Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 8 minor 8 cited by

Grid: Omni Visual Generation

T0 review · 3 major / 8 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Packing video frames into a single grid image lets a lightly fine-tuned text-to-image model generate coherent video and multi-view sequences at a fraction of the compute of video-specific models.

desk verdict GRID's grid-layout reformulation of temporal generation is a real idea with a clear efficiency story, but its 'implicit temporal prior' premise and the 1000x data-efficiency claim need more evidence. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.10718 v5 pith:LWGRRDK7 submitted 2024-12-14 cs.CV

Cong Wan , Xiangyang Luo , Hao Luo , Zijian Cai , Yiren Song , Yunlong Zhao , Yifan Bai , Fan Wang
show 2 more authors
Yuhang He Yihong Gong
This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.CV
keywords gridrepresentationtext-to-videogenerationmulti-viewflowmatchingLoRAfine-tuningdiffusiontransformervideoframeinterpolationefficientvisual
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

The paper claims that video and multi-view generation do not require video-specific architectures: a modern text-to-image model already carries enough implicit temporal understanding that, once frames are arranged as a grid inside a single image, light fine-tuning can produce the whole sequence coherently. The authors build GRID on the FLUX model with a LoRA adapter of about 160 million parameters, training on roughly 35,000 clips instead of the tens of millions used by specialized video models. They report quality that matches or beats task-specific systems on text-to-video, image-to-video, multi-view generation, and frame interpolation, at up to 67x faster inference while using under one thousandth of the training resources. If the claim holds, re-formatting the input becomes a substitute for building temporal machinery, which would make capable video generation far cheaper to reproduce.

What carries the argument

The central object is the grid representation: an $m \times n$ tiling of video frames or viewpoints inside one image, governed by a conditioning string $c' = [c_{\text{layout}}, c_{\text{content}}]$ that names the grid geometry and the sequence's content. Three mechanisms work together: the base model's self-attention, which over a grid automatically covers both within-frame and cross-frame relations; parallel flow matching with loss $L_{\text{total}} = L_{\text{base}} + \alpha L_{\text{flow}}$, where $L_{\text{base}} = \mathbb{E}_{t,\epsilon}[\,|\epsilon - \epsilon_\theta(I_t, t, c')|^2\,]$ enforces per-cell noise prediction and $L_{\text{flow}}$ penalizes mismatches between the noise residuals of adjacent cells; and a coarse-to-fine schedule that starts from large, noisily captioned datasets at modest resolution and moves to curated high-resolution captions while $\alpha$ rises from 0 to 0.5. The job of this machinery is to turn temporal dynamics into spatial consistency problems that pretrained attention already knows how to solve.

What would settle it

Train the identical recipe — same clips, same LoRA rank, same flow-matching and temporal losses — but present each video as separate frame latents instead of one grid image, and compare FVD on UCF-101 and TikTok; if the non-grid model matches GRID's numbers, the grid format itself is not the source of the gains. A second test: apply the grid recipe to a text-to-image base model with clearly weaker spatial priors; if it performs as well as FLUX, the implicit-temporal-understanding premise is not load-bearing.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

GRID's central claim is that reformulating temporal sequences as spatial grid layouts lets a pretrained text-to-image model generate coherent video and multi-view sequences without any video-specific module. Because the model's self-attention spans the whole grid image, it naturally splits into intra-frame attention, which preserves appearance inside each cell, and cross-frame attention, which relates cells to one another, while text-image cross-attention applies one semantic instruction across all cells. Training uses parallel flow matching with the composite loss $L_{\text{total}} = L_{\text{base}} + \alpha L_{\text{flow}}$, where $L_{\text{base}}$ predicts noise over the whole grid at once and $L_{\text{flow}}$ penalizes inconsistent noise changes between adjacent cells, with a coarse-to-fine schedule that learns layout from large web-video data before refining motion on curated, precisely captioned samples as $\alpha$ grows. With only the LoRA adapter on FLUX, the paper reports an image-to-video FVD of 93.7 on TikTok, a 16-frame text-to-video FVD of 382.5 on UCF-101, multi-view scores that beat specialized 4D generators, and an interpolation PSNR of 35.48, at 6-67x faster inference using one thousandth of the data.

Load-bearing premise

Everything rests on the premise that the pretrained image model already carries usable temporal and multi-view knowledge deep in its weights, so that arranging frames in a grid and fine-tuning lightly is enough to surface it; the paper supports this with qualitative zero-shot demonstrations rather than a controlled comparison against a non-grid training scheme.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • A single FLUX backbone with one LoRA adapter serves text-to-video, image-to-video, multi-view generation, interpolation, style transfer, restoration, and 3D editing, with task changes expressed as prompt-level layout changes instead of new network modules.
  • Sequence length stops being fixed by the architecture: a model trained on $4\times4$ grids extends zero-shot to $4\times8$ grids by prompting, roughly doubling the generated length at linear cost.
  • Competitive video models become trainable with about 35,000 clips and 10,000 steps on eight GPUs, rather than millions of clips and thousands of GPU-days, substantially lowering the entry barrier for research groups.
  • Generating all frames in parallel avoids the error accumulation of autoregressive and motion-module pipelines, which the paper credits for the consistency gains of the grid format.

