Pith. sign in

REVIEW 5 major objections 5 minor 53 references

CoT-Edit: Let CoT Guide Instruction Video Editing

T0 review · 5 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 CoT-Edit claims that inserting a chain-of-thought multimodal planner that emits bounding boxes before diffusion editing fixes target ambiguity and physical implausibility in instruction-based video editing.

desk verdict A genuinely new plan-guide-edit architecture for instruction video editing, with strong qualitative promise, but the headline SOTA claims lean on an unvalidated Gemini judge and one overclaim on temporal consistency. read the letter →

arxiv 2608.01113 v1 pith:GUQTZZQO submitted 2026-08-02 cs.CV

Sen Liang , Fengbin Guan , Youliang Zhang , Xin Li , Zhibo Chen This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.CV
keywords instruction-basedvideoeditingChain-of-Thoughtreasoningmultimodallargelanguagemodelsboundingboxgroundingdiffusionspatiallocalizationphysicalplausibility
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

Text-only instruction-based video editing struggles when a scene has several similar objects or when an instruction implies motion, because the model has to guess both what to edit and where. This paper argues that the "where" should be decided explicitly before generation begins. A chain-of-thought multimodal large language model examines the video keyframes and the instruction, and outputs a temporal sequence of bounding boxes plus an enriched instruction carrying attributes, spatial relations, and physical constraints. A box-guided branch converts those anchors into masks, and a diffusion editor applies the edit inside the masks while preserving the rest of the video. If the reported results hold, this ordering—plan, guide, edit—is what makes instruction-based video editing localize correctly among similar objects and produce physically plausible additions.

What carries the argument

The central mechanism is the chain-of-thought enhanced multimodal large language model planner, which acts as a translator from a text instruction to spatial anchors. It decomposes the task into parsing the editing intent, identifying the target across frames, separating camera motion from object motion, and checking physical and cinematic consistency, then emits a keyframe-aligned bounding box sequence and an enriched instruction. The bounding boxes turn mask prediction from an open-ended global search into a local refinement inside known regions, which is what allows precise selection among similar objects. The enriched instruction carries attributes, contact, and motion priors into both the mask branch and the diffusion editor. Two bidirectional connectors—one feeding editor semantics back into the mask branch and one injecting mask features into the editor—couple the two stages so that the mask stays accurate at thin or occluded structures while the editor receives spatial guidance at multiple depths.

What would settle it

A human perceptual study on the same 100 videos sampled from Koala-36M, where raters choose which edited video selects the intended object and obeys the stated physical motion, would settle the central claim. If CoT-Edit does not beat the best baseline under human judgment on these two dimensions, the reported advantage is an artifact of the judge model rather than a true gain.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that instruction-based video editing becomes controllable when an explicit planning step converts a text instruction into spatial anchors before any pixel is generated. In this design, a chain-of-thought multimodal large language model examines the video keyframes and the user instruction, and produces two things: a temporal sequence of bounding boxes and an enriched instruction that carries attributes, spatial relations, and physical constraints. A mask branch then turns those boxes into spatiotemporal masks, and a diffusion editor fuses masks, enriched text, and video features to produce the final edit. The paper reports that this ordering achieves the best numbers on FVD, CLIPScore, and judge-model-rated physical plausibility, spatial relations, instruction following, and editing quality against six open-source baselines, with the largest margins in spatial relation and physical-rule scores. It also reports that ablations removing the chain-of-thought step lose physically plausible motion, such as a ball following a parabolic bounce.

