MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399607037 · doi:10.36548/jiip.2024.3.001

Harmonizing Fine-tuned Llama 2 for Content Generation with Stable Diffusion for Image Synthesis in Article Creation

2024· article· en· W4399607037 on OpenAlexaff
P Shenbagam, Thrisha Vaishnavi K S., S. Hariprakassh, K. Abhirami, B. Abiram, Rakesh Nandhaa K S.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Innovative Image Processing · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHuman Motion and Animation
Canadian institutionsArtificial Intelligence in Medicine (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContent (measure theory)DiffusionImage (mathematics)Computer scienceComputer visionArtificial intelligenceMathematicsPhysicsThermodynamicsMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The research explores the integration of generative AI in multimedia content production using a fine-tuned Llama 2 model for text generation and the Stable Diffusion algorithm for image synthesis. The research analyses the fine-tuned Llama 2-7b-chat model's adaptability to specific content generation contexts, enhanced by a unique dataset and QLoRa, a Quantized Low-Rank Adaptation for parameter-efficient fine-tuning, achieving significant reductions in training loss and nuanced quality in the generated content. Notably, the model's evaluation yielded an impressive perplexity score of 1.49, indicating advanced predictive performance. Additionally, stable diffusion's ability to transform textual descriptions into intricate images, highlighting its potential in AI-mediated content creation is demonstrated. The experiments and qualitative analyses reveal improvements in efficiency and creativity, emphasizing the collaborative potential of these models to revolutionize multidisciplinary content generation. The research underscores the transformative impact of fine-tuned generative models on content creation and offers insights into the broader implications for future AI research, while acknowledging the critical need for ethical considerations in the deployment of such technologies.

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 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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.495
Threshold uncertainty score0.362

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 communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.223 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Innovative Image ProcessingSame topicHuman Motion and AnimationFrench-language works237,207