Reading between the lines

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

  • My reading: if the grid-transfer premise is right, the same reformulation should transfer to other pretrained image generators and possibly to other sequential modalities whose frames tile naturally, but the paper tests only FLUX, so the breadth of the effect is an open question.
  • My reading: the paper's own limitation note concedes that LoRA fine-tuning struggles on open-world motion far from the base model's distribution, so a concrete stress test is to compare GRID against a video-specific model on deliberately out-of-distribution motion prompts.
  • My reading: the reported gains mix three factors — grid format, fine-tuning data, and the temporal loss — and the paper does not isolate them; an ablation that feeds the same data as separate per-frame latents rather than a grid would show which factor carries the result.
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

3 major / 8 minor

Summary. The paper proposes GRID, a framework that reformulates temporal visual generation tasks (text-to-video, image-to-video, multi-view, interpolation, and extension tasks such as style transfer and restoration) as grid-layout image generation. Starting from the FLUX text-to-image model, the method fine-tunes LoRA adapters with a parallel flow-matching objective and a temporal consistency loss, using a coarse-to-fine data curriculum. The authors report state-of-the-art or comparable quantitative results on several benchmarks while claiming large reductions in inference time (up to 67×) and training data/compute (<1/1000 vs. specialized models). The central thesis is that pretrained image models possess implicit temporal understanding that grid reformulation can unlock, avoiding the need to learn temporal dynamics from scratch.

Significance. If the claims hold, the grid-reformulation idea would be an important contribution: it would let a single pretrained text-to-image model serve multiple video and multi-view tasks with small fine-tuning costs, potentially changing how video models are built. The paper is clearly written and provides implementation details that are largely reproducible (open-source FLUX, public datasets, LoRA, 8 A800 GPUs, explicit training steps). The appendix also contains a candid limitations statement (A.11), which is commendable. However, the evidence as presented does not yet substantiate the strongest claims: the implicit-temporal-understanding premise is asserted rather than demonstrated, the data-efficiency figure is not tied to the actual training videos, and the quantitative comparisons are undermined by small test sets, missing error bars, and a post-processing confound in the multi-view experiments. The contribution is plausible and the direction is promising, but the paper needs substantial additional control experiments and a re-framed evaluation before the headline claims can be accepted.

major comments (3)
  1. [A.1 and §2.1] The central premise that modern image generation models possess 'implicit temporal understanding' that a grid layout can unlock is not supported by the evidence provided. Appendix A.1's zero-shot test shows that all three models (DALLE-3, Flux, Imagen3) produce 'random orientations' when given explicit motion instructions such as 'rotate clockwise'; this is evidence against, not for, implicit temporal understanding. Since the paper's 'zero-scratch' claim and the efficiency advantage rest on reusing FLUX's temporal priors, the authors must either provide direct evidence of such priors or run an ablation that isolates the grid reformulation from the LoRA fine-tuning and the temporal loss (e.g., the same LoRA and losses applied to a non-grid video formulation, or the same grid pipeline initialized from an image model without prior video exposure). Without such a control, the observed gains could be attributed to the training data and the temporal loss rather than to the grid representation.
  2. [§3.1 and Eq. (12) / Appendix A.3] The data-efficiency claim of '~1000× reduction' is not supported by the experimental setup described in §3.1. The coarse phase uses WebVid and TikTok datasets; WebVid alone contains approximately 2.5M video clips and TikTok contains many more. Equation (12) compares '<35K videos (our method)' against '>35M videos (previous methods),' but the paper does not disclose the number of videos actually sampled from WebVid/TikTok for GRID training. If the full WebVid or TikTok collections were used, the 1000× claim would be off by orders of magnitude. The authors need to state the exact number of training videos used (or a specific subsample size) in §3.1 and Appendix A.3, or revise the claim accordingly.
  3. [Tables 1–2 and Appendix A.6] The quantitative comparisons are not controlled and do not support the claims of state-of-the-art performance and 67× speedup. For multi-view generation, the test set is 30 Objaverse objects; for image-to-video, 100 TikTok videos; no error bars or significance tests are reported. More importantly, Appendix A.6 states that multi-view outputs are post-processed with Real-ESRGAN super-resolution (from 256×256 to 1024×1024) before scoring, whereas the baselines are not post-processed. This confound alone could explain part of the CLIP-F and FVD gains. The inference-time comparison (6 minutes vs. 405 minutes) also compares pipelines with different output resolutions and post-processing steps. The paper should report matched evaluation numbers: same resolution, same post-processing applied to all methods, and multiple seeds with confidence intervals.
minor comments (8)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract says 'up to 67 faster inference speeds'; the multiplication symbol is missing and the phrase should read 'up to 67× faster inference speeds.'
  2. [§3.2] In the multi-view paragraph, 'achievesstate-of-the-art' is missing a space; it should be 'achieves state-of-the-art.'
  3. [Eqs. (5)–(6)] The indexing in the flow loss definition is unclear. For an m×n grid, columns run from 0 to n−1; the 'across rows' term uses index n (instead of n−1 and 0), and the boundary condition for j=0 is not spelled out. Please clarify the exact indices and boundary handling.
  4. [Appendix A.3] The display of 'Data Reduction ≈ > 35M videos (previous methods) / < 35K videos (our method) = 1000×' is visually confusing; please write it as a proper equation or fraction.
  5. [Appendix A.7] The line '90-97' is incomplete; it should specify what is reduced by 90-97% (presumably parameters).
  6. [Appendix A.4] The reference to 'IC-LoRA [63, 64]' appears inaccurate: [63] is In-Context LoRA for Diffusion Transformers, but [64] is Group Diffusion Transformers. Please correct the citation grouping.
  7. [Tables 1–2] The 'Time' row in Table 1 says 'whole time cost during inference in A800,' while Table 2 says 'average sampling time per sequence in A800 GPU.' Please use consistent units and state explicitly whether post-processing time is included.
  8. [§2.1] The notation clayout and ccontent is used in the text but only defined in the Figure 2 caption; please define these symbols explicitly in the body of §2.1.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the method is empirically trained and evaluated, and the cited equations are training objectives, not self-referential predictions.

