MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392619076 · doi:10.1145/3613904.3642803

PromptCharm: Text-to-Image Generation through Multi-modal Prompting and Refinement

2024· preprint· en· W4392619076 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicGenerative Adversarial Networks and Image Synthesis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceUsabilityModalField (mathematics)Image editingInpaintingQuality (philosophy)Image (mathematics)Human–computer interactionGenerative grammarArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The recent advancements in Generative AI have significantly advanced the field of text-to-image generation. The state-of-the-art text-to-image model, Stable Diffusion, is now capable of synthesizing high-quality images with a strong sense of aesthetics. Crafting text prompts that align with the model’s interpretation and the user’s intent thus becomes crucial. However, prompting remains challenging for novice users due to the complexity of the stable diffusion model and the non-trivial efforts required for iteratively editing and refining the text prompts. To address these challenges, we propose PromptCharm, a mixed-initiative system that facilitates text-to-image creation through multi-modal prompt engineering and refinement. To assist novice users in prompting, PromptCharm first automatically refines and optimizes the user’s initial prompt. Furthermore, PromptCharm supports the user in exploring and selecting different image styles within a large database. To assist users in effectively refining their prompts and images, PromptCharm renders model explanations by visualizing the model’s attention values. If the user notices any unsatisfactory areas in the generated images, they can further refine the images through model attention adjustment or image inpainting within the rich feedback loop of PromptCharm. To evaluate the effectiveness and usability of PromptCharm, we conducted a controlled user study with 12 participants and an exploratory user study with another 12 participants. These two studies show that participants using PromptCharm were able to create images with higher quality and better aligned with the user’s expectations compared with using two variants of PromptCharm that lacked interaction or visualization support.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.910
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.056
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.247 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it