Object-Centric Image Generation from Layouts
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We begin with the hypothesis that a model must be able to understand individual objects and relationships between objects in order to generate complex scenes with multiple objects well. Our layout-to-image-generation method, which we call Object-Centric Generative Adversarial Network (or OC-GAN), relies on a novel Scene-Graph Similarity Module (SGSM). The SGSM learns representations of the spatial relationships between objects in the scene, which lead to our model's improved layout-fidelity. We also propose changes to the conditioning mechanism of the generator that enhance its object instance-awareness. Apart from improving image quality, our contributions mitigate two failure modes in previous approaches: (1) spurious objects being generated without corresponding bounding boxes in the layout, and (2) overlapping bounding boxes in the layout leading to merged objects in images. Extensive quantitative evaluation and ablation studies demonstrate the impact of our contributions, with our model outperforming previous state-of-the-art approaches on both the COCO-Stuff and Visual Genome datasets. Finally, we address an important limitation of evaluation metrics used in previous works by introducing SceneFID -- an object-centric adaptation of the popular Fréchet Inception Distance metric, that is better suited for multi-object images.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".