Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 major objections 5 minor 68 references

Stream Forcing: Constructing Unified Training Trajectory for Robust Streaming Video Generation

T0 review · 1 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Stream Forcing unifies the two dominant training strategies for streaming video diffusion by interpolating their noise-level schedules along a smooth curriculum, and reports that this unified training improves video quality and zero-shot…

desk verdict Solid training-curriculum idea with a clean proof and consistent ablations, but the headline 36.6% FVD claim rests on a train+test baseline; the honest same-setting gain is about 2.7%. read the letter →

arxiv 2608.10439 v1 pith:UGRARWUN submitted 2026-08-11 cs.CV

Yueting Zhu , Yuehao Song , Kaicheng Zhang , Bao Tang , Shaoyu Chen , Qian Zhang , Wenyu Liu , Xinggang Wang This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.CV
keywords streamingvideogenerationdiffusionmodelscurriculumtrainingnoise-levelsamplingLogit-NormaldistributionGaussiancopulatrain-inferenceconsistencyFréchetDistance
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

Streaming video diffusion models face a conflict: training usually draws noise levels independently per frame, which gives broad coverage but ignores the ordered denoising used at inference, while training that mimics the inference schedule improves consistency but narrows the noise levels seen. Stream Forcing reformulates training-time noise-level sampling as a frame-indexed stochastic process with Logit-Normal marginals and an inter-frame correlation parameter, making independent and progressive sampling the two endpoints of one family. Training walks a smooth curriculum from the independent endpoint to the inference-aligned endpoint using joint calibration and Gaussian-Copula-based correlated sampling. The authors report that this unified trajectory improves the Fréchet Video Distance (FVD) by 36.6% on UCF-101 and 4.7% on Taichi-HD, and enables zero-shot extrapolation to 128-frame videos with 27.9% and 10.9% FVD improvements. If these results hold, the method offers a general way to align diffusion training with causal streaming inference without sacrificing training coverage.

What carries the argument

The central object is the frame-indexed stochastic process over noise levels, with Logit-Normal marginals—a distribution on $(0,1)$ obtained by applying the logistic sigmoid to a Gaussian random variable—parameterized by per-frame $(\mu_t,\sigma_t)$ and an inter-frame correlation $\rho$. The mode equation $\psi(\zeta,\sigma)=\logit(\zeta)+\sigma^2(1-2\zeta)$ converts a desired marginal mode $\zeta$ into a location parameter, and a joint calibration algorithm grid-searches $\sigma$ so that all frames share a common peak density. A Gaussian Copula built from an AR(1) process, $z_t=\rho z_{t-1}+\sqrt{1-\rho^2}\,\epsilon_t$, generates correlated noise levels while preserving each frame's prescribed marginal. These pieces implement the curriculum that evolves the sampling configuration from independent to inference-consistent.

What would settle it

Retrain FAR* on the UCF-101 training split only and evaluate under the exact 16-frame unconditional protocol: if its FVD falls to or below 177.0, the claimed 36.6% improvement disappears. A simpler check is to compare directly with the train-only AR-Diffusion† result of 181.9, where the margin is about 2.7% rather than 36.6%.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper argues that the train-inference mismatch in streaming video diffusion is not a binary choice. It reformulates training-time noise-level sampling as a frame-indexed stochastic process whose marginals are Logit-Normal, controlled per frame by a location $\mu_t$ and scale $\sigma_t$ and across frames by a correlation $\rho$. In this space, independent sampling ($\mu_t=\mu_0$, $\sigma_t=\sigma_0$, $\rho=0$) and progressive sampling ($\mu_t\to \logit(t/T)$, $\sigma_t\to 0$, $\rho\to 1$) are endpoints of one continuous family. Stream Forcing trains along a curriculum that interpolates between these endpoints, starting with independent noise for broad coverage, passing through calibrated intermediate configurations, and finishing with inference-consistent sampling. Joint calibration keeps per-frame mode densities balanced, and a Gaussian Copula realizes the prescribed inter-frame correlation. The central claim is that this unified trajectory produces higher-quality streaming video than either endpoint alone and transfers zero-shot to longer horizons.

Load-bearing premise

The headline quality gain assumes it is fair to compare a model trained only on the training split with baselines trained on both training and test splits; the table itself marks the main baseline that way, so the reported margin depends on that comparability.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Streaming video diffusion can be trained with broad noise coverage while still matching the ordered denoising used at inference, so practitioners no longer have to choose between the two.
  • The same curriculum transfers to a new domain: on nuScenes driving videos, Stream Forcing improves both FID and FVD over existing driving-world-model baselines.
  • Models trained on 16-frame clips can extrapolate to 128-frame streams without extra long-video training, with reported FVD gains of 27.9% on UCF-101 and 10.9% on Taichi-HD.
  • The three-stage schedule introduces a tunable balance between coverage and consistency; the ablation finds a 2:1 ratio of independent to curriculum training performs best.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The same stochastic-process interpolation could apply to other causal sequence diffusion tasks—audio, control, or sensor streams—where an autoregressive generation order conflicts with full-sequence training.
  • The grid-search calibration could likely be replaced by a closed-form dispersion-matching step, which would make the curriculum easier to port to new datasets; the paper's own entropy ablations suggest mode-density matching is the active ingredient.
  • The headline margin depends on evaluation protocol: against the train-only AR-Diffusion† baseline the UCF-101 gap is about 2.7%, so a strictly train-only rerun of FAR* would clarify how much of the gain is due to the curriculum.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

