MotionScript: Natural Language Descriptions for Expressive 3D Human Motions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.031 | 0.014 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".