounded. The only mild concern is that the same authors construct both the benchmark and the method, but the benchmark scenarios are externally sourced and manually verified, and the evaluation uses standard metrics and third-party models. This is normal practice, not circularity. The skeptic's concern about detection failures producing all-zero masks is a correctness risk (metric validity), not a circularity issue—the metric values are not defined in terms of the method's outputs by construction.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

4 free parameters · 4 axioms · 3 invented entities

The paper introduces two main invented entities (OCCUR-Bench and ReSpec) and one metric (S_TC), all with independent evidence through external datasets, standard similarity measures, and human evaluation. The free parameters are mostly standard hyperparameters for the editors and detection pipeline, not parameters fitted to make the method work. The domain assumptions are reasonable but the detection/segmentation pipeline quality is the most fragile.

free parameters (4)
  • YOLO-Worldv2 confidence threshold = conf=0.001 internal, 0.2 acceptance
    Detection thresholds chosen for the evaluation pipeline; affect which objects are detected and thus mask quality.
  • Flux.2 denoising steps and guidance scale = 30 steps, guidance 4.0
    Editor hyperparameters chosen for generation; not tuned on OCCUR-Bench but affect output quality.
  • OmniGen2 denoising steps, text guidance, image guidance = 50 steps, text 5.0, image 2.0
    Editor hyperparameters; affect output quality.
  • Metric normalization = average of normalized PSNR, LPIPS, CLIP
    The choice to average three normalized metrics is a design decision that affects all reported scores.
axioms (4)
  • domain assumption Visual absence does not imply semantic change (§1): content that is occluded but never semantically modified should be restored when revealed.
    This is the core domain assumption motivating the entire benchmark and method. It is reasonable but is a design choice about what conversational editors should do.
  • domain assumption Open-vocabulary detection and segmentation (YOLO-Worldv2 + SAM) can reliably extract occluder and new-object masks for evaluation (§3.3, Appendix B.1).
    The evaluation pipeline's validity depends on this. The paper acknowledges potential errors but treats the pipeline as sufficient.
  • domain assumption A VLM-based controller (Qwen3-VL-8B) can infer preservation targets and select correct historical references from editing history (§4).
    ReSpec's effectiveness depends on the VLM's ability to correctly perform these tasks. Table 7 shows 79% reference selection accuracy with Qwen, which is imperfect but sufficient for gains.
  • domain assumption LLM-as-judge (GPT-4o-mini) can reliably assess instruction faithfulness (§5.1).
    The auxiliary instruction faithfulness metric depends on this assumption.
invented entities (3)
  • OCCUR-Bench independent evidence
    purpose: Diagnostic benchmark for temporal preservation under occlusion-and-revelation in conversational image editing.
    The benchmark is constructed from external datasets with manual verification and is designed to be independently usable. The GitHub link provides access.
  • ReSpec independent evidence
    purpose: Training-free framework that makes implicit preservation explicit via restoration-aware instructions and historical visual references.
    ReSpec is evaluated against baselines on the benchmark and shows measurable improvement. It is falsifiable: if historical references do not improve restoration, the method fails.
  • Temporal consistency score (S_TC) independent evidence
    purpose: Composite metric averaging restoration and preservation consistency.
    The metric is computed from standard similarity measures (PSNR, LPIPS, CLIP) applied to masked regions, and is validated against human evaluation.

pith-pipeline@v1.1.0-glm · 21508 in / 2761 out tokens · 213878 ms · 2026-07-09T20:56:03.315233+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