1 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper proposes Stream Forcing, a curriculum training framework for streaming video diffusion models. It reformulates per-frame noise-level sampling during training as a frame-indexed stochastic process with Logit-Normal marginals, parameterized by location, scale, and temporal correlation. The method constructs a training trajectory from independent sampling (as in Diffusion Forcing) to inference-aligned progressive sampling (as in rolling/AR diffusion), enforced by a joint calibration algorithm for mode and scale parameters and a Gaussian-copula-based temporal correlative sampling scheme. Experiments on UCF-101, Taichi-HD, and nuScenes report FVD improvements, including zero-shot long-horizon extrapolation to 128 frames.

Significance. The core idea of interpolating between independent and progressive noise-level schedules is timely and potentially useful for streaming video world models. The derivation of the mode equation in Appendix A.4 is correct, and the ablation studies (Tables 4-7) show that each proposed component contributes to the reported FVD. However, the headline 36.6% UCF-101 improvement is computed against a baseline (FAR*) trained on the train+test split, while the proposed method is trained on the training split only. The 27.9% long-horizon gain is more credible because it is based on train-only baselines. Thus, the conceptual contribution is defensible but the central quantitative claim needs correction.

major comments (1)
  1. [Section 4.1.1 / Table 1] The abstract and Section 4.1.1 report a 36.6% FVD improvement on UCF-101 (from 279.0 to 177.0), but this is computed against FAR*, which Table 1 marks with * meaning 'trained on both the training and test splits.' Stream Forcing is trained on the training split only. The text claims this comparison is 'under the same evaluation setting,' which the table contradicts. Against the best train-only baseline, AR-Diffusion† (FVD 181.9), the improvement of Ours (177.0) is (181.9 - 177.0)/181.9 ≈ 2.7%, and the improvement of Ours† (146.9) is ≈ 19.2%. Because the abstract, introduction, and experiments all lead with the 36.6% number, the central empirical claim is not supported by the reported comparisons. Please recompute headline comparisons against train-only baselines, or explicitly justify and qualify the comparison to train+test methods.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Section 3.3] The curriculum is discretized into 10 uniformly-spaced configurations; the paper does not justify this number or provide a sensitivity analysis, so please add a discussion or ablation of the number of curriculum points.
  2. [Algorithm 1] The joint calibration grid search does not specify the number of grid points N, the upper bound of the search range for sigma, or the stopping tolerance; please provide these details for reproducibility.
  3. [Table 4] The ablation table rows are ambiguous in formatting; please show all three constraint indicators (TS, DCC, IFC) for each row so the reader can see which constraint is removed.
  4. [Table 2] The caption does not annotate which baselines are trained on the training split only versus train+test, unlike Table 1; please add matching footnotes to allow verification of the reported zero-shot improvements.
  5. [Equation 10] The AR(1) process does not specify the distribution of the initial value z_0; please state that z_0 is standard normal so that all marginals are standard normal as claimed.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circular derivation: the mode equation is proved independently in Appendix A.4, the training trajectory is a construction rather than a fitted prediction, and the headline FVD number is an external benchmark measurement with a baseline-comparability caveat, not a circular step.

full rationale

Stream Forcing's derivation chain is self-contained. The mode equation (Eq. 9) is derived in Appendix A.4 from the logit-normal density, so the joint calibration in Algorithm 1 uses an identity rather than assuming the method's own outputs. Independent sampling and progressive sampling are explicitly defined as endpoint configurations in Eqs. 5-6, and the curriculum trajectory, mode-density matching, and Gaussian-copula sampling are constructive design choices that parameterize training without fitting any quantity to the evaluation benchmarks and then re-reporting it as a prediction. FVD numbers are external evaluations on held-out data; no prediction in the paper is forced by construction from a fitted constant. The identified weakness is not circularity: the abstract's 36.6% FVD improvement is computed against FAR*, which Table 1 marks as trained on both train and test splits, whereas Stream Forcing is train-only, so the claim of an improvement 'under the same evaluation setting' in Section 4.1.1 is not supported by the table; against the train-only AR-Diffusion† baseline the improvement is approximately 2.7%. This is an evaluation-comparability flaw, not a derivational circularity. Hyperparameters such as the 2:1 ratio and linear rho schedule are chosen by ablations on the same UCF benchmark, which is a benchmark-selection risk rather than a circular step. Author self-citations appear only as tangential related work and are not load-bearing, and Appendix A.6.1's limitation statement concerns scale, not circularity. The long-horizon 27.9% claim in Table 2 is compared against train-only Diffusion Forcing and is therefore not affected by the FAR* leakage issue. Separately, Appendix A.4's uniqueness assertion for the logit-normal stationary point is a mathematical-correctness point and is not part of a circular argument.