full rationale

GRID's derivation chain is empirical rather than deductive: the paper fine-tunes FLUX with a parallel flow-matching objective plus a temporal smoothness loss and reports external benchmark numbers (FVD, IS, CLIP, PSNR). No fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction, no equation reduces to another by construction, and the self-citations [73, 74] appear only in the impact statement and are not load-bearing. The core premise that FLUX possesses transferable implicit temporal understanding is asserted and only loosely supported by Appendix A.1, where the zero-shot test mainly probes static grid layouts and actually reports that explicit motion instructions produce 'random orientations across all models'; this is a validity/ablation gap (no non-grid baseline with identical LoRA, data, and losses isolates the grid), not circularity. Two internal inconsistencies should be weighed as correctness risks rather than circularity: (i) Eq. (12) claims 'our method <35K videos' while §3.1 says coarse training uses WebVid and TikTok, and WebVid alone contains millions of clips, so the 1000× data reduction is not justified unless a specific subsample is disclosed; (ii) Appendix A.6 applies Real-ESRGAN post-processing to multi-view outputs, so some comparisons mix pipelines. These issues undermine efficiency or attribution claims but do not make the reported predictions equivalent to the paper's inputs by construction.

Assumptions & free parameters 8 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central method rests on a pretrained model (FLUX), several hand-selected hyperparameters, and three datasets. There are no new physical entities or forces. The key ad hoc component is the temporal loss Lflow, which is designed to enforce smoothness and then used to claim improved temporal consistency; this is a modeling choice rather than a discovered law.

free parameters (8)
  • temporal_loss_max_weight = 0.5
    Maximum weight alpha for Lflow in Eq. (3), annealed from 0 during training; chosen by hand.
  • inference_noise_T = 0.8-1.0
    Noise level in Eq. (9) for reference-guided generation; hand-tuned for diversity-fidelity trade-off.
  • grid_layout = 4x4, 8x8, 4x6
    Grid dimensions per task; set the number of frames and per-frame resolution.
  • lora_rank = 16-256
    LoRA rank for fine-tuning; capacity and compute trade-off, chosen per variant.
  • guidance_scale = 3.5
    Classifier-free guidance at inference, fixed across tasks.
  • sampling_steps = 20
    Number of flow-matching sampling steps during inference.
  • training_steps = 10K (video)
    Fine-tuning steps for video generation; multi-view uses 1.5K steps.
  • post_upscale_factor = 4x (Real-ESRGAN)
    Super-resolution applied to multi-view outputs before evaluation (Appendix A.6).
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption FLUX-dev pretrained weights provide a strong spatial prior that transfers to grid layouts
    The entire method depends on this transfer; Appendix A.1 motivates it with qualitative zero-shot tests but does not prove it.
  • domain assumption Self-attention over grid cells can model temporal relationships
    Section 2.1 and Figure 2 assert that cross-frame attention (Ii, Ij) learns motion without a temporal module.
  • standard math Flow matching (Esser et al., 2024) is a valid training objective
    Used in Eq. (1)-(4); relies on prior flow-matching theory.
  • domain assumption WebVid, TikTok, and Objaverse provide adequate temporal and multi-view training signal
    No analysis of dataset bias or coverage; the paper relies on these for the coarse phase.
  • ad hoc to paper Temporal loss on noise-prediction deltas encourages motion coherence
    Lflow in Eq. (5)-(7) is a novel regularizer; no theoretical link to real motion is given.
  • domain assumption FVD, CLIP, and PSNR are valid evaluation metrics for the claimed capabilities
    Used in Tables 1-3; FVD sensitivity on small samples is debated.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Grid: Omni Visual Generation." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/LWGRRDK7

@misc{pith2026241210718,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Grid: Omni Visual Generation},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/LWGRRDK7}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.10718}
}
read the original abstract

Visual generation has witnessed remarkable progress in single-image tasks, yet extending these capabilities to temporal sequences remains challenging. Current approaches either build specialized video models from scratch with enormous computational costs or add separate motion modules to image generators, both requiring learning temporal dynamics anew. We observe that modern image generation models possess underutilized potential in handling structured layouts with implicit temporal understanding. Building on this insight, we introduce GRID, which reformulates temporal sequences as grid layouts, enabling holistic processing of visual sequences while leveraging existing model capabilities. Through a parallel flow-matching training strategy with coarse-to-fine scheduling, our approach achieves up to 67 faster inference speeds while using <1/1000 of the computational resources compared to specialized models. Extensive experiments demonstrate that GRID not only excels in temporal tasks from Text-to-Video to 3D Editing but also preserves strong performance in image generation, establishing itself as an efficient and versatile omni-solution for visual generation.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.10718 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Different paradigms for temporal visual generation. (a) Motion-Scratch (e.g., SVD, AnimateDiff): learn temporal dynamics from scratch while reusing pretrained image models. (b) Full-Scratch (e.g., Sora): learn everything from scratch, requiring massive data and computational resources. (c) Zero-Scratch (GRID): reuse both spatial and temporal capabilities through grid-based reformulation, leveraging pretrained models… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Pipeline Overview. Left: GRID arranges videos into grid layouts, with text annotations combining layout format prefix and LLM-generated captions. The model is trained using LoRA fine-tuning on DIT blocks, incorporating both base loss and temporal loss to capture inter-frame relationships. Right: Grid-based reformulation naturally extends model’s built-in self-attention to include frame-wise self-attention, cross-fra… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Omni Inference Framework: By transforming temporal and view sequences into struc￾tured layout spaces, we enable a pure image-based model FLUX to tackle diverse video and multi-view tasks (text/image-to-video generation, video interpolation, and multi-view synthesis) through a unified pipeline without additional video-specific architectures. • Fine Phase: Building on the foundational knowledge from the coarse phase, … view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (11 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Zero-shot evaluation of foundation models on grid-based multi-view generation tasks before [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Comparison of attention mechanisms. (a) Traditional video diffusion models rely on [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Multi-view generation results for static objects (top six rows) and dynamic subjects (bottom [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p023_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Text-to-Video Generation of driving scenes, showcasing complex multi-vehicle scenarios [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p024_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Image-to-Video Generation of dance sequences from TikTok dataset. The leftmost column [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p024_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Zero-shot video motion clone results. Our model incorporates characteristics from different [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p025_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Creative multy-view concept generation [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p026_10.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: We only train our model using 4×4 datasets, but when at inference, we directly change prompt to ask to layout 4×8 grid. The model has not trained on these kind of dataset, but show a zero-shot generalization ability. 26 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p026_11.png]
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Zero-shot 3D editing with attribute control. Our model generates diverse variations by [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p027_12.png]
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Video restoration from degraded inputs. Left: Input sequences with Gaussian blur and [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p027_13.png]
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: Demonstration of maintained image generation capabilities. Our model preserves high [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p028_14.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 8 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. DataClaw0: Agentic Tailoring Multimodal Data from Raw Streams