Conversational image editing requires preserving not only visible content, but also content that temporarily disappears across turns. When newly added or modified content occludes a previously visible region, that region should reappear if it was never semantically changed. However, existing systems often fail to recover such occluded-but-unchanged content, producing inconsistent or hallucinated results. We introduce OCCUR-Bench, a diagnostic benchmark for temporal preservation in conversational image editing. OCCUR-Bench provides diverse occlusion-and-revelation scenarios with historical restoration references, enabling evaluation of faithful restoration rather than plausible regeneration. We also propose ReSpec, a training-free framework that makes implicit preservation explicit by pairing restoration-aware instructions with historical visual references. Given an editing history, ReSpec identifies what should persist, selects the historical image state that provides missing visual evidence, and conditions an in-context editor on the resulting instruction and reference image. Experiments show that ReSpec improves restoration fidelity and temporal consistency on OCCUR-Bench, highlighting the need to ground preservation in editing history rather than only the current image.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.07051 by Bumsoo Kim, Buru Chang, Jihyung Ahn, Soomin Han.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Motivating example of temporal preservation in conversational image editing. The owl’s chest pattern [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: OCCUR-Bench scenario design. Each tra￾jectory temporarily occludes a semantically unchanged occludee, applies optional intermediate edits, and later reveals it by modifying the occluder. Evaluation com￾pares the revealed region with Iref to measure faithful restoration rather than plausible regeneration. Entities in Pt should remain recoverable after editing, including cases where they become tem￾porarily … view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: OCCUR-Bench evaluation pipeline for tem [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Overview of ReSpec. A VLM-based controller infers the implicit preservation target from the editing [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Human preference results for ReSpec ver [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Qualitative case study of historical reference selection, where ReSpec restores an occluded target from an [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Restoration consistency across editing trajec [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Qualitative example illustrating the limitation [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Two-turn generation prompt used for constructing multi-turn editing instructions. The prompt generates [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_9.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Two-turn extension prompt used to extend an existing editing trajectory. The prompt adds intermediate [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_10.png] view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Instruction faithfulness evaluation prompt. The evaluator judges only whether the edited image follows [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_11.png] view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Restoration-aware orchestration prompt used by ReSpec. For restoration turns, the VLM identifies the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_12.png] view at source ↗
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Non-restoration instruction rewriting prompt used by ReSpec. For turns that do not reveal hidden content, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_13.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

51 extracted references · 51 canonical work pages · 11 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    2023 , doi =

    Cui, Xing and Li, Zekun and Li, Peipei and Hu, Yibo and Shi, Hailin and Cao, Chunshui and He, Zhaofeng , booktitle =. 2023 , doi =

    work page 2023

  2. [2]

    Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV) , pages =

    MasaCtrl: Tuning-Free Mutual Self-Attention Control for Consistent Image Synthesis and Editing , author =. Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV) , pages =

    work page

  3. [3]

    2025 , howpublished =

    work page 2025

  4. [4]

    Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV) , year =

    Multi-turn Consistent Image Editing , author =. Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV) , year =

    work page

  5. [5]

    2025 , doi =

    Ma, Shichao and Zhang, Xinfeng and Zhao, Zeng and Liu, Bai and Fan, Changjie and Hu, Zhipeng , booktitle =. 2025 , doi =

    work page 2025

  6. [6]

    Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) , pages =

    Improving Editability in Image Generation with Layer-wise Memory , author =. Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) , pages =

    work page

  7. [7]

    International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML) , year =

    Zero-Shot Text-to-Image Generation , author =. International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML) , year =

    work page

  8. [8]

    Photorealistic Text-to-Image Diffusion Models with Deep Language Understanding

    Photorealistic Text-to-Image Diffusion Models with Deep Language Understanding , author =. arXiv preprint arXiv:2205.11487 , year =

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  9. [9]

    Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) , year =

    High-Resolution Image Synthesis with Latent Diffusion Models , author =. Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) , year =

    work page

  10. [10]

    Frontiers in Psychology , volume =

    No Intentions in the Brain: A Wittgensteinian Perspective on the Science of Intention , author =. Frontiers in Psychology , volume =. 2019 , doi =

    work page 2019

  11. [11]