Assumptions & free parameters 5 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The method's core is a parameterized sampling family plus a set of heuristics. The free parameters are hyperparameters fitted via ablations on the evaluation benchmark; the inventiveness is in the curriculum schedule, not in new physical entities.

free parameters (5)
  • rho_max = 0.95
    Maximum inter-frame correlation coefficient in the temporal correlative sampling schedule; chosen via ablations (Table 6).
  • Curriculum transition discretization = 10 uniformly spaced configurations
    The trajectory interval (0,1) in Eq. 7 is discretized into 10 uniform steps; heuristic, no sensitivity analysis.
  • Training phase ratio independent:curriculum = 2:1 (300k/150k/150k steps)
    Selected via ablation (Table 7) on UCF-101; the ratio balances coverage and transition.
  • sigma_init (initial scale parameter) = not reported
    Used in Algorithm 1 to compute the reference density H; value not stated, required to reproduce calibration.
  • Target progressive modes zeta^1_t = t/T
    Defines the inference-aligned endpoint in Eq. 7; an idealized schedule that may not match the actual streamlined inference.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The Logit-Normal family is a flexible and adequate model for per-frame noise-level marginals.
    Section 3.1.2 assumes this family without empirical or theoretical justification beyond support on (0,1) and flexibility.
  • standard math A Gaussian copula with AR(1) latent variables preserves the intended temporal dependence without altering marginals.
    Section 3.2.2 invokes standard copula theory (Nelsen 2006); the sufficiency of a single rho parameter is an additional assumption.
  • standard math The mode equation (Eq. 9) has a unique solution in (0,1).
    Proven in Appendix A.4; relies on standard calculus and the unimodality of the Logit-Normal density.
  • domain assumption The training objective (v-prediction) and DDIM/CFG inference are appropriate for streaming video diffusion.
    Taken from prior works such as Diffusion Forcing [6] and AR-Diffusion [41]; the method does not re-derive these choices.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Stream Forcing: Constructing Unified Training Trajectory for Robust Streaming Video Generation." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/UGRARWUN

@misc{pith2026260810439,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Stream Forcing: Constructing Unified Training Trajectory for Robust Streaming Video Generation},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/UGRARWUN}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2608.10439}
}
read the original abstract

Streaming video generation holds strong potential for world modeling, where future frames must be inferred online sequentially to form a continuous video stream. However, streaming video diffusion models introduce a fundamental train-inference mismatch: inference follows a specialized denoising order, whereas advanced training strategies typically require diverse noise-level configurations. To address this trade-off between train-inference consistency and training coverage, we reformulate the video diffusion sampling as a frame-indexed stochastic process over noise levels. Within this stochastic process space, we construct a continuous training trajectory along which the sampling schedule progressively evolves from independent sampling to inference-consistent sampling. We further introduce a joint calibration algorithm and a temporal correlative sampling algorithm to ensure trajectory smoothness and cross-frame correlation. Building on these designs, we propose Stream Forcing, a unified training framework for streaming video generation that balances training sufficiency and inference efficiency. Extensive experiments demonstrate that Stream Forcing significantly improves generation quality with a 36.6% FVD improvement on the UCF-101 benchmark. Furthermore, our method facilitates robust zero-shot extrapolation to long-horizon video generation with a 27.9% FVD improvement on the UCF-101 benchmark.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2608.10439 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Comparison of streaming inference methods.(a) Chunk-based Generation.(b) Streamlined Generation. window in which the noise levels {kt} T t=1 satisfy kt ≤ kt+1, ∀ t ∈ {1, . . . , T − 1}. (2) While such a strictly increasing design improves consis￾tency with inference, it confines training to a narrow sub￾set of noise schedules and reduces coverage of the training distribution. Alternatively, independent sampling [6] … view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Illustration of trajectory constraints. Each subfigure shows marginals for a three-frame sampling process. (a) Neither Constraint 1 nor Constraint 2 is satisfied. (b) Only Constraint 1 is satisfied. (c) Only Constraint 2 is satisfied. (d) Both Constraints are satisfied. 3.1.2 Training Sampling as a Stochastic Process with Logit-Normal Marginals At each step, we sample one noise level for every frame t in the trainin… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Overview of the curriculum training. Our method builds a continuous curriculum transition between independent training and inference-aligned training that balances full distribution coverage with consistency at inference time. Constraint 3: Inter-frame correlation. The correlation coefficient ρ s should also evolve as training progresses, such that the sampled noise levels preserve the temporal de￾pendence between s… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Visualization of unconditional video generation on UCF-101 dataset. DF: Diffusion Forcing [6]. AR-D: AR-Diffusion [41]. Our method presents higher visual quality and more robust long-horizontal extrapolation. from independent sampling to strongly correlated sampling be…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

68 extracted references · 34 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Logistic-normal distribu- tions: Some properties and uses.Biometrika, 67(2):261–272,

    Jhon Atchison and Sheng M Shen. Logistic-normal distribu- tions: Some properties and uses.Biometrika, 67(2):261–272,

    work page

  2. [2]

    Stable video diffusion: Scaling latent video diffusion models to large datasets.arXiv preprint arXiv:2311.15127, 2023

    Andreas Blattmann, Tim Dockhorn, Sumith Kulal, Daniel Mendelevitch, Maciej Kilian, Dominik Lorenz, Yam Levi, Zion English, Vikram V oleti, Adam Letts, et al. Stable video diffusion: Scaling latent video diffusion models to large datasets.arXiv preprint arXiv:2311.15127, 2023. 1, 7

    arXiv 2023

  3. [3]

