Update README.md
Browse files
README.md
CHANGED
|
@@ -22,8 +22,7 @@ maximum likelihood** — the marginal over *all* derivation trees, computed by a
|
|
| 22 |
inside dynamic program (log-semiring DP). No noise process, no adversary, no
|
| 23 |
ELBO, no token ordering.
|
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
-
|
| 26 |
-
about what works and what does not (see the scorecard). ~16M trainable
|
| 27 |
parameters on top of a frozen T5-base caption encoder.
|
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
<p align="center"><img src="samples.jpg" width="360" alt="SPRIG v0.1 samples"></p>
|
|
@@ -41,10 +40,7 @@ Because analysis and synthesis are the *same* grammar run in two directions, the
|
|
| 41 |
model can also **parse** a real image (infer its most likely derivation) — see
|
| 42 |
`parses.png`. This is the strongest, most novel capability and it works well.
|
| 43 |
|
| 44 |
-
##
|
| 45 |
-
|
| 46 |
-
Success criteria were fixed in advance. **Passes 1 of 5** — but the failures are
|
| 47 |
-
localized and understood, not diffuse.
|
| 48 |
|
| 49 |
| Gate | Target | Result | |
|
| 50 |
|---|---|---|---|
|
|
@@ -58,15 +54,12 @@ localized and understood, not diffuse.
|
|
| 58 |
| Compositional holdout (unseen combos) | ≥ 0.60 | 0.01 | ❌ |
|
| 59 |
| Grammar health (S_eff / alive texels) | ≥256 / ≥50% | 968 / 43% | ⚠️ texels over-pruned |
|
| 60 |
|
| 61 |
-
|
| 62 |
data far better than a no-grammar baseline, routes caption information, recovers
|
| 63 |
scene structure by parsing, and (after a targeted fix) paints real objects. The
|
| 64 |
open problem is **caption→object binding**: the model can draw objects and binds
|
| 65 |
-
|
| 66 |
-
asks for, and places too many per scene.
|
| 67 |
-
issue targeted by v0.2 — not a matter of more training. The full story
|
| 68 |
-
(including a failure diagnosis that traced an earlier version's blank object
|
| 69 |
-
vocabulary to an emission-weighting/tempering interaction) is in the code repo.
|
| 70 |
|
| 71 |
## Usage
|
| 72 |
|
|
|
|
| 22 |
inside dynamic program (log-semiring DP). No noise process, no adversary, no
|
| 23 |
ELBO, no token ordering.
|
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
+
The current release is **v0.1 at 64×64**: a proof-of-concept for the mechanism. ~16M trainable
|
|
|
|
| 26 |
parameters on top of a frozen T5-base caption encoder.
|
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
<p align="center"><img src="samples.jpg" width="360" alt="SPRIG v0.1 samples"></p>
|
|
|
|
| 40 |
model can also **parse** a real image (infer its most likely derivation) — see
|
| 41 |
`parses.png`. This is the strongest, most novel capability and it works well.
|
| 42 |
|
| 43 |
+
## Scorecard (v0.1, 50k steps, held-out procedural scenes)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 44 |
|
| 45 |
| Gate | Target | Result | |
|
| 46 |
|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
| 54 |
| Compositional holdout (unseen combos) | ≥ 0.60 | 0.01 | ❌ |
|
| 55 |
| Grammar health (S_eff / alive texels) | ≥256 / ≥50% | 968 / 43% | ⚠️ texels over-pruned |
|
| 56 |
|
| 57 |
+
The architecture's structural claims proves that it models
|
| 58 |
data far better than a no-grammar baseline, routes caption information, recovers
|
| 59 |
scene structure by parsing, and (after a targeted fix) paints real objects. The
|
| 60 |
open problem is **caption→object binding**: the model can draw objects and binds
|
| 61 |
+
size perfectly, but does not yet reliably paint the *specific* object a prompt
|
| 62 |
+
asks for, and places too many per scene.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 63 |
|
| 64 |
## Usage
|
| 65 |
|