Load-bearing premise

The reported advantage over baselines depends on the judge model's scores being a fair measure of physical plausibility and spatial relations; if the judge simply favors outputs that look like multimodal-LLM planning, the large gains on those dimensions could be an artifact.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Instruction-based editing no longer needs to solve implicit global localization; the planner's bounding boxes restrict the edit to the intended region, which is why scenes with multiple similar objects become tractable.
  • Physically constrained additions, such as an object following a parabolic trajectory, can be specified through the text and realized through the box sequence, because the boxes encode a spatiotemporal path rather than a single location.
  • The modular training schedule—separate mask and editor training followed by joint fine-tuning on 100k pairs—reduces the need for large aligned video-instruction datasets.
  • The framework covers non-spatial tasks such as stylization by letting the planner emit an empty box sequence, so the enriched instruction alone drives the edit.
  • Because edited content is composited inside the masks and original video is preserved outside, background and temporal consistency are maintained even for localized additions.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A direct transfer test would apply the same plan-guide-edit decomposition to instruction-based image editing, where a bounding-box plan should resolve ambiguity among similar objects with minimal changes to the mask and editor branches.
  • The keyframe-aligned box sequence suggests a natural extension to long videos: sample more keyframes or interpolate box trajectories between them; the paper's experiments do not report how performance scales with sequence length.
  • Because the judge model used for the main scores may systematically prefer outputs that resemble multimodal-LLM planning, re-scoring the same outputs with a judge that sees no planning text, or with human raters, would separate genuine spatial and physical gains from judge bias.
  • The data-efficiency claim implies an experiment: train the full model at several fractions of the 100k internal pairs; if the planner is the load-bearing component, spatial scores should degrade more slowly than appearance scores as data shrink.
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

5 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper proposes CoT-Edit, a Plan-Guide-Edit framework for instruction-based video editing. A CoT-enhanced MLLM planner takes input keyframes and a user instruction to produce a temporal bounding-box sequence and an enriched instruction; a box-conditioned mask branch converts these spatial priors into spatiotemporal masks; and a diffusion editor built on Wan2.2 5B fuses masks, enriched text, and video features to render the edited video. The authors report state-of-the-art quantitative results on a 100-video sample from Koala-36M, together with ablations of the CoT planner and the mask branch, and claim reduced data requirements through modular followed by joint training.

Significance. If the empirical claims hold, the paper makes a useful contribution by decoupling semantic planning from spatial execution: the explicit bounding-box sequence is a clean way to inject spatial priors, and the modular two-stage training is a plausible route to reducing aligned-data requirements. The paper also includes a rare and valuable decomposition of the planner, mask branch, and editor, with clear ablations. However, the current evaluation does not yet support the central SOTA claims: the main evidence for physical plausibility and spatial relations comes from an unvalidated Gemini judge, the temporal-consistency numbers contradict the broad 'outperforms' wording, and the mask-branch ablation shows a non-monotonic physical-plausibility pattern. These issues are fixable with additional experiments and corrected reporting, but they are load-bearing for the paper's headline conclusions.

major comments (5)
  1. [Section 4.2, Table 1] The headline claims of physically consistent object additions and precise spatial localization rest entirely on Gemini ratings (Physical Rule, Spatial Relation, Instruction Following, Editing Quality), but the manuscript reports neither the Gemini prompt template nor per-item scores, variance, significance tests, or correlation with human judgments. Since the CoT planner is an MLLM and Gemini is also used as a judge, the large margins over OmniVideo and Lucy-1.1 (e.g., Physical Rule 0.741 vs 0.590; Spatial Relation 0.841 vs 0.641) could reflect a systematic preference for MLLM-style structured outputs rather than genuine physical or spatial superiority. An independent human evaluation, or at least a second non-MLLM judge with the full rating protocol, is needed to support the SOTA claim.
  2. [Section 4.2, Table 1; Abstract; Conclusion] The statement that CoT-Edit consistently outperforms all baselines is contradicted by the reported Temporal Consistency: Ours TC=0.945 is below InsV2V (0.958), InsViE (0.957), OmniVideo (0.954), and Lucy-1.1 (0.961). The abstract and conclusion also emphasize temporal coherence, so the SOTA claim must be qualified to exclude temporal consistency, or the discrepancy must be explained.
  3. [Section 4.3, Table 2] The mask-branch ablation is not monotonic in physical plausibility: adding the Mask-Connector lowers Physical Rule from 0.674 (E w/ MLLM) to 0.643 (E+M w/ Mc), and the full Reverse-Connector restores it only to 0.681. The paper explains spatial gains but does not discuss this physical-plausibility regression; since physical consistency is one of the two central differentiators, this pattern needs analysis and not just a summary statement that the mask branch enhances spatial understanding.
  4. [Section 4.1 and Section 4.3] The main quantitative comparison is based on 100 randomly sampled Koala-36M videos, with no confidence intervals, no significance tests, and no description of the instruction distribution. The user study is summarized in one sentence with no participant count, protocol, or statistics, and the full details are deferred to a supplementary document that was not provided for review. This level of reporting is insufficient for state-of-the-art claims.
  5. [Section 4.1] The internal training dataset of about 100k video editing pairs with precise mask annotations is neither released nor described in detail, so the reader cannot disentangle the contribution of the proposed architecture from the contribution of this unshared data. At minimum, the dataset composition, filtering criteria, and instruction types should be reported so that the reduced-data-dependency claim can be evaluated.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Section 2.1] There is a spacing typo 'V AEs' and reference [23] appears unrelated to video generation; it should be removed or replaced.
  2. [Figure 2 and Section 3.1] The figure caption uses 'VLM planner' while the text uses 'MLLM planner'; the terminology should be unified.
  3. [Section 3.1] The relationship between the keyframe-aligned bounding box sequence and the full-frame mask sequence is not specified; clarify how sparse keyframe boxes are propagated to all frames and how the planner's empty-box output for non-spatial tasks is handled by the mask branch.
  4. [Section 3.3, Equation (4)] The notation 'QVLcrossattn(MLP(V), C^M_l)' is ambiguous: the text says cross-attention is 'modulated by mask features', but the equation does not make the modulation operation explicit; please define the exact mechanism and dimensional transformations.
  5. [Table 1] The Lucy-1.1 row lacks separators between FVD, TC, and MS values ('1488.120.9610.98'), which makes the table hard to read; fix the formatting.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity found: the framework is empirical and self-contained; the Gemini-judge overlap is an evaluation-validity risk, not a derivation collapse.