    Video generation models as world simulators

    Tim Brooks, Bill Peebles, Connor Holmes, Will DePue, Yufei Guo, Li Jing, David Schnurr, Joe Taylor, Troy Luh- man, Eric Luhman, Clarence Ng, Ricky Wang, and Aditya Ramesh. Video generation models as world simulators

  4. [4]

    nuscenes: A multi- modal dataset for autonomous driving

    Holger Caesar, Varun Bankiti, Alex H Lang, Sourabh V ora, Venice Erin Liong, Qiang Xu, Anush Krishnan, Yu Pan, Gi- ancarlo Baldan, and Oscar Beijbom. nuscenes: A multi- modal dataset for autonomous driving. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pages 11621–11631, 2020. 2, 6, 1

    work page 2020

  5. [5]

    nuplan: A closed-loop ml-based plan- ning benchmark for autonomous vehicles.arXiv preprint arXiv:2106.11810, 2021

    Holger Caesar, Juraj Kabzan, Kok Seang Tan, Whye Kit Fong, Eric Wolff, Alex Lang, Luke Fletcher, Oscar Beijbom, and Sammy Omari. nuplan: A closed-loop ml-based plan- ning benchmark for autonomous vehicles.arXiv preprint arXiv:2106.11810, 2021. 6, 1

    arXiv 2021

  6. [6]

    Diffusion forcing: Next-token prediction meets full-sequence diffu- sion.Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 37:24081–24125, 2024

    Boyuan Chen, Diego Mart ´ı Mons ´o, Yilun Du, Max Sim- chowitz, Russ Tedrake, and Vincent Sitzmann. Diffusion forcing: Next-token prediction meets full-sequence diffu- sion.Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 37:24081–24125, 2024. 1, 2, 5, 6, 7, 8

    work page 2024

  7. [7]

    Deep compres- sion autoencoder for efficient high-resolution diffusion mod- els

    Junyu Chen, Han Cai, Junsong Chen, Enze Xie, Shang Yang, Haotian Tang, Muyang Li, and Song Han. Deep compres- sion autoencoder for efficient high-resolution diffusion mod- els. InInternational Conference on Learning Representa- tions, pages 96539–96560, 2025. 1

    work page 2025

  8. [8]

    Empower- ing world models with reflection for embodied video predic- tion

    Xiaowei Chi, Chun-Kai Fan, Hengyuan Zhang, Xingqun Qi, Rongyu Zhang, Anthony Chen, Chi-Min Chan, Wei Xue, Qifeng Liu, Shanghang Zhang, and Yike Guo. Empower- ing world models with reflection for embodied video predic- tion. InForty-second International Conference on Machine Learning, 2025. 1

    work page 2025

Show all 68 references
  1. [9]

    Self- forcing++: Towards minute-scale high-quality video genera- tion.arXiv preprint arXiv:2510.02283, 2025

    Justin Cui, Jie Wu, Ming Li, Tao Yang, Xiaojie Li, Rui Wang, Andrew Bai, Yuanhao Ban, and Cho-Jui Hsieh. Self- forcing++: Towards minute-scale high-quality video genera- tion.arXiv preprint arXiv:2510.02283, 2025. 8, 3

    2025 arXiv

  2. [10]

    Scaling recti- fied flow transformers for high-resolution image synthesis

    Patrick Esser, Sumith Kulal, Andreas Blattmann, Rahim Entezari, Jonas M ¨uller, Harry Saini, Yam Levi, Dominik Lorenz, Axel Sauer, Frederic Boesel, et al. Scaling recti- fied flow transformers for high-resolution image synthesis. InForty-first international conference on machi...

  3. [11]

    Rad-2: Scaling rein- forcement learning in a generator-discriminator framework

    Hao Gao, Shaoyu Chen, Yifan Zhu, Yuehao Song, Wenyu Liu, Qian Zhang, and Xinggang Wang. Rad-2: Scaling rein- forcement learning in a generator-discriminator framework. arXiv preprint arXiv:2604.15308, 2026. 1

    2026 arXiv

  4. [12]

    Ca2-vdm: Efficient autoregres- sive video diffusion model with causal generation and cache sharing.arXiv preprint arXiv:2411.16375, 2024

    Kaifeng Gao, Jiaxin Shi, Hanwang Zhang, Chunping Wang, Jun Xiao, and Long Chen. Ca2-vdm: Efficient autoregres- sive video diffusion model with causal generation and cache sharing.arXiv preprint arXiv:2411.16375, 2024. 2, 8

    2024 arXiv

  5. [13]

    Long- context autoregressive video modeling with next-frame pre- diction.arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.19325, 2025

    Yuchao Gu, Weijia Mao, and Mike Zheng Shou. Long- context autoregressive video modeling with next-frame pre- diction.arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.19325, 2025. 5

    2025 arXiv

  6. [14]

    Long context tuning for video generation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.10589, 2025

    Yuwei Guo, Ceyuan Yang, Ziyan Yang, Zhibei Ma, Zhi- jie Lin, Zhenheng Yang, Dahua Lin, and Lu Jiang. Long context tuning for video generation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.10589, 2025. 8

    2025 arXiv

  7. [15]

