PapersWithELO
← ICLR 2024 leaderboard

MoLE: Human-centric Text-to-image Diffusion with Mixture of Low-rank Experts

Jie Zhu, Yixiong Chen, Mingyu Ding, Ping Luo, Leye Wang, Jingdong Wang

generative modelsdiffusion modelhuman-centric image generation
24.00100
Fused
band ≈ ±14 pct pts (from σ = 0.28)
22.20100
Mimo
band ≈ ±21 pct pts (from σ = 0.41)
28.10100
DeepSeek
band ≈ ±20 pct pts (from σ = 0.39)

OpenReview ground truth

Rejected

Abstract

Text-to-image diffusion has attracted vast attention due to its impressive imagegeneration capabilities. However, when it comes to human-centric text-to-image generation, particularly in the context of faces and hands, the results often fall short of naturalness due to insufficient training priors. We alleviate the issue in this work from two perspectives. 1) From the data aspect, we carefully collect a human-centric dataset comprising approximately one million high-quality human-in-the-scene images and two specific sets of close-up images of faces and hands. These datasets collectively provide a rich prior knowledge base to enhance the human-centric image generation capabilities of the diffusion model. 2) On the methodological front, we propose a simple yet effective method called Mixture of Low-rank Experts (MoLE) by considering low-rank modules trained on closeup hand and face images respectively as experts. This concept draws inspiration from our observation of low-rank refinement, where a low-rank module trained by a customized close-up dataset has the potential to enhance the corresponding image part when applied at an appropriate scale. To validate the superiority of MoLE in the context of human-centric image generation compared to state-of-the-art, we construct two benchmarks and perform evaluations with diverse metrics and human studies. More visualization, datasets, models, and code will be released on our webpage https://sites.google.com/view/mole4diffuser/.

Author context

Most prolific author: 19 submissions (credibility 0.23).

Delta if applied: -1.1 percentile

Aggregate statistics only — no individual author rankings.

Ranking trajectory

Percentile by tournament round — convergence indicates rating stability.

Battle history — 36 comparisons

Ranked above opponent in 45% of matchups.

Judge assessments

Mean overall score 0.0 ± 0.0 (n = 36)