full rationale

The paper is an empirical systems paper rather than a derivational chain: CoT-Edit is a three-module architecture trained on public and internal datasets and evaluated with automatic metrics, a Gemini-based rating, and a user study. There is no equation in the paper that reduces a predicted quantity to a fitted input, and no parameter is fit to the reported test quantities and then renamed as a prediction. The planner's bounding boxes and enriched instructions are inputs to the mask generator and editor, which is a legitimate pipeline rather than circular reasoning: those outputs are not defined in terms of the final evaluation scores. The self-citations in the related-work section (HunyuanVideo-Avatar, HunyuanCustom, Omniv2V, MagicStick, TIV-Diffusion, RASS) are contextual and not load-bearing for the paper's central claim. The only concerning point is that Gemini serves both as the judge for physical plausibility, spatial relations, instruction following, and editing quality in Table 1, and as one of the planner variants in the CoT ablation in Figure 5. This could bias the ablation and the qualitative SOTA claims if Gemini systematically prefers outputs resembling its own structured reasoning. However, this is a measurement-validity risk, not a circularity in the sense of the derivation reducing to its own inputs: there is no quoted equation or construction showing that the judged score is determined by the planner's own output by definition. External benchmarks such as FVD, VBench metrics, CLIPScore, and the user study provide independent content, so the central claim does not rest on a self-referential chain. Per the hard rules, a possible judge bias without an exhibited equation-level reduction is not circularity. The finding is therefore no significant circularity, score 0.

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

The central claim is an empirical performance claim, so the ledger lists the domain assumptions the method depends on: the base diffusion model's quality, the planner's accuracy, the validity of the automatic and Gemini evaluation, and the internal dataset's adequacy. No free parameters in the physics sense are fitted; the model's trainable weights and training hyperparameters are standard for this class of method. No new physical entities are proposed.

assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Wan2.2 5B provides a capable video diffusion backbone.
    The Editor and Guide branches are built on Wan2.2 5B; if the base model cannot produce high-quality video, the framework's results would degrade regardless of planning (Section 3, Base Model and Setup).
  • domain assumption The MLLM planner's bounding boxes and enriched instructions are sufficiently accurate to constrain mask generation.
    The Guide treats boxes as hard constraints; incorrect boxes would force edits in wrong regions (Section 3.2).
  • domain assumption Automatic metrics, particularly Gemini ratings, reflect human-judged editing quality.
    The SOTA claim relies on Gemini scores for physical plausibility, spatial relations, and instruction following (Section 4.2).
  • domain assumption The internal 100k video-edit dataset with precise mask annotations is of adequate scale and quality for joint training.
    The second-stage joint training is performed on this non-public dataset; its quality directly affects the final model (Section 4.1).