    World models.arXiv preprint arXiv:1803.10122, 2(3), 2018

    David Ha and J ¨urgen Schmidhuber. World models.arXiv preprint arXiv:1803.10122, 2(3), 2018. 1, 7

    2018 arXiv

  8. [16]

    Latent video diffusion models for high-fidelity long video generation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2211.13221,

    Yingqing He, Tianyu Yang, Yong Zhang, Ying Shan, and Qifeng Chen. Latent video diffusion models for high-fidelity long video generation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2211.13221,

    arXiv

  9. [17]

    Streamingt2v: Con- sistent, dynamic, and extendable long video generation from text

    Roberto Henschel, Levon Khachatryan, Hayk Poghosyan, Daniil Hayrapetyan, Vahram Tadevosyan, Zhangyang Wang, Shant Navasardyan, and Humphrey Shi. Streamingt2v: Con- sistent, dynamic, and extendable long video generation from text. InProceedings of the Computer Vision and Patter...

    2025

  10. [18]

    Video dif- fusion models.Advances in neural information processing systems, 35:8633–8646, 2022

    Jonathan Ho, Tim Salimans, Alexey Gritsenko, William Chan, Mohammad Norouzi, and David J Fleet. Video dif- fusion models.Advances in neural information processing systems, 35:8633–8646, 2022. 1, 7

    2022

  11. [19]

    Cogvideo: Large-scale pretraining for text-to-video generation via transformers.arXiv preprint arXiv:2205.15868, 2022

    Wenyi Hong, Ming Ding, Wendi Zheng, Xinghan Liu, and Jie Tang. Cogvideo: Large-scale pretraining for text-to-video generation via transformers.arXiv preprint arXiv:2205.15868, 2022. 7

    2022 arXiv

  12. [20]

    Acdit: Interpolating autoregressive con- ditional modeling and diffusion transformer.arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.07720, 2024

    Jinyi Hu, Shengding Hu, Yuxuan Song, Yufei Huang, Mingxuan Wang, Hao Zhou, Zhiyuan Liu, Wei-Ying Ma, and Maosong Sun. Acdit: Interpolating autoregressive con- ditional modeling and diffusion transformer.arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.07720, 2024. 8

    2024

  13. [21]

    Self forcing: Bridging the train- test gap in autoregressive video diffusion.arXiv preprint arXiv:2506.08009, 2025

    Xun Huang, Zhengqi Li, Guande He, Mingyuan Zhou, and Eli Shechtman. Self forcing: Bridging the train- test gap in autoregressive video diffusion.arXiv preprint arXiv:2506.08009, 2025. 8, 3

    2025 arXiv

  14. [22]

    Fifo-diffusion: Generating infinite videos from text without training.Advances in Neural Information Processing Sys- tems, 37:89834–89868, 2024

    Jihwan Kim, Junoh Kang, Jinyoung Choi, and Bohyung Han. Fifo-diffusion: Generating infinite videos from text without training.Advances in Neural Information Processing Sys- tems, 37:89834–89868, 2024. 1, 2

    2024

  15. [23]

    Hybrid video diffusion models with 2d triplane and 3d wavelet rep- resentation

    Kihong Kim, Haneol Lee, Jihye Park, Seyeon Kim, Kwanghee Lee, Seungryong Kim, and Jaejun Yoo. Hybrid video diffusion models with 2d triplane and 3d wavelet rep- resentation. InEuropean Conference on Computer Vision, pages 148–165. Springer, 2024. 5

    2024

  16. [24]

    Drivegan: Towards a controllable high-quality neural simulation

    Seung Wook Kim, Jonah Philion, Antonio Torralba, and Sanja Fidler. Drivegan: Towards a controllable high-quality neural simulation. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Con- ference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 5820–5829, 2021. 6

    2021

  17. [25]

    Videopoet: A large language model for zero-shot video gen- eration

    Dan Kondratyuk, Lijun Yu, Xiuye Gu, Jose Lezama, Jonathan Huang, Grant Schindler, Rachel Hornung, Vigh- nesh Birodkar, Jimmy Yan, Ming-Chang Chiu, et al. Videopoet: A large language model for zero-shot video gen- eration. InInternational Conference on Machine Learning, pages 2...

    2024

  18. [26]

    Framedit: Diffusion transformer with matrix at- tention for efficient video generation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2603.09721, 2026

    Minh Khoa Le, Kien Do, Duc Thanh Nguyen, and Truyen Tran. Framedit: Diffusion transformer with matrix at- tention for efficient video generation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2603.09721, 2026. 5, 2

    2026 arXiv

  19. [27]

    Mardini: Masked autoregres- sive diffusion for video generation at scale.arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.20280, 2024

    Haozhe Liu, Shikun Liu, Zijian Zhou, Mengmeng Xu, Yan- ping Xie, Xiao Han, Juan C P ´erez, Ding Liu, Kumara Ka- hatapitiya, Menglin Jia, et al. Mardini: Masked autoregres- sive diffusion for video generation at scale.arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.20280, 2024. 8

    arXiv

  20. [28]

    Rolling forcing: Autoregressive long video diffusion in real time.arXiv preprint arXiv:2509.25161, 2025

