A Data Perspective on Enhanced Identity Preservation for Diffusion Personalization
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Large text-to-image models have revolutionized the ability to generate imagery using natural language. However, particularly unique or personal visual concepts, such as pets and furniture, will not be captured by the original model. This has led to interest in how to personalize a text-to-image model. Despite significant progress, this task remains a formidable challenge, particularly in preserving the subject's identity. Most researchers attempt to address this issue by modifying model architectures. These methods are capable of keeping the subject structure and color but fail to preserve identity details. Towards this issue, our approach takes a data-centric perspective. We introduce a novel regularization dataset generation strategy on both the text and image level. This strategy enables the model to preserve fine details of the desired subjects, such as text and logos. Our method is architecture-agnostic and can be flexibly applied on various text-to-image models. We show on established benchmarks that our data-centric approach forms the new state of the art in terms of identity preservation and text alignment.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".