new

Get trending papers in your email inbox!

Subscribe

Daily Papers

byAK and the research community

Nov 10

SketchAssist: A Practical Assistant for Semantic Edits and Precise Local Redrawing

Sketch editing is central to digital illustration, yet existing image editing systems struggle to preserve the sparse, style-sensitive structure of line art while supporting both high-level semantic changes and precise local redrawing. We present SketchAssist, an interactive sketch drawing assistant that accelerates creation by unifying instruction-guided global edits with line-guided region redrawing, while keeping unrelated regions and overall composition intact. To enable this assistant at scale, we introduce a controllable data generation pipeline that (i) constructs attribute-addition sequences from attribute-free base sketches, (ii) forms multi-step edit chains via cross-sequence sampling, and (iii) expands stylistic coverage with a style-preserving attribute-removal model applied to diverse sketches. Building on this data, SketchAssist employs a unified sketch editing framework with minimal changes to DiT-based editors. We repurpose the RGB channels to encode the inputs, enabling seamless switching between instruction-guided edits and line-guided redrawing within a single input interface. To further specialize behavior across modes, we integrate a task-guided mixture-of-experts into LoRA layers, routing by text and visual cues to improve semantic controllability, structural fidelity, and style preservation. Extensive experiments show state-of-the-art results on both tasks, with superior instruction adherence and style/structure preservation compared to recent baselines. Together, our dataset and SketchAssist provide a practical, controllable assistant for sketch creation and revision.

  • 6 authors
·
Dec 16, 2025

The FID Lottery: Quantifying Hidden Randomness in Generative-Model Evaluation

The Frechet Inception Distance (FID) is the de facto arbiter of image generation, yet most papers report just a single number from a single trained model using a single sampling seed. How reproducible is that number if we retrain the model, or merely resample from it? In this paper, we treat FID as a random variable on a two-axis panel of training and generation seeds, and measure its variance directly on several hundred SiT networks trained on class-conditional ImageNet 256x256. We report surprising findings: (a) Retraining the model using the same recipe with a different seed moves FID 3.2x more (in Inception feature space) than redrawing samples from a fixed network. (b) That gap is driven by three factors: random initialisation, data ordering, and the per-step Gaussian noise of the flow-matching loss. (c) Increasing compute or model size barely tightens the spread, holding the FID coefficient of variation (CoV) inside a 1-2% band. (d) Per-cell classifier-free-guidance tuning halves the spread but reshuffles which seeds work best, and a lucky training seed reaches the same FID with up to 2x less compute than an unlucky one. Based on these findings, we recommend a new FID evaluation protocol: evaluate under per-cell optimal guidance, treat any FID gap below the empirically measured ~1.3% CoV as inconclusive, and report an error bar over several training seeds rather than a single FID number.

kyutai Kyutai
·
Jun 17 1

Same Layout, Different Count: What Number Words Do Past Ten in Text-to-Image Models

Ask SD3.5-Medium for twelve of an object and then, from the same starting noise, for twenty-five. The picture keeps its layout, but the count changes about as much as it would under a new random seed, and in no consistent direction. We study what number words do once a request passes about ten objects, in five open text-to-image models. Holding the object and the starting noise fixed, we change one thing at a time, and people who never see the request count 3,088 of the images. Every model follows the number for small crowds, but only up to a point, its reach: SD3.5-M and FLUX.1-dev stop following it soon after ten, while FLUX.2 [klein] and Qwen-Image follow it loosely up to twenty-five. Beyond SD3.5-M's reach, the coarse part of the starting noise fixes the composition of the picture but not how many objects it holds: redrawing only the noise finer than an eighth of the image keeps the layout as well as a new number does, and already moves the count two-thirds as far. The number word still reaches the denoiser and acts in its first steps, but nothing we tried gives it a clear direction. Shown instead as a noised grid in the starting latent, the count is drawn: people find it in 59% of images, against 4% when it is only told. Past ten, an exact-match score barely separates a model that follows the number loosely from one that ignores it, and a relative-error score can even prefer a constant guess of sixteen. A same-noise test with a few requests per object tells them apart.

  • 2 authors
·
Nov 4