    Proceedings of the 2010 IEEE Symposium on 3D User Interfaces (3DUI) , pages =

    Rapid and accurate 3D selection by progressive refinement , author =. Proceedings of the 2010 IEEE Symposium on 3D User Interfaces (3DUI) , pages =. 2010 , organization =

    work page 2010

  12. [12]

    Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) , pages =

    InstructPix2Pix: Learning to Follow Image Editing Instructions , author =. Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) , pages =

    work page

  13. [13]

    Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Winter Conference on Applications of Computer Vision (WACV) , year =

    Iterative Multi-granular Image Editing using Diffusion Models , author =. Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Winter Conference on Applications of Computer Vision (WACV) , year =

    work page

  14. [14]

    International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML) , pages=

    Zero-shot text-to-image generation , author=. International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML) , pages=. 2021 , organization=

    work page 2021

  15. [15]

    Hierarchical Text-Conditional Image Generation with CLIP Latents

    Hierarchical text-conditional image generation with clip latents , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2204.06125 , year=

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  16. [16]

    Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS) , year=

    Photorealistic text-to-image diffusion models with deep language understanding , author=. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS) , year=

    work page

  17. [17]

    Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) , pages=

    High-resolution image synthesis with latent diffusion models , author=. Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) , pages=

    work page

  18. [18]

    SDXL: Improving Latent Diffusion Models for High-Resolution Image Synthesis

    SDXL: Improving Latent Diffusion Models for High-Resolution Image Synthesis , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2307.01952 , year=

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  19. [19]

    Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) , pages=

    Rich Human Feedback for Text-to-Image Generation , author=. Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) , pages=

    work page

  20. [20]

    2024 , eprint=

    TheaterGen: Character Management with LLM for Consistent Multi-turn Image Generation , author=. 2024 , eprint=

    work page 2024

  21. [21]

    Proceedings of the 62nd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL 2024): System Demonstrations , month=

    DialogDraw: Image Generation and Editing System Based on Multi-Turn Dialogue , author=. Proceedings of the 62nd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL 2024): System Demonstrations , month=. 2024 , address=

    work page 2024

  22. [22]

    Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EMNLP 2023 , month=

    A Diffusion-based Method for Multi-turn Compositional Image Generation , author=. Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EMNLP 2023 , month=. 2023 , address=

    work page 2023

  23. [23]

    The Challenges of Image Generation Models in Generating Multi-Component Images

    The challenges of image generation models in generating multi-component images , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2311.13620 , year=

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  24. [24]

    Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS) , volume =

    MagicBrush: A Manually Annotated Dataset for Instruction-Guided Image Editing , author =. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS) , volume =

    work page

  25. [25]

    Direct Inversion: Boosting Diffusion-based Editing with 3 Lines of Code

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

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  26. [26]

    GIE-Bench: Towards Grounded Evaluation for Text-Guided Image Editing

    GIE-Bench: Towards Grounded Evaluation for Text-Guided Image Editing , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2505.11493 , year=

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  27. [27]

    European conference on computer vision , pages=

    Microsoft coco: Common objects in context , author=. European conference on computer vision , pages=. 2014 , organization=

    work page 2014

  28. [28]

    HQ-Edit: A High-Quality Dataset for Instruction-based Image Editing

    Hq-edit: A high-quality dataset for instruction-based image editing , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.09990 , year=

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  29. [29]

    , title =

    Brooks, Tim and Holynski, Aleksander and Efros, Alexei A. , title =. Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) , month =. 2023 , pages =

    work page 2023

  30. [30]

    2025 , url =

    Gemini 2.5: Pushing the Frontier with Advanced Reasoning, Multimodality, Long Context, and Next Generation Agentic Capabilities , institution =. 2025 , url =

    work page 2025

  31. [31]

    European conference on computer vision , pages=

    Grounding dino: Marrying dino with grounded pre-training for open-set object detection , author=. European conference on computer vision , pages=. 2024 , organization=

    work page 2024

  32. [32]

    Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF international conference on computer vision , pages=

