MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413156548 · doi:10.1109/cvpr52734.2025.02676

Controllable Human Image Generation with Personalized Multi-Garments

2025· article· en· W4413156548 on OpenAlexaff
Yisol Choi, Sangkyung Kwak, Sihyun Yu, Hyungwon Choi, Jinwoo Shin

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
Topic3D Shape Modeling and Analysis
Canadian institutionsKootenay Association for Science & Technology
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceComputer visionClothingArtificial intelligenceComputer graphics (images)Image (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present BootComp, a novel framework based on text-to-image diffusion models for controllable human image generation with multiple reference garments. Here, the main bottleneck is data acquisition for training: collecting a large-scale dataset of high-quality reference garment images per human subject is quite challenging, i.e., ideally, one needs to manually gather every single garment photograph worn by each human. To address this, we propose a data generation pipeline to construct a large synthetic dataset, consisting of human and multiple-garment pairs, by introducing a model to extract any reference garment images from each human image. To ensure data quality, we also propose a filtering strategy to remove undesirable generated data based on measuring perceptual similarities between the garment presented in human image and extracted garment. Finally, by utilizing the constructed synthetic dataset, we train a diffusion model having two parallel denoising paths that use multiple garment images as conditions to generate human images while preserving their fine-grained details. We further show the wide-applicability of our framework by adapting it to different types of reference-based generation in the fashion domain, including virtual try-on, and controllable human image generation with other conditions, e.g., pose, face, etc.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.761
Threshold uncertainty score0.245

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 communication0.0000.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.234 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topic3D Shape Modeling and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207