MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

MotionScript: Natural Language Descriptions for Expressive 3D Human Motions

2025· article· W4416749668 on OpenAlexaff
Payam Jome Yazdian, Rachel Lagasse, Hamid Mohammadi, Eric Liu, Li Cheng, Angelica Lim

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Language
FieldEngineering
TopicHuman Motion and Animation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMotion (physics)Motion captureNatural languageHuman motionAction (physics)Natural language generation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We introduce MotionScript, a novel framework for generating highly detailed, natural language descriptions of 3D human motions. Unlike existing motion datasets that rely on broad action labels or generic captions, MotionScript provides fine-grained, structured descriptions that capture the full complexity of human movement—including expressive actions (e.g., emotions, stylistic walking) and interactions beyond standard motion capture datasets. MotionScript serves as both a descriptive tool and a training resource for text-to-motion models, enabling the synthesis of highly realistic and diverse human motions from text. By augmenting motion datasets with MotionScript captions, we demonstrate significant improvements in out-of-distribution motion generation, allowing large language models (LLMs) to generate motions that extend beyond existing data. Additionally, MotionScript opens new applications in animation, virtual human simulation, and robotics, providing an interpretable bridge between intuitive descriptions and motion synthesis. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first attempt to systematically translate 3D motion into structured natural language without requiring training data. Code, dataset, and examples are available at https://pjyazdian.github.io/MotionScript

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.899
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
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.267 · 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.

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

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHuman Motion and AnimationFrench-language works237,207