    Segment anything , author=. Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF international conference on computer vision , pages=

    work page

  33. [33]

    Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) , month =

    Yang, Binxin and Gu, Shuyang and Zhang, Bo and Zhang, Ting and Chen, Xuejin and Sun, Xiaoyan and Chen, Dong and Wen, Fang , title =. Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) , month =. 2023 , pages =

    work page 2023

  34. [34]

    Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition , pages=

    The unreasonable effectiveness of deep features as a perceptual metric , author=. Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition , pages=

    work page

  35. [35]

    Proceedings of the 2021 conference on empirical methods in natural language processing , pages=

    Clipscore: A reference-free evaluation metric for image captioning , author=. Proceedings of the 2021 conference on empirical methods in natural language processing , pages=

    work page 2021

  36. [36]

    2025 , eprint=

    Balancing Preservation and Modification: A Region and Semantic Aware Metric for Instruction-Based Image Editing , author=. 2025 , eprint=

    work page 2025

  37. [37]

    2025 , note =

    Alisa Fortin and Guillaume Vernade and Kat Kampf and Ammaar Reshi , title =. 2025 , note =

    work page 2025

  38. [38]

    2025 , note =

    OpenAI , title =. 2025 , note =

    work page 2025

  39. [39]

    Advances in neural information processing systems , volume=

    Llmscore: Unveiling the power of large language models in text-to-image synthesis evaluation , author=. Advances in neural information processing systems , volume=

    work page

  40. [40]

    ICML , year=

    Learning Transferable Visual Models from Natural Language Supervision , author=. ICML , year=

    work page

  41. [41]

    OmniGen2: Towards Instruction-Aligned Multimodal Generation

    OmniGen2: Exploration to Advanced Multimodal Generation , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2506.18871 , year=

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  42. [42]

    2024 , eprint =

    SEED-Data-Edit Technical Report: A Hybrid Dataset for Instructional Image Editing , author =. 2024 , eprint =

    work page 2024

  43. [43]

    2025 , eprint =

    ImgEdit: A Unified Image Editing Dataset and Benchmark , author =. 2025 , eprint =

    work page 2025

  44. [44]

    2603.29602 , archivePrefix =

    Shen, Fei and Xie, Chengyu and Wang, Lihong and Zhang, Zhanyi and Jiang, Xin and Du, Xiaoyu and Tang, Jinhui , year =. 2603.29602 , archivePrefix =

    work page arXiv

  45. [45]

    2026 , eprint =

    Agent Banana: High-Fidelity Image Editing with Agentic Thinking and Tooling , author =. 2026 , eprint =

    work page 2026

  46. [46]

    CoSTA$\ast$: Cost-Sensitive Toolpath Agent for Multi-turn Image Editing

    Gupta, Advait and Velaga, NandaKiran and Nguyen, Dang and Zhou, Tianyi , year =. 2503.10613 , archivePrefix =

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  47. [47]

    Liang, Zihan and Sun, Jiahao and Ma, Haoran , year =. An. 2508.17435 , archivePrefix =

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  48. [48]

    2026 , eprint =

    PhotoAgent: Agentic Photo Editing with Exploratory Visual Aesthetic Planning , author =. 2026 , eprint =

    work page 2026

  49. [49]

    In-Context Edit: Enabling Instructional Image Editing with In-Context Generation in Large Scale Diffusion Transformer

    In-Context Edit: Enabling Instructional Image Editing with In-Context Generation in Large Scale Diffusion Transformer , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2504.20690 , year=

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  50. [50]

    2024 , url =

    Ju, Xuan and Zeng, Ailing and Bian, Yuxuan and Liu, Shaoteng and Xu, Qiang , booktitle =. 2024 , url =

    work page 2024

  51. [51]

    Proceedings of the International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML) , year =

    Balancing Preservation and Modification: A Region and Semantic Aware Metric for Instruction-Based Image Editing , author =. Proceedings of the International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML) , year =

    work page