    Kunhao Liu, Wenbo Hu, Jiale Xu, Ying Shan, and Shijian Lu. Rolling forcing: Autoregressive long video diffusion in real time.arXiv preprint arXiv:2509.25161, 2025. 8, 3

    2025 arXiv

  21. [29]

    Redefining temporal modeling in video dif- fusion: The vectorized timestep approach.arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.03160, 2024

    Yaofang Liu, Yumeng Ren, Xiaodong Cun, Aitor Artola, Yang Liu, Tieyong Zeng, Raymond H Chan, and Jean- michel Morel. Redefining temporal modeling in video dif- fusion: The vectorized timestep approach.arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.03160, 2024. 5, 8, 2

    arXiv

  22. [30]

    Wovogen: World volume-aware diffusion for con- trollable multi-camera driving scene generation

    Jiachen Lu, Ze Huang, Zeyu Yang, Jiahui Zhang, and Li Zhang. Wovogen: World volume-aware diffusion for con- trollable multi-camera driving scene generation. InEu- ropean conference on computer vision, pages 329–345. Springer, 2024. 6

    2024

  23. [31]

    Latte: Latent diffusion transformer for video generation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2401.03048, 2024

    Xin Ma, Yaohui Wang, Xinyuan Chen, Gengyun Jia, Zi- wei Liu, Yuan-Fang Li, Cunjian Chen, and Yu Qiao. Latte: Latent diffusion transformer for video generation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2401.03048, 2024. 1, 5, 7, 2

    2024 arXiv

  24. [32]

    Neural residual diffusion models for deep scalable vision generation.Advances in Neural Information Processing Sys- tems, 37:117456–117480, 2024

    Zhiyuan Ma, Liangliang Zhao, Biqing Qi, and Bowen Zhou. Neural residual diffusion models for deep scalable vision generation.Advances in Neural Information Processing Sys- tems, 37:117456–117480, 2024. 2

    2024

  25. [33]

    R. B. Nelsen.An Introduction to Copulas. Springer-Verlag, New York, 2nd edition, 2006. 4

    2006

  26. [34]

    Worldsimbench: Towards video generation models as world simulators

    Yiran Qin, Zhelun Shi, Jiwen Yu, Xijun Wang, Enshen Zhou, Lijun Li, Zhenfei Yin, Xihui Liu, Lu Sheng, Jing Shao, LEI BAI, and Ruimao Zhang. Worldsimbench: Towards video generation models as world simulators. InForty-second In- ternational Conference on Machine Learning, 2025. 1

    2025

  27. [35]

    Rolling diffusion models

    David Ruhe, Jonathan Heek, Tim Salimans, and Emiel Hoogeboom. Rolling diffusion models. InProceedings of the International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML),

  28. [36]

    Seedance 2.0: Advanc- ing video generation for world complexity.arXiv preprint arXiv:2604.14148, 2026

    Team Seedance, De Chen, Liyang Chen, Xin Chen, Ying Chen, Zhuo Chen, Zhuowei Chen, Feng Cheng, Tianheng Cheng, Yufeng Cheng, et al. Seedance 2.0: Advanc- ing video generation for world complexity.arXiv preprint arXiv:2604.14148, 2026. 1

    2026 arXiv

  29. [37]

    First order motion model for image animation.Advances in neural information processing systems, 32, 2019

    Aliaksandr Siarohin, St ´ephane Lathuili`ere, Sergey Tulyakov, Elisa Ricci, and Nicu Sebe. First order motion model for image animation.Advances in neural information processing systems, 32, 2019. 5, 6, 1, 2, 3

    2019

  30. [38]

    Stylegan-v: A continuous video generator with the price, image quality and perks of stylegan2

    Ivan Skorokhodov, Sergey Tulyakov, and Mohamed Elho- seiny. Stylegan-v: A continuous video generator with the price, image quality and perks of stylegan2. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pages 3626–3636, 2022. 5

    2022

  31. [39]

    History-guided video diffusion.arXiv preprint arXiv:2502.06764, 2025

    Kiwhan Song, Boyuan Chen, Max Simchowitz, Yilun Du, Russ Tedrake, and Vincent Sitzmann. History-guided video diffusion.arXiv preprint arXiv:2502.06764, 2025. 2, 8, 1

    2025 arXiv

  32. [40]

    Ucf101: A dataset of 101 human actions classes from videos in the wild.arXiv preprint arXiv:1212.0402, 2012

    Khurram Soomro, Amir Roshan Zamir, and Mubarak Shah. Ucf101: A dataset of 101 human actions classes from videos in the wild.arXiv preprint arXiv:1212.0402, 2012. 5, 6, 1, 2, 3

    2012 arXiv

  33. [41]

    Ar-diffusion: Asynchronous video genera- tion with auto-regressive diffusion

    Mingzhen Sun, Weining Wang, Gen Li, Jiawei Liu, Jiahui Sun, Wanquan Feng, Shanshan Lao, SiYu Zhou, Qian He, and Jing Liu. Ar-diffusion: Asynchronous video genera- tion with auto-regressive diffusion. InProceedings of the Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition Conference, page...