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of CoT-Edit: Let CoT Guide Instruction Video Editing." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/GUQTZZQO

@misc{pith2026260801113,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: CoT-Edit: Let CoT Guide Instruction Video Editing},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/GUQTZZQO}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2608.01113}
}
read the original abstract

Text-driven instruction-based video editing in complex scenes remains challenging: purely textual prompts often fail to capture precise spatial relationships and physical constraints, resulting in target ambiguity and physically implausible outcomes. To address this, we propose a plan--guide--edit framework that explicitly bridges semantic intent and spatial execution. In our framework, a Chain-of-Thought (CoT)-enhanced multimodal large language model (MLLM) serves as a planner, performing structured reasoning over the video and instructions to derive a precise sequence of bounding boxes and attribute-enriched editing directives. These spatial priors then guide a box-conditioned mask generator, transforming ambiguous global retrieval into localized, context-aware refinement and producing masks that more accurately capture object scale, contact relationships, and placement. Building on these spatial and semantic signals, a diffusion-based editor integrates the masks, enriched instructions, and frame features to render high-fidelity edits that remain temporally coherent and spatially well aligned. Trained first in a modular manner and then jointly, our framework achieves superior performance with reduced data requirements, delivering precise localization in scenes with multiple similar objects and physically consistent object additions, and extensive experiments demonstrate state-of-the-art performance over multiple strong baseline methods. More details are available at: https://github.com/flying-sky999/CoT-Edit

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2608.01113 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Illustration of the challenges in text-driven instruction [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p001_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Overview of the proposed “Plan–Guide–Edit” framework for instruction-based video editing. Given a video and an instruction, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Chain-of-Thought (CoT) reasoning process of the MLLM planner. Given an editing instruction and keyframes, the planner [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (2 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Qualitative comparison of CoT-Edit and open-source baselines, showing more precise target localization, better preservation of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Qualitative results of the CoT ablation study. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_5.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

53 extracted references · 25 canonical work pages

  1. [23]

    The health- wealth gradient in labor markets: Integrating health, in- surance, and social metrics to predict employment density

    Dingyuan Liu, Qiannan Shen, and Jiaci Liu. The health- wealth gradient in labor markets: Integrating health, in- surance, and social metrics to predict employment density. Computation, 14(1):22, 2026. 2

    work page 2026

  2. [1]

    Scaling instruction-based video editing with a high-quality synthetic dataset.arXiv preprint arXiv:2510.15742, 2025

    Qingyan Bai, Qiuyu Wang, Hao Ouyang, Yue Yu, Hanlin Wang, Wen Wang, Ka Leong Cheng, Shuailei Ma, Yanhong Zeng, Zichen Liu, et al. Scaling instruction-based video editing with a high-quality synthetic dataset.arXiv preprint arXiv:2510.15742, 2025. 3, 6

    arXiv

  3. [2]

    In- structpix2pix: Learning to follow image editing instructions

    Tim Brooks, Aleksander Holynski, and Alexei A Efros. In- structpix2pix: Learning to follow image editing instructions. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vi- sion and pattern recognition, pages 18392–18402, 2023. 1, 3

    work page 2023

  4. [3]

    Hunyuanvideo-avatar: High-fidelity audio-driven hu- man animation for multiple characters.arXiv preprint arXiv:2505.20156, 2025

    Yi Chen, Sen Liang, Zixiang Zhou, Ziyao Huang, Yifeng Ma, Junshu Tang, Qin Lin, Yuan Zhou, and Qinglin Lu. Hunyuanvideo-avatar: High-fidelity audio-driven hu- man animation for multiple characters.arXiv preprint arXiv:2505.20156, 2025. 2

    arXiv 2025

  5. [4]

    Consistent video- to-video transfer using synthetic dataset.arXiv preprint arXiv:2311.00213, 2023

    Jiaxin Cheng, Tianjun Xiao, and Tong He. Consistent video- to-video transfer using synthetic dataset.arXiv preprint arXiv:2311.00213, 2023. 3, 7

    arXiv 2023

  6. [5]

    Rass: Improving denoising diffusion sam- plers with reinforced active sampling scheduler

    Xin Ding, Lei Yu, Xin Li, Zhijun Tu, Hanting Chen, Jie Hu, and Zhibo Chen. Rass: Improving denoising diffusion sam- plers with reinforced active sampling scheduler. InProceed- ings of the Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition Con- ference, pages 12923–12933, 2025. 2

    work page 2025

  7. [6]

    Why compress what you can generate? when gpt-4o generation ushers in image compression fields