    cs.LG 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 6.0 of 10

    DataClaw0 introduces an agentic data-tailoring paradigm, a 9B model trained on a synthetically generated dataset, and a new benchmark, claiming improved downstream adaptation in video generation, VQA, and GUI navigati...

  2. ReMoT: Reinforcement Learning with Motion Contrast Triplets

    cs.CV 2026-02 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Training a 4B vision-language model on rule-generated motion-contrast triplets with GRPO lifts spatio-temporal QA accuracy by about 17 points on the authors' own benchmark and by smaller margins on standard benchmarks.

  3. Autoregressive Images Watermarking through Lexical Biasing: An Approach Resistant to Regeneration Attack

    cs.CR 2025-06 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    LBW embeds watermarks into autoregressive image token maps by biasing token sampling toward a secret green list and detects them with a z-test on green-token counts.

  4. OmniConsistency: Learning Style-Agnostic Consistency from Paired Stylization Data

    cs.CV 2025-05 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    OmniConsistency is a style-agnostic consistency module for Flux that preserves structure and details during stylization with arbitrary LoRAs, reaching GPT-4o-level content consistency.

  5. MakeAnything: Harnessing Diffusion Transformers for Multi-Domain Procedural Sequence Generation

    cs.CV 2025-02 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Fine-tuning a diffusion transformer with asymmetric LoRA plus a new 24,000-sequence dataset enables multi-domain, step-by-step procedural generation and image-to-process reconstruction.

  6. LayerTracer: Cognitive-Aligned Layered SVG Synthesis via Diffusion Transformer

    cs.CV 2025-02 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A diffusion transformer trained on SVG construction sequences generates and vectorizes layered SVG graphics, breaking creation into editable steps.

  7. FonTS: Text Rendering with Typography and Style Controls

    cs.CV 2024-11 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A two-stage diffusion transformer pipeline achieves word-level typography control and style-consistent artistic text rendering.

  8. RelationAdapter: Learning and Transferring Visual Relation with Diffusion Transformers

    cs.CV 2025-06 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    A decoupled-attention adapter transfers image-pair edits to new photos in diffusion transformers, trained with a new 218-task visual editing dataset.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

76 extracted references · 25 canonical work pages · cited by 8 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    Scaling rectified 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 rectified flow transformers for high-resolution image synthesis. In Forty-first International Conference on Machine Learning, 2024

    work page 2024

  2. [2]

    Imagen 3

    Jason Baldridge, Jakob Bauer, Mukul Bhutani, Nicole Brichtova, Andrew Bunner, Kelvin Chan, Yichang Chen, Sander Dieleman, Yuqing Du, Zach Eaton-Rosen, et al. Imagen 3. arXiv preprint arXiv:2408.07009, 2024

    arXiv 2024

  3. [3]

    Improving image generation with better captions

    James Betker, Gabriel Goh, Li Jing, Tim Brooks, Jianfeng Wang, Linjie Li, Long Ouyang, Juntang Zhuang, Joyce Lee, Yufei Guo, et al. Improving image generation with better captions. Computer Science. https://cdn. openai. com/papers/dall-e-3. pdf, 2(3):8, 2023

    2023

  4. [4]

    Visual autoregressive modeling: Scalable image generation via next-scale prediction

    Keyu Tian, Yi Jiang, Zehuan Yuan, Bingyue Peng, and Liwei Wang. Visual autoregressive modeling: Scalable image generation via next-scale prediction. arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.02905, 2024

    arXiv 2024

  5. [5]

    GLM: general language model pretraining with autoregressive blank infilling

    Zhengxiao Du, Yujie Qian, Xiao Liu, Ming Ding, Jiezhong Qiu, Zhilin Yang, and Jie Tang. GLM: general language model pretraining with autoregressive blank infilling. pages 320–335, 2022

    work page 2022

  6. [6]

    GPT-4 technical report

    OpenAI. GPT-4 technical report. arXiv:2303.08774, 2023

    arXiv 2023

  7. [7]

    Frozen in time: A joint video and image encoder for end-to-end retrieval

    Max Bain, Arsha Nagrani, G¨ul Varol, and Andrew Zisserman. Frozen in time: A joint video and image encoder for end-to-end retrieval. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF international conference on computer vision, pages 1728–1738, 2021

    work page 2021

  8. [8]

    Self-supervised 3d representation learning of dressed humans from social media videos

    Yasamin Jafarian and Hyun Soo Park. Self-supervised 3d representation learning of dressed humans from social media videos. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 45(7):8969–8983, 2022

    work page 2022

Show all 76 references
  1. [9]

    Objaverse: A universe of annotated 3d objects

    Matt Deitke, Dustin Schwenk, Jordi Salvador, Luca Weihs, Oscar Michel, Eli VanderBilt, Ludwig Schmidt, Kiana Ehsani, Aniruddha Kembhavi, and Ali Farhadi. Objaverse: A universe of annotated 3d objects. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Rec...

