MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7131092999 · doi:10.1109/iccvw69036.2025.00724

Target Attribute Diffusion Models

2025· article· W7131092999 on OpenAlexaff
William Loh, Yanting Miao, Suraj Kothawade

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Language
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicConsumer Market Behavior and Pricing
Canadian institutionsVector InstituteUniversity of Waterloo
FundersGoogle
KeywordsSharpeningBrightnessDiffusionClassifier (UML)Pattern recognition (psychology)Diffusion mapMotion (physics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Diffusion models have shown notable success in generating images conditioned on textual prompts, enabling users to edit images at a coarse scale with well-aligned text-to-image models. ControlNet [31] enhances these capabilities by allowing diffusion models to edit aspects such as pose, position, and edges according to reference visual motion information in a qualitative manner. However, diffusion models still face challenges in measurable and quantitative applications, such as applying sharpening or color enhancement effects. We call quantities such as brightness and saturation, attributes. In this work, we introduce Target Attribute Diffusion Models (TADM), which enable diffusion models to incorporate additional conditioning on continuous random variables. Unlike classifier-guidance methods, which require training an explicit classifier [30], TADM supports real-valued conditional variables. We also propose a new architecture called attribute carrier between the text embeddings and the new conditioning variable. Experiments were conducted on three attributes: color saturation, sharpness and human preference. TADM outperformed the baseline algorithm on a single prompt, single attribute experiment. In addition, TADM demonstrates improvement in the multiple prompt experiments with respect to two of the three attributes.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.002

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.221 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicConsumer Market Behavior and PricingFrench-language works237,207