    Yixin Gao, Xiaohan Pan, Xin Li, and Zhibo Chen. Why compress what you can generate? when gpt-4o generation ushers in image compression fields. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision, pages 371–381, 2025. 2

    work page 2025

  8. [7]

    Seed-data-edit technical report: A hybrid dataset for in- structional image editing.arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.04007,

    Yuying Ge, Sijie Zhao, Chen Li, Yixiao Ge, and Ying Shan. Seed-data-edit technical report: A hybrid dataset for in- structional image editing.arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.04007,

    arXiv

Show all 53 references
  1. [8]

    Clipscore: A reference-free evaluation met- ric for image captioning

    Jack Hessel, Ari Holtzman, Maxwell Forbes, Ronan Le Bras, and Yejin Choi. Clipscore: A reference-free evaluation met- ric for image captioning. InProceedings of the 2021 confer- ence on empirical methods in natural language processing, pages 7514–7528, 2021. 6

    2021

  2. [9]

    Imagen video: High definition video generation with diffusion mod- els.arXiv preprint arXiv:2210.02303, 2022

    Jonathan Ho, William Chan, Chitwan Saharia, Jay Whang, Ruiqi Gao, Alexey Gritsenko, Diederik P Kingma, Ben Poole, Mohammad Norouzi, David J Fleet, et al. Imagen video: High definition video generation with diffusion mod- els.arXiv preprint arXiv:2210.02303, 2022. 2

    arXiv

  3. [10]

    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. 2

    2022

  4. [11]

    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. 2

    2022 arXiv

  5. [12]

    Animate anyone: Consistent and controllable image- to-video synthesis for character animation

    Li Hu. Animate anyone: Consistent and controllable image- to-video synthesis for character animation. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pages 8153–8163, 2024. 2

    2024

  6. [13]

    Hunyuancustom: A multimodal-driven architecture for customized video gener- ation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2505.04512, 2025

    Teng Hu, Zhentao Yu, Zhengguang Zhou, Sen Liang, Yuan Zhou, Qin Lin, and Qinglin Lu. Hunyuancustom: A multimodal-driven architecture for customized video gener- ation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2505.04512, 2025. 2

    2025 arXiv

  7. [14]

    Vbench: Comprehensive bench- mark suite for video generative models

    Ziqi Huang, Yinan He, Jiashuo Yu, Fan Zhang, Chenyang Si, Yuming Jiang, Yuanhan Zhang, Tianxing Wu, Qingyang Jin, Nattapol Chanpaisit, et al. Vbench: Comprehensive bench- mark suite for video generative models. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pa...

    2024

  8. [15]

    Anyedit: Edit any knowledge encoded in language models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2502.05628, 2025

    Houcheng Jiang, Junfeng Fang, Ningyu Zhang, Guojun Ma, Mingyang Wan, Xiang Wang, Xiangnan He, and Tat-seng Chua. Anyedit: Edit any knowledge encoded in language models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2502.05628, 2025. 6

    2025

  9. [16]

    Vace: All-in-one video creation and editing

    Zeyinzi Jiang, Zhen Han, Chaojie Mao, Jingfeng Zhang, Yulin Pan, and Yu Liu. Vace: All-in-one video creation and editing. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Con- ference on Computer Vision, pages 17191–17202, 2025. 2

    2025

  10. [17]

    Text2video-zero: Text- to-image diffusion models are zero-shot video generators

    Levon Khachatryan, Andranik Movsisyan, Vahram Tade- vosyan, Roberto Henschel, Zhangyang Wang, Shant Navasardyan, and Humphrey Shi. Text2video-zero: Text- to-image diffusion models are zero-shot video generators. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Comput...

    2023

  11. [18]

    Hunyuanvideo: A systematic framework for large video generative models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.03603, 2024

    Weijie Kong, Qi Tian, Zijian Zhang, Rox Min, Zuozhuo Dai, Jin Zhou, Jiangfeng Xiong, Xin Li, Bo Wu, Jianwei Zhang, et al. Hunyuanvideo: A systematic framework for large video generative models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.03603, 2024. 2

    2024 arXiv

  12. [19]

    Anyv2v: A tuning-free framework for any video-to- video editing tasks.arXiv preprint arXiv:2403.14468, 2024