    2025

  34. [42]

    Autoregressive model beats diffusion: Llama for scalable image generation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.06525, 2024

    Peize Sun, Yi Jiang, Shoufa Chen, Shilong Zhang, Bingyue Peng, Ping Luo, and Zehuan Yuan. Autoregressive model beats diffusion: Llama for scalable image generation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.06525, 2024. 7

    2024 arXiv

  35. [43]

    Kling-omni technical report.arXiv preprint arXiv:2512.16776, 2025

    Kling Team, Jialu Chen, Yuanzheng Ci, Xiangyu Du, Zipeng Feng, Kun Gai, Sainan Guo, Feng Han, Jingbin He, Kang He, et al. Kling-omni technical report.arXiv preprint arXiv:2512.16776, 2025. 1

    2025 arXiv

  36. [44]

    Magi-1: Autoregressive video genera- tion at scale.arXiv preprint arXiv:2505.13211, 2025

    Hansi Teng, Hongyu Jia, Lei Sun, Lingzhi Li, Maolin Li, Mingqiu Tang, Shuai Han, Tianning Zhang, WQ Zhang, Weifeng Luo, et al. Magi-1: Autoregressive video genera- tion at scale.arXiv preprint arXiv:2505.13211, 2025. 3

    2025 arXiv

  37. [45]

    Visual autoregressive modeling: Scalable image generation via next-scale prediction.Advances in neural in- formation processing systems, 37:84839–84865, 2024

    Keyu Tian, Yi Jiang, Zehuan Yuan, Bingyue Peng, and Li- wei Wang. Visual autoregressive modeling: Scalable image generation via next-scale prediction.Advances in neural in- formation processing systems, 37:84839–84865, 2024. 7

    2024

  38. [46]

    To- wards accurate generative models of video: A new metric & challenges.arXiv preprint arXiv:1812.01717, 2018

    Thomas Unterthiner, Sjoerd Van Steenkiste, Karol Kurach, Raphael Marinier, Marcin Michalski, and Sylvain Gelly. To- wards accurate generative models of video: A new metric & challenges.arXiv preprint arXiv:1812.01717, 2018. 1

    2018 arXiv

  39. [47]

    Wan: Open and advanced large-scale video generative models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.20314, 2025

    Team Wan, Ang Wang, Baole Ai, Bin Wen, Chaojie Mao, Chen-Wei Xie, Di Chen, Feiwu Yu, Haiming Zhao, Jianx- iao Yang, et al. Wan: Open and advanced large-scale video generative models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.20314, 2025. 1

    2025 arXiv

  40. [48]

    Drivedreamer: Towards real-world- drive world models for autonomous driving

    Xiaofeng Wang, Zheng Zhu, Guan Huang, Xinze Chen, Jia- gang Zhu, and Jiwen Lu. Drivedreamer: Towards real-world- drive world models for autonomous driving. InEuropean conference on computer vision, pages 55–72. Springer, 2024. 6

    2024

  41. [49]

    Driving into the future: Multiview visual forecasting and planning with world model for au- tonomous driving

    Yuqi Wang, Jiawei He, Lue Fan, Hongxin Li, Yuntao Chen, and Zhaoxiang Zhang. Driving into the future: Multiview visual forecasting and planning with world model for au- tonomous driving. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Con- ference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pag...

    2024

  42. [50]

    Loong: Generating minute-level long videos with autoregressive lan- guage models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.02757, 2024

    Yuqing Wang, Tianwei Xiong, Daquan Zhou, Zhijie Lin, Yang Zhao, Bingyi Kang, Jiashi Feng, and Xihui Liu. Loong: Generating minute-level long videos with autoregressive lan- guage models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.02757, 2024. 7

    2024 arXiv

  43. [51]

    Art-v: Auto-regressive text-to- video generation with diffusion models

    Wenming Weng, Ruoyu Feng, Yanhui Wang, Qi Dai, Chunyu Wang, Dacheng Yin, Zhiyuan Zhao, Kai Qiu, Jian- min Bao, Yuhui Yuan, et al. Art-v: Auto-regressive text-to- video generation with diffusion models. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Rec...

    2024

  44. [52]

    Drivelaw: Unifying planning and video generation in a latent driving world.arXiv preprint arXiv:2512.23421, 2025

    Tianze Xia, Yongkang Li, Lijun Zhou, Jingfeng Yao, Kaixin Xiong, Haiyang Sun, Bing Wang, Kun Ma, Hangjun Ye, Wenyu Liu, et al. Drivelaw: Unifying planning and video generation in a latent driving world.arXiv preprint arXiv:2512.23421, 2025. 1

    2025 arXiv

  45. [53]

    Progressive au- toregressive video diffusion models

    Desai Xie, Zhan Xu, Yicong Hong, Hao Tan, Difan Liu, Feng Liu, Arie Kaufman, and Yang Zhou. Progressive au- toregressive video diffusion models. InProceedings of the Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition Conference, pages 6322–6332, 2025. 8

    2025

  46. [54]

    Videogpt: Video generation using vq-vae and trans- formers.arXiv preprint arXiv:2104.10157, 2021

    Wilson Yan, Yunzhi Zhang, Pieter Abbeel, and Aravind Srinivas. Videogpt: Video generation using vq-vae and trans- formers.arXiv preprint arXiv:2104.10157, 2021. 5, 7

    2021 arXiv

  47. [55]

    Scalingnoise: Scaling inference-time search for generating infinite videos.arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.16400,

    Haolin Yang, Feilong Tang, Ming Hu, Qingyu Yin, Yulong Li, Yexin Liu, Zelin Peng, Peng Gao, Junjun He, Zongyuan Ge, et al. Scalingnoise: Scaling inference-time search for generating infinite videos.arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.16400,

    arXiv

  48. [56]

    Generalized predictive model for autonomous driving

    Jiazhi Yang, Shenyuan Gao, Yihang Qiu, Li Chen, Tianyu Li, Bo Dai, Kashyap Chitta, Penghao Wu, Jia Zeng, Ping Luo, et al. Generalized predictive model for autonomous driving. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 14662–14672...

