DS-Fusion: Artistic Typography via Discriminated and Stylized Diffusion
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We introduce a novel method to automatically generate an artistic typography by stylizing one or more letter fonts to visually convey the semantics of an input word, while ensuring that the output remains readable. To address an assortment of challenges with our task at hand including conflicting goals (artistic stylization vs. legibility), lack of ground truth, and immense search space, our approach utilizes large language models to bridge texts and visual images for stylization and build an unsupervised generative model with a diffusion model backbone. Specifically, we employ the denoising generator in Latent Diffusion Model (LDM), with the key addition of a CNN-based discriminator to adapt the input style onto the input text. The discriminator uses rasterized images of a given letter/word font as real samples and the output of the denoising generator as fake samples. Our model is coined DS-Fusion for discriminated and stylized diffusion. We showcase the quality and versatility of our method through numerous examples, qualitative and quantitative evaluation, and ablation studies. User studies comparing to strong baselines including CLIPDraw, DALL-E 2, Stable Diffusion, as well as artist-crafted typographies, demonstrate strong performance of DS-Fusion. Code is available at https://ds-fusion.github.io/.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
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".