    Max Ku, Cong Wei, Weiming Ren, Harry Yang, and Wenhu Chen. Anyv2v: A tuning-free framework for any video-to- video editing tasks.arXiv preprint arXiv:2403.14468, 2024. 7

    2024 arXiv

  13. [20]

    Omniv2v: Versatile video generation and edit- ing via dynamic content manipulation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2506.01801, 2025

    Sen Liang, Zhentao Yu, Zhengguang Zhou, Teng Hu, Hong- mei Wang, Yi Chen, Qin Lin, Yuan Zhou, Xin Li, Qinglin Lu, et al. Omniv2v: Versatile video generation and edit- ing via dynamic content manipulation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2506.01801, 2025. 2

    2025 arXiv

  14. [21]

    Grounding 3d scene affordance from egocentric interactions.arXiv preprint arXiv:2409.19650, 2024

    Cuiyu Liu, Wei Zhai, Yuhang Yang, Hongchen Luo, Sen Liang, Yang Cao, and Zheng-Jun Zha. Grounding 3d scene affordance from egocentric interactions.arXiv preprint arXiv:2409.19650, 2024. 2

    2024 arXiv

  15. [22]

    Stablev2v: Stabilizing shape consistency in video-to- video editing.IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems for Video Technology, 2025

    Chang Liu, Rui Li, Kaidong Zhang, Yunwei Lan, and Dong Liu. Stablev2v: Stabilizing shape consistency in video-to- video editing.IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems for Video Technology, 2025. 3, 7

    2025

  16. [24]

    Video-p2p: Video editing with cross-attention control

    Shaoteng Liu, Yuechen Zhang, Wenbo Li, Zhe Lin, and Jiaya Jia. Video-p2p: Video editing with cross-attention control. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 8599–8608, 2024. 3

    2024

  17. [25]

    Follow your pose: Pose- guided text-to-video generation using pose-free videos

    Yue Ma, Yingqing He, Xiaodong Cun, Xintao Wang, Siran Chen, Xiu Li, and Qifeng Chen. Follow your pose: Pose- guided text-to-video generation using pose-free videos. In Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelli- gence, pages 4117–4125, 2024. 2

    2024

  18. [26]

    Magic- stick: Controllable video editing via control handle transfor- mations

    Yue Ma, Xiaodong Cun, Sen Liang, Jinbo Xing, Yingqing He, Chenyang Qi, Siran Chen, and Qifeng Chen. Magic- stick: Controllable video editing via control handle transfor- mations. In2025 IEEE/CVF Winter Conference on Applica- tions of Computer Vision (WACV), pages 9385–9395. IEEE,

  19. [27]

    In- structx: Towards unified visual editing with mllm guidance

    Chong Mou, Qichao Sun, Yanze Wu, Pengze Zhang, Xinghui Li, Fulong Ye, Songtao Zhao, and Qian He. In- structx: Towards unified visual editing with mllm guidance. arXiv preprint arXiv:2510.08485, 2025. 1, 3

    2025

  20. [28]

    Occluded video instance segmentation: A bench- mark.International Journal of Computer Vision, 130(8): 2022–2039, 2022

    Jiyang Qi, Yan Gao, Yao Hu, Xinggang Wang, Xiaoyu Liu, Xiang Bai, Serge Belongie, Alan Yuille, Philip HS Torr, and Song Bai. Occluded video instance segmentation: A bench- mark.International Journal of Computer Vision, 130(8): 2022–2039, 2022. 6

    2022

  21. [29]

    Instructvid2vid: Controllable video editing with natural language instructions

    Bosheng Qin, Juncheng Li, Siliang Tang, Tat-Seng Chua, and Yueting Zhuang. Instructvid2vid: Controllable video editing with natural language instructions. In2024 IEEE International Conference on Multimedia and Expo (ICME), pages 1–6. IEEE, 2024. 1, 3

    2024

  22. [30]

    Urvos: Unified referring video object segmentation network with a large-scale benchmark

    Seonguk Seo, Joon-Young Lee, and Bohyung Han. Urvos: Unified referring video object segmentation network with a large-scale benchmark. InEuropean conference on computer vision, pages 208–223. Springer, 2020. 6

    2020

  23. [31]

    Make-a-video: Text-to-video generation without text-video data.arXiv preprint arXiv:2209.14792,