    2023

  2. [10]

    Ucf101: A dataset of 101 human actions classes from videos in the wild

    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

    2012 arXiv

  3. [11]

    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

    2019

  4. [12]

    An empirical study on evaluation metrics of generative adversarial networks

    Qiantong Xu, Gao Huang, Yang Yuan, Chuan Guo, Yu Sun, Felix Wu, and Kilian Weinberger. An empirical study on evaluation metrics of generative adversarial networks. arXiv preprint arXiv:1806.07755, 2018

    2018 arXiv

  5. [13]

    Diffusion4d: Fast spatial-temporal consistent 4d generation via video diffusion models

    Hanwen Liang, Yuyang Yin, Dejia Xu, Hanxue Liang, Zhangyang Wang, Konstantinos N Plataniotis, Yao Zhao, and Yunchao Wei. Diffusion4d: Fast spatial-temporal consistent 4d generation via video diffusion models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.16645, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  6. [14]

    Animate124: Animating one image to 4d dynamic scene

    Yuyang Zhao, Zhiwen Yan, Enze Xie, Lanqing Hong, Zhenguo Li, and Gim Hee Lee. Animate124: Animating one image to 4d dynamic scene. arXiv preprint arXiv:2311.14603, 2023

    2023 arXiv

  7. [15]

    Sherwin Bahmani, Ivan Skorokhodov, Victor Rong, Gordon Wetzstein, Leonidas Guibas, Peter Wonka, Sergey Tulyakov, Jeong Joon Park, Andrea Tagliasacchi, and David B. Lindell. 4d-fy: Text-to-4d generation using hybrid score distillation sampling. IEEE Conference on Computer Visio...

    2024

  8. [16]

    Stag4d: Spatial-temporal anchored generative 4d gaussians

    Yifei Zeng, Yanqin Jiang, Siyu Zhu, Yuanxun Lu, Youtian Lin, Hao Zhu, Weiming Hu, Xun Cao, and Yao Yao. Stag4d: Spatial-temporal anchored generative 4d gaussians. 2024

    2024

  9. [17]

    4dgen: Grounded 4d content generation with spatial-temporal consistency

    Yuyang Yin, Dejia Xu, Zhangyang Wang, Yao Zhao, and Yunchao Wei. 4dgen: Grounded 4d content generation with spatial-temporal consistency. arXiv preprint arXiv:2312.17225, 2023

    2023 arXiv

  10. [18]

    Animated- iff: Animate your personalized text-to-image diffusion models without specific tuning

    Yuwei Guo, Ceyuan Yang, Anyi Rao, Yaohui Wang, Yu Qiao, Dahua Lin, and Bo Dai. Animated- iff: Animate your personalized text-to-image diffusion models without specific tuning. arXiv preprint arXiv:2307.04725, 2023

    2023 arXiv

  11. [19]

    Open-sora: Democratizing efficient video production for all

    Zangwei Zheng, Xiangyu Peng, Tianji Yang, Chenhui Shen, Shenggui Li, Hongxin Liu, Yukun Zhou, Tianyi Li, and Yang You. Open-sora: Democratizing efficient video production for all. arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.20404, 2024. 10

    2024 arXiv

  12. [20]

    Cosmos world foundation model platform for physical ai

    Niket Agarwal, Arslan Ali, Maciej Bala, Yogesh Balaji, Erik Barker, Tiffany Cai, Prithvijit Chattopadhyay, Yongxin Chen, Yin Cui, Yifan Ding, et al. Cosmos world foundation model platform for physical ai. arXiv preprint arXiv:2501.03575, 2025

    2025 arXiv

  13. [21]

    Cogvideox: Text-to-video diffusion models with an expert transformer

    Zhuoyi Yang, Jiayan Teng, Wendi Zheng, Ming Ding, Shiyu Huang, Jiazheng Xu, Yuanming Yang, Wenyi Hong, Xiaohan Zhang, Guanyu Feng, et al. Cogvideox: Text-to-video diffusion models with an expert transformer. arXiv preprint arXiv:2408.06072, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  14. [22]

    Extracting motion and appearance via inter-frame attention for efficient video frame interpolation

    Guozhen Zhang, Yuhan Zhu, Haonan Wang, Youxin Chen, Gangshan Wu, and Limin Wang. Extracting motion and appearance via inter-frame attention for efficient video frame interpolation. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 5682...

