MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Retraction Notice: T2VBench: Benchmarking Temporal Dynamics for Text-to-Video Generation

2024· article· W7115568583 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Language
FieldComputer Science
TopicMultimodal Machine Learning Applications
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBenchmarkingBenchmark (surveying)Dynamics (music)Generative grammarTemporal databaseTemporal scales

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

While text-to-video (T2V) generative models produce exceptionally realistic videos, they lack a comprehensive evaluation across the temporal dimension, with a limited focus on basic dynamics including camera transitions, movement, and event sequences. In this work, we introduce T2VBench, a comprehensive T2V evaluation benchmark enriched with temporal dynamics lexicons derived from curated temporal words on Wikipedia. T2VBench is a hierarchical evaluation framework comprising over 1,600 temporally rich prompts and 5,000 generated videos with human ratings, spanning 16 critical temporal evaluation dimensions. We assess three leading text-to-video models, including ZeroScope and Pika, to gauge their proficiency in handling temporal dynamics. Our analysis highlights the strengths and limitations of these models across various temporal aspects. Furthermore, we provide insights into future directions for enhancing text-to-video evaluation metrics and offer a detailed analysis of these models’ performance across the temporal dimensions. Overall, T2VBench is the first-of-its-kind comprehensive benchmark fully focused on temporal dynamics for text-to-video evaluation. It aims to facilitate scientific benchmarking of both generative models and automated metrics on text-to-video generation.

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.

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmano category
Domain: not available · Genre: Other
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Not applicablehigh
gptResearch integrity
Domain: not available · Genre: Editorial
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Not applicablehigh
models splitAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.913
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.297 · 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