    Uriel Singer, Adam Polyak, Thomas Hayes, Xi Yin, Jie An, Songyang Zhang, Qiyuan Hu, Harry Yang, Oron Ashual, Oran Gafni, et al. Make-a-video: Text-to-video generation without text-video data.arXiv preprint arXiv:2209.14792,

    arXiv

  24. [32]

    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. 2

    2022

  25. [33]

    Omni-video: Democratizing uni- fied video understanding and generation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2507.06119, 2025

    Zhiyu Tan, Hao Yang, Luozheng Qin, Jia Gong, Meng- ping Yang, and Hao Li. Omni-video: Democratizing uni- fied video understanding and generation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2507.06119, 2025. 7

    2025

  26. [34]

    Lucy edit: Open-weight text-guided video editing, 2025

    DecartAI Team. Lucy edit: Open-weight text-guided video editing, 2025. 1, 3, 7

    2025

  27. [35]

    Gemini: a family of highly capable multimodal models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2312.11805, 2023

    Gemini Team, Rohan Anil, Sebastian Borgeaud, Jean- Baptiste Alayrac, Jiahui Yu, Radu Soricut, Johan Schalkwyk, Andrew M Dai, Anja Hauth, Katie Millican, et al. Gemini: a family of highly capable multimodal models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2312.11805, 2023. 6, 7, 8

    2023 arXiv

  28. [36]

    Fvd: A new metric for video generation

    Thomas Unterthiner, Sjoerd Van Steenkiste, Karol Kurach, Rapha¨el Marinier, Marcin Michalski, and Sylvain Gelly. Fvd: A new metric for video generation. 2019. 6, 7

    2019

  29. [37]

    Phenaki: Variable length video generation from open domain textual description.arXiv preprint arXiv:2210.02399, 2022

    Ruben Villegas, Mohammad Babaeizadeh, Pieter-Jan Kin- dermans, Hernan Moraldo, Han Zhang, Mohammad Taghi Saffar, Santiago Castro, Julius Kunze, and Dumitru Erhan. Phenaki: Variable length video generation from open domain textual description.arXiv preprint arXiv:2210.02399, 2022. 2

    arXiv

  30. [38]

    Modelscope text-to-video technical report.arXiv preprint arXiv:2308.06571, 2023

    Jiuniu Wang, Hangjie Yuan, Dayou Chen, Yingya Zhang, Xiang Wang, and Shiwei Zhang. Modelscope text-to-video technical report.arXiv preprint arXiv:2308.06571, 2023. 2

    2023 arXiv

  31. [39]

    Koala-36m: A large-scale video dataset improving consistency between fine-grained conditions and video content

    Qiuheng Wang, Yukai Shi, Jiarong Ou, Rui Chen, Ke Lin, Jiahao Wang, Boyuan Jiang, Haotian Yang, Mingwu Zheng, Xin Tao, et al. Koala-36m: A large-scale video dataset improving consistency between fine-grained conditions and video content. InProceedings of the Computer Vision an...

    2025

  32. [40]

    Tiv-diffusion: Towards object-centric movement for text-driven image to video gen- eration

    Xingrui Wang, Xin Li, Yaosi Hu, Hanxin Zhu, Chen Hou, Cuiling Lan, and Zhibo Chen. Tiv-diffusion: Towards object-centric movement for text-driven image to video gen- eration. InProceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 7988–7996, 2025. 2

    2025

  33. [41]

    Re-attentional con- trollable video diffusion editing

    Yuanzhi Wang, Yong Li, Mengyi Liu, Xiaoya Zhang, Xin Liu, Zhen Cui, and Antoni B Chan. Re-attentional con- trollable video diffusion editing. InProceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 8123– 8131, 2025. 3

    2025

  34. [42]

    Training-free controllable text-guided video editing.IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems for Video Technology, 2026

    Yuanzhi Wang, Yong Li, Mengyi Liu, Xiaoya Zhang, Zhen Cui, and Jian Yang. Training-free controllable text-guided video editing.IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems for Video Technology, 2026. 3

    2026

  35. [43]

    Phrasecut: Language-based image segmen- tation in the wild

    Chenyun Wu, Zhe Lin, Scott Cohen, Trung Bui, and Subhransu Maji. Phrasecut: Language-based image segmen- tation in the wild. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Con- ference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 10216–10225, 2020. 6

    2020

  36. [44]

    Tune-a-video: One-shot tuning of image diffusion models for text-to-video generation

    Jay Zhangjie Wu, Yixiao Ge, Xintao Wang, Stan Weixian Lei, Yuchao Gu, Yufei Shi, Wynne Hsu, Ying Shan, Xiaohu Qie, and Mike Zheng Shou. Tune-a-video: One-shot tuning of image diffusion models for text-to-video generation. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF international conference...