    2023

  15. [23]

    A unified pyramid recurrent network for video frame interpolation

    Xin Jin, Longhai Wu, Jie Chen, Youxin Chen, Jayoon Koo, and Cheul-hee Hahm. A unified pyramid recurrent network for video frame interpolation. In Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, 2023

    2023

  16. [24]

    Vfimamba: Video frame interpolation with state space models, 2024

    Guozhen Zhang, Chunxu Liu, Yutao Cui, Xiaotong Zhao, Kai Ma, and Limin Wang. Vfimamba: Video frame interpolation with state space models, 2024. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2407.02315

    2024 arXiv

  17. [25]

    Deep unsupervised learning using nonequilibrium thermodynamics

    Jascha Sohl-Dickstein, Eric Weiss, Niru Maheswaranathan, and Surya Ganguli. Deep unsupervised learning using nonequilibrium thermodynamics. In International conference on machine learning, pages 2256–2265. PMLR, 2015

    2015

  18. [26]

    Denoising diffusion probabilistic models

    Jonathan Ho, Ajay Jain, and Pieter Abbeel. Denoising diffusion probabilistic models. Advances in neural information processing systems, 33:6840–6851, 2020

    2020

  19. [27]

    High-resolution image synthesis with latent diffusion models

    Robin Rombach, Andreas Blattmann, Dominik Lorenz, Patrick Esser, and Bj¨orn Ommer. High-resolution image synthesis with latent diffusion models. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pages 10684–10695, 2022

    2022

  20. [28]

    Sdxl: Improving latent diffusion models for high-resolution image synthesis

    Dustin Podell, Zion English, Kyle Lacey, Andreas Blattmann, Tim Dockhorn, Jonas M¨uller, Joe Penna, and Robin Rombach. Sdxl: Improving latent diffusion models for high-resolution image synthesis. arXiv preprint arXiv:2307.01952, 2023

    2023 arXiv

  21. [29]

    Hierarchical text-conditional image generation with clip latents

    Aditya Ramesh, Prafulla Dhariwal, Alex Nichol, Casey Chu, and Mark Chen. Hierarchical text-conditional image generation with clip latents. arXiv preprint arXiv:2204.06125, 1(2):3, 2022

    2022 arXiv

  22. [30]

    Sara Mahdavi, Rapha Gontijo Lopes, Tim Salimans, Jonathan Ho, David Fleet, and Mohammad Norouzi

    Chitwan Saharia, William Chan, Saurabh Saxena, Lala Li, Jay Whang, Emily Denton, Seyed Kamyar Seyed Ghasemipour, Burcu Karagol Ayan, S. Sara Mahdavi, Rapha Gontijo Lopes, Tim Salimans, Jonathan Ho, David Fleet, and Mohammad Norouzi. Imagen: unprecedented photorealism × deep le...

    2022

  23. [31]

    Scalable diffusion models with transformers

    William Peebles and Saining Xie. Scalable diffusion models with transformers. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision, pages 4195–4205, 2023

    2023

  24. [32]

    Flow matching for generative modeling

    Yaron Lipman, Ricky TQ Chen, Heli Ben-Hamu, Maximilian Nickel, and Matt Le. Flow matching for generative modeling. arXiv preprint arXiv:2210.02747, 2022

    2022 arXiv

  25. [33]

    BlackForest. Flux. https://github.com/black-forest-labs/flux, 2024

    2024

  26. [34]

    Exploring the limits of transfer learning with a unified text-to-text transformer

    Colin Raffel, Noam Shazeer, Adam Roberts, Katherine Lee, Sharan Narang, Michael Matena, Yanqi Zhou, Wei Li, and Peter J Liu. Exploring the limits of transfer learning with a unified text-to-text transformer. Journal of Machine Learning Research, 21(1):5485–5551, 2020

    2020

  27. [35]

    Imagen video: High definition video generation with diffusion models

    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 models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2210.02303, 2022

    arXiv

  28. [36]

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

    Andreas Blattmann, Robin Rombach, Huan Ling, Tim Dockhorn, Seung Wook Kim, Sanja Fidler, and Karsten Kreis. Align your latents: High-resolution video synthesis with latent diffusion models. In CVPR, pages 22563–22575, 2023

    2023

  29. [37]

    Show-1: Marrying pixel and latent diffusion models for text-to-video generation

    David Junhao Zhang, Jay Zhangjie Wu, Jia-Wei Liu, Rui Zhao, Lingmin Ran, Yuchao Gu, Difei Gao, and Mike Zheng Shou. Show-1: Marrying pixel and latent diffusion models for text-to-video generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:2309.15818, 2023

    2023 arXiv

  30. [38]

    Stable video diffusion: Scaling latent video diffusion models to large datasets

    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. 11

    2023 arXiv

  31. [39]

    Latent video diffusion models for high-fidelity long video generation

    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, 2(3):4, 2023

    2023 arXiv

  32. [40]

    Magicvideo: Efficient video generation with latent diffusion models

    Daquan Zhou, Weimin Wang, Hanshu Yan, Weiwei Lv, Yizhe Zhu, and Jiashi Feng. Magicvideo: Efficient video generation with latent diffusion models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2211.11018, 2022

    2022 arXiv

  33. [41]

    Modelscope text-to-video technical report

    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

    2023 arXiv

  34. [42]

    Preserve your own correlation: A noise prior for video diffusion models

    Songwei Ge, Seungjun Nah, Guilin Liu, Tyler Poon, Andrew Tao, Bryan Catanzaro, David Jacobs, Jia-Bin Huang, Ming-Yu Liu, and Yogesh Balaji. Preserve your own correlation: A noise prior for video diffusion models. In CVPR, pages 22930–22941, 2023

    2023

  35. [43]

    Internvid: A large-scale video-text dataset for multimodal understanding and generation

    Yi Wang, Yinan He, Yizhuo Li, Kunchang Li, Jiashuo Yu, Xin Ma, Xinyuan Chen, Yaohui Wang, Ping Luo, Ziwei Liu, et al. Internvid: A large-scale video-text dataset for multimodal understanding and generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:2307.06942, 2023

    2023 arXiv

  36. [44]

    Videofactory: Swap attention in spatiotemporal diffusions for text-to-video generation

    Wenjing Wang, Huan Yang, Zixi Tuo, Huiguo He, Junchen Zhu, Jianlong Fu, and Jiaying Liu. Videofactory: Swap attention in spatiotemporal diffusions for text-to-video generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:2305.10874, 2023