    2024

  49. [57]

    From slow bidirectional to fast autoregressive video diffusion mod- els

    Tianwei Yin, Qiang Zhang, Richard Zhang, William T Free- man, Fredo Durand, Eli Shechtman, and Xun Huang. From slow bidirectional to fast autoregressive video diffusion mod- els. InProceedings of the Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition Conference, pages 22963–22974, 2025. 8

    2025

  50. [58]

    An image is worth 32 tokens for reconstruction and generation.Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 37:128940– 128966, 2024

    Qihang Yu, Mark Weber, Xueqing Deng, Xiaohui Shen, Daniel Cremers, and Liang-Chieh Chen. An image is worth 32 tokens for reconstruction and generation.Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 37:128940– 128966, 2024. 1

    2024

  51. [59]

    Generating videos with dynamics-aware implicit generative adversarial net- works.arXiv preprint arXiv:2202.10571, 2022

    Sihyun Yu, Jihoon Tack, Sangwoo Mo, Hyunsu Kim, Junho Kim, Jung-Woo Ha, and Jinwoo Shin. Generating videos with dynamics-aware implicit generative adversarial net- works.arXiv preprint arXiv:2202.10571, 2022. 5

    2022 arXiv

  52. [60]

    Video probabilistic diffusion models in projected latent space

    Sihyun Yu, Kihyuk Sohn, Subin Kim, and Jinwoo Shin. Video probabilistic diffusion models in projected latent space. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on com- puter vision and pattern recognition, pages 18456–18466,

  53. [61]

    Packing input frame context in next-frame prediction models for video genera- tion.arXiv preprint arXiv:2504.12626, 2025

    Lvmin Zhang and Maneesh Agrawala. Packing input frame context in next-frame prediction models for video genera- tion.arXiv preprint arXiv:2504.12626, 2025. 3

    2025

  54. [62]

    Pretraining frame preservation in au- toregressive video memory compression.arXiv preprint arXiv:2512.23851, 2025

    Lvmin Zhang, Shengqu Cai, Muyang Li, Chong Zeng, Bei- jia Lu, Anyi Rao, Song Han, Gordon Wetzstein, and Ma- neesh Agrawala. Pretraining frame preservation in au- toregressive video memory compression.arXiv preprint arXiv:2512.23851, 2025. 3

    2025 arXiv

  55. [63]

    Mobilei2v: Fast and high-resolution image-to- video on mobile devices.arXiv preprint arXiv:2511.21475,

    Shuai Zhang, Bao Tang, Siyuan Yu, Yueting Zhu, Jingfeng Yao, Ya Zou, Shanglin Yuan, Li Yu, Wenyu Liu, and Xing- gang Wang. Mobilei2v: Fast and high-resolution image-to- video on mobile devices.arXiv preprint arXiv:2511.21475,

  56. [64]

    Taming teacher forcing for masked autoregressive video gen- eration

    Deyu Zhou, Quan Sun, Yuang Peng, Kun Yan, Runpei Dong, Duomin Wang, Zheng Ge, Nan Duan, and Xiangyu Zhang. Taming teacher forcing for masked autoregressive video gen- eration. InProceedings of the Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition Conference, pages 7374–7384, 2025. 5 App...

    2025

  57. [65]

    Abrupt changes in the sampling distribution may introduce sud- den shifts in training difficulty and destabilize the cur- riculum

    Trajectory transition smoothness: This constraint pro- motes stable optimization across training steps. Abrupt changes in the sampling distribution may introduce sud- den shifts in training difficulty and destabilize the cur- riculum. We therefore enforce a uniform evolution o...

  58. [66]

    Per-frame distribution coverage consistency: It promotes balanced optimization across frames within each train- ing step. If the distribution of one frame is sharply con- centrated while that of another is overly dispersed, their dominant noise-level regions are sampled with s...

  59. [67]

    In contrast, inference follows an or- dered denoising process in which the noise levels of ad- jacent frames are strongly correlated

    Inter-frame correlation: In the initial diffusion-forcing configuration, frame-wise noise levels are sampled in- dependently, so their inter-frame dependencies are not explicitly modeled. In contrast, inference follows an or- dered denoising process in which the noise levels o...

  60. [101]

    All methods generate videos at 256×256 resolution and 16 frames

    * indicates training on train + test split, while methods with- out * are trained only on train.‡indicates results evaluated on the test split, while all other results are evaluated on the full dataset. All methods generate videos at 256×256 resolution and 16 frames. Methods F...

Pith tools

Reviewed August 15, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.