    2023

  37. [45]

    Insvie-1m: Effective instruction-based video editing with elaborate dataset construction

    Yuhui Wu, Liyi Chen, Ruibin Li, Shihao Wang, Chenxi Xie, and Lei Zhang. Insvie-1m: Effective instruction-based video editing with elaborate dataset construction. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vi- sion, pages 16692–16701, 2025. 1, 3, 7

    2025

  38. [46]

    Veg- gie: Instructional editing and reasoning video concepts with grounded generation

    Shoubin Yu, Difan Liu, Ziqiao Ma, Yicong Hong, Yang Zhou, Hao Tan, Joyce Chai, and Mohit Bansal. Veg- gie: Instructional editing and reasoning video concepts with grounded generation. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF In- ternational Conference on Computer Vision, pages 15147– 151...

    2025

  39. [47]

    Editworld: Simulating world dynamics for instruction- following image editing

    Bohan Zeng, Ling Yang, Jiaming Liu, Minghao Xu, Yuanx- ing Zhang, Pengfei Wan, Wentao Zhang, and Shuicheng Yan. Editworld: Simulating world dynamics for instruction- following image editing. InProceedings of the 33rd ACM In- ternational Conference on Multimedia, pages 12674–12681,

  40. [48]

    I2vgen-xl: High-quality image-to-video synthesis via cascaded diffusion models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2311.04145, 2023

    Shiwei Zhang, Jiayu Wang, Yingya Zhang, Kang Zhao, Hangjie Yuan, Zhiwu Qin, Xiang Wang, Deli Zhao, and Jingren Zhou. I2vgen-xl: High-quality image-to-video synthesis via cascaded diffusion models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2311.04145, 2023. 2

    2023 arXiv

  41. [49]

    Effived: Efficient video editing via text-instruction diffusion models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2403.11568, 2024

    Zhenghao Zhang, Zuozhuo Dai, Long Qin, and Weizhi Wang. Effived: Efficient video editing via text-instruction diffusion models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2403.11568, 2024. 3

    2024 arXiv

  42. [50]

    Motionpro: A precise mo- tion controller for image-to-video generation

    Zhongwei Zhang, Fuchen Long, Zhaofan Qiu, Yingwei Pan, Wu Liu, Ting Yao, and Tao Mei. Motionpro: A precise mo- tion controller for image-to-video generation. InProceed- ings of the Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition Con- ference, pages 27957–27967, 2025. 2

    2025

  43. [51]

    Ultraedit: Instruction-based fine-grained im- age editing at scale.Advances in Neural Information Pro- cessing Systems, 37:3058–3093, 2024

    Haozhe Zhao, Xiaojian Ma, Liang Chen, Shuzheng Si, Ru- jie Wu, Kaikai An, Peiyu Yu, Minjia Zhang, Qing Li, and Baobao Chang. Ultraedit: Instruction-based fine-grained im- age editing at scale.Advances in Neural Information Pro- cessing Systems, 37:3058–3093, 2024. 6

    2024

  44. [52]

    Semantic under- standing of scenes through the ade20k dataset.International journal of computer vision, 127(3):302–321, 2019

    Bolei Zhou, Hang Zhao, Xavier Puig, Tete Xiao, Sanja Fi- dler, Adela Barriuso, and Antonio Torralba. Semantic under- standing of scenes through the ade20k dataset.International journal of computer vision, 127(3):302–321, 2019. 6

    2019

  45. [53]

    Se\˜ norita-2m: A high-quality instruction- based dataset for general video editing by video specialists

    Bojia Zi, Penghui Ruan, Marco Chen, Xianbiao Qi, Shaozhe Hao, Shihao Zhao, Youze Huang, Bin Liang, Rong Xiao, and Kam-Fai Wong. Se\˜ norita-2m: A high-quality instruction- based dataset for general video editing by video specialists. arXiv preprint arXiv:2502.06734, 2025. 6

    2025 arXiv

Pith tools

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