    2023 arXiv

  37. [45]

    Make-a-video: Text-to-video generation without text-video data

    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, 2022

    2022 arXiv

  38. [46]

    Make pixels dance: High-dynamic video generation

    Yan Zeng, Guoqiang Wei, Jiani Zheng, Jiaxin Zou, Yang Wei, Yuchen Zhang, and Hang Li. Make pixels dance: High-dynamic video generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:2311.10982, 2023

    2023 arXiv

  39. [47]

    Stablevideo: Text-driven consistency-aware diffusion video editing

    Wenhao Chai, Xun Guo, Gaoang Wang, and Yan Lu. Stablevideo: Text-driven consistency-aware diffusion video editing. In CVPR, pages 23040–23050, 2023

    2023

  40. [48]

    Novel view synthesis with diffusion models

    Daniel Watson, William Chan, Ricardo Martin-Brualla, Jonathan Ho, Andrea Tagliasacchi, and Mohammad Norouzi. Novel view synthesis with diffusion models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2210.04628, 2022

    2022 arXiv

  41. [49]

    Zero- 1-to-3: Zero-shot one image to 3d object

    Ruoshi Liu, Rundi Wu, Basile Van Hoorick, Pavel Tokmakov, Sergey Zakharov, and Carl V ondrick. Zero- 1-to-3: Zero-shot one image to 3d object. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF international conference on computer vision, pages 9298–9309, 2023

    2023

  42. [50]

    Mvdream: Multi-view diffusion for 3d generation

    Yichun Shi, Peng Wang, Jianglong Ye, Mai Long, Kejie Li, and Xiao Yang. Mvdream: Multi-view diffusion for 3d generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:2308.16512, 2023

    2023 arXiv

  43. [51]

    Wonder3d: Single image to 3d using cross-domain diffusion

    Xiaoxiao Long, Yuan-Chen Guo, Cheng Lin, Yuan Liu, Zhiyang Dou, Lingjie Liu, Yuexin Ma, Song-Hai Zhang, Marc Habermann, Christian Theobalt, et al. Wonder3d: Single image to 3d using cross-domain diffusion. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Patter...

    2024

  44. [52]

    Zero123++: a single image to consistent multi-view diffusion base model

    Ruoxi Shi, Hansheng Chen, Zhuoyang Zhang, Minghua Liu, Chao Xu, Xinyue Wei, Linghao Chen, Chong Zeng, and Hao Su. Zero123++: a single image to consistent multi-view diffusion base model. arXiv preprint arXiv:2310.15110, 2023

    2023 arXiv

  45. [53]

    Yuanxun Lu, Jingyang Zhang, Shiwei Li, Tian Fang, David McKinnon, Yanghai Tsin, Long Quan, Xun Cao, and Yao Yao. Direct2. 5: Diverse text-to-3d generation via multi-view 2.5 d diffusion. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages...

    2024

  46. [55]

    Syncdreamer: Generating multiview-consistent images from a single-view image

    Yuan Liu, Cheng Lin, Zijiao Zeng, Xiaoxiao Long, Lingjie Liu, Taku Komura, and Wenping Wang. Syncdreamer: Generating multiview-consistent images from a single-view image. arXiv preprint arXiv:2309.03453, 2023

    2023 arXiv

  47. [56]

    Era3d: High-resolution multiview diffusion using efficient row-wise attention

    Peng Li, Yuan Liu, Xiaoxiao Long, Feihu Zhang, Cheng Lin, Mengfei Li, Xingqun Qi, Shanghang Zhang, Wenhan Luo, Ping Tan, et al. Era3d: High-resolution multiview diffusion using efficient row-wise attention. arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.11616, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  48. [57]

    Hunyuan3d-1.0: A unified framework for text-to-3d and image-to-3d generation

    Xianghui Yang, Huiwen Shi, Bowen Zhang, Fan Yang, Jiacheng Wang, Hongxu Zhao, Xinhai Liu, Xinzhou Wang, Qingxiang Lin, Jiaao Yu, et al. Hunyuan3d-1.0: A unified framework for text-to-3d and image-to-3d generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:2411.02293, 2024. 12

    2024 arXiv

  49. [58]

    Dreamgaussian4d: Generative 4d gaussian splatting

    Jiawei Ren, Liang Pan, Jiaxiang Tang, Chi Zhang, Ang Cao, Gang Zeng, and Ziwei Liu. Dreamgaussian4d: Generative 4d gaussian splatting. arXiv preprint arXiv:2312.17142, 2023

    2023 arXiv

  50. [59]

    Sv4d: Dynamic 3d content generation with multi-frame and multi-view consistency

    Yiming Xie, Chun-Han Yao, Vikram V oleti, Huaizu Jiang, and Varun Jampani. Sv4d: Dynamic 3d content generation with multi-frame and multi-view consistency. arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.17470, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  51. [60]

    Dimen- sionx: Create any 3d and 4d scenes from a single image with controllable video diffusion

    Wenqiang Sun, Shuo Chen, Fangfu Liu, Zilong Chen, Yueqi Duan, Jun Zhang, and Yikai Wang. Dimen- sionx: Create any 3d and 4d scenes from a single image with controllable video diffusion. arXiv preprint arXiv:2411.04928, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  52. [61]

    Cat4d: Create anything in 4d with multi-view video diffusion models

    Rundi Wu, Ruiqi Gao, Ben Poole, Alex Trevithick, Changxi Zheng, Jonathan T Barron, and Alek- sander Holynski. Cat4d: Create anything in 4d with multi-view video diffusion models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2411.18613, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  53. [62]

    Videopoet: A large language model for zero-shot video generation

    Dan Kondratyuk, Lijun Yu, Xiuye Gu, Jos´e Lezama, Jonathan Huang, Grant Schindler, Rachel Hornung, Vighnesh Birodkar, Jimmy Yan, Ming-Chang Chiu, et al. Videopoet: A large language model for zero-shot video generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:2312.14125, 2023

    2023 arXiv

  54. [63]

    In-context lora for diffusion transformers

    Lianghua Huang, Wei Wang, Zhi-Fan Wu, Yupeng Shi, Huanzhang Dou, Chen Liang, Yutong Feng, Yu Liu, and Jingren Zhou. In-context lora for diffusion transformers. arXiv preprint arxiv:2410.23775, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  55. [64]

    Group diffusion transformers are unsupervised multitask learners

    Lianghua Huang, Wei Wang, Zhi-Fan Wu, Huanzhang Dou, Yupeng Shi, Yutong Feng, Chen Liang, Yu Liu, and Jingren Zhou. Group diffusion transformers are unsupervised multitask learners. arXiv preprint arxiv:2410.15027, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  56. [65]

    Instant3d: Fast text-to-3d with sparse-view generation and large reconstruction model

    Jiahao Li, Hao Tan, Kai Zhang, Zexiang Xu, Fujun Luan, Yinghao Xu, Yicong Hong, Kalyan Sunkavalli, Greg Shakhnarovich, and Sai Bi. Instant3d: Fast text-to-3d with sparse-view generation and large reconstruction model. arXiv preprint arXiv:2311.06214, 2023

    2023 arXiv

  57. [66]

    Wetzstein

    Shengqu Cai, Eric Chan, Yunzhi Zhang, Leonidas Guibas, Jiajun Wu, and Gordon. Wetzstein. Diffusion self-distillation for zero-shot customized image generation. In CVPR, 2025

    2025

  58. [67]

    Omnicontrol: Control any joint at any time for human motion generation

    Yiming Xie, Varun Jampani, Lei Zhong, Deqing Sun, and Huaizu Jiang. Omnicontrol: Control any joint at any time for human motion generation. In The Twelfth International Conference on Learning Representations, 2024. URL https://openreview.net/forum?id=gd0lAEtWso

    2024

  59. [68]

    Real-esrgan: Training real-world blind super- resolution with pure synthetic data

    Xintao Wang, Liangbin Xie, Chao Dong, and Ying Shan. Real-esrgan: Training real-world blind super- resolution with pure synthetic data. In International Conference on Computer Vision Workshops (ICCVW)

  60. [69]

    T2v-compbench: A comprehensive benchmark for compositional text-to-video generation

    Kaiyue Sun, Kaiyi Huang, Xian Liu, Yue Wu, Zihan Xu, Zhenguo Li, and Xihui Liu. T2v-compbench: A comprehensive benchmark for compositional text-to-video generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.14505, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  61. [70]

    Is a 3d-tokenized llm the key to reliable autonomous driving? arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.18361, 2024

    Yifan Bai, Dongming Wu, Yingfei Liu, Fan Jia, Weixin Mao, Ziheng Zhang, Yucheng Zhao, Jianbing Shen, Xing Wei, Tiancai Wang, et al. Is a 3d-tokenized llm the key to reliable autonomous driving? arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.18361, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  62. [71]

    Anydressing: Customizable multi-garment virtual dressing via latent diffusion models

    Xinghui Li, Qichao Sun, Pengze Zhang, Fulong Ye, Zhichao Liao, Wanquan Feng, Songtao Zhao, and Qian He. Anydressing: Customizable multi-garment virtual dressing via latent diffusion models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.04146, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  63. [72]

    Spf-portrait: Towards pure portrait customization with semantic pollution-free fine-tuning

    Xiaole Xian, Zhichao Liao, Qingyu Li, Wenyu Qin, Pengfei Wan, Weicheng Xie, Long Zeng, Linlin Shen, and Pingfa Feng. Spf-portrait: Towards pure portrait customization with semantic pollution-free fine-tuning. arXiv preprint arXiv:2504.00396, 2025

    2025 arXiv

  64. [73]

    Codeswap: Symmetrically face swapping based on prior codebook

    Xiangyang Luo, Xin Zhang, Yifan Xie, Xinyi Tong, Weijiang Yu, Heng Chang, Fei Ma, and Fei Richard Yu. Codeswap: Symmetrically face swapping based on prior codebook. In Proceedings of the 32nd ACM International Conference on Multimedia, pages 6910–6919, 2024

    2024

  65. [74]

    Prompt-agnostic adversarial perturbation for customized diffusion models

    Cong Wan, Yuhang He, Xiang Song, and Yihong Gong. Prompt-agnostic adversarial perturbation for customized diffusion models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2408.10571, 2024. 13 A Appendix A.1 Why Flux? Zero-shot Analysis of Foundation Models To better understand the layout capabilities o...

    2024 arXiv

  66. [75]

    Architectural Efficiency: Our grid-based framework requires only 160M additional parameters while maintaining competitive performance. This efficiency stems from: • Treating temporal sequences as spatial layouts, enabling parallel processing • Leveraging existing image generat...

  67. [76]

    Data Efficiency: We achieve remarkable data efficiency improvements: Data Reduction ≈ > 35M videos (previous methods) < 35K videos (our method) = 1000× (12) This efficiency is achieved through: • Strategic use of grid-based training that maximizes information extraction from e...

  68. [77]

    Computational Accessibility: Our approach enables high-quality video generation while main- taining accessibility for research environments with limited computational resources: • Training can be completed on standard research GPUs • Inference requires significantly less memor...

    1987

Pith tools

Reviewed August 11, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.