Organizations: Faculty of Computing, Harbin Institute of Technology, Harbin, 150001, China. · Zhengzhou Advanced Research Institute of Harbin Institute of Technology, Zhengzhou, 450000, China. · Huawei Noah’s Ark Lab, Shenzhen, 518100, China. · Artificial Intelligence Research Institute, Shenzhen University of Advanced Technology, Shenzhen, 518107, China.
Emerging unified editing models have demonstrated strong capabilities in general object editing tasks. However, it remains a significant challenge to perform fine-grained editing in complex multi-entity scenes, particularly those where targets are not visually salient and require spatial reasoning. To this end, we propose InterCoG, a novel text-vision Interleaved Chain-of-Grounding reasoning framework for fine-grained image editing in complex real-world scenes. The key insight of InterCoG is to first perform object position reasoning solely within text that includes spatial relation details to explicitly deduce the location and identity of the edited target. It then conducts visual grounding via highlighting the editing targets with generated bounding boxes and masks in pixel space, and finally rewrites the editing description to specify the intended outcomes. To further facilitate this paradigm, we propose two auxiliary training modules: multimodal grounding reconstruction supervision and multimodal grounding reasoning alignment to enforce spatial localization accuracy and reasoning interpretability, respectively. We also construct GroundEdit-45K, a dataset comprising 45K grounding-oriented editing samples with detailed reasoning annotations, and GroundEdit-Bench for grounding-aware editing evaluation. Extensive experiments substantiate the superiority of our approach in highly precise edits under spatially intricate and multi-entity scenes.
Figures & tables
Fig. 1 : We present InterCoG , a novel interleaved chain-of-grounding reasoning framework capable of performing spatially precise image editing in complex scenes, particularly those demanding referential reasoning for precise target localization. InterCoG first performs textual grounding to parse the user-specified editing target, followed by visual grounding with explicit and interpretable localization cues in the form of mask and bounding boxe tags. Leveraging these grounded cues, the model is able to conduct target-faithful editing under complex multi-entity scenarios, thus enjoying better functionality and practicality in realistic applications.
Fig. 2 : GroundEdit-45K Dataset Construction Pipeline and Statistics. Left: The pipeline consists of three steps: (1) target selection and visual grounding generation; (2) instruction and text reasoning generation; and (3) context-preserving local target editing. Right: Our dataset contains 45K samples covering 8 categories of local editing types.
Fig. 3 : Overview of the Proposed InterCoG Framework. Left: Our framework performs text–vision interleaved chain-of-grounding reasoning to interpret and locate user-intended targets and formulate editing descriptions, ultimately producing precise and semantically aligned editing results. Right: Illustration of the proposed text–vision and vision–vision reasoning alignment schemes, designed to enforce coherent multimodal grounding reasoning.
Method
Color Change
Remove
Replace
Add
Appearance
Others
Average
EGA ↑
ES ↑
EGA ↑
ES ↑
EGA ↑
ES ↑
EGA ↑
ES ↑
EGA ↑
ES ↑
EGA ↑
ES ↑
EGA ↑
ES ↑
Human ↑
FLUX.2 [Pro] [ 54 ]
0.53
2.61
0.57
2.48
0.48
2.76
0.61
3.08
0.26
3.28
0.38
2.92
0.53
2.65
7.4
GPT-Image-1 [ 55 ]
0.61
2.78
0.74
2.89
0.55
3.20
0.42
2.82
0.83
3.56
0.65
3.72
0.66
2.93
8.4
GPT-Image-1.5 [ 56 ]
0.83
4.09
0.84
3.82
0.82
3.76
0.80
3.58
0.89
3.62
0.83
4.06
0.81
3.92
8.7
Nano Banana [ 57 ]
0.56
2.91
0.66
3.15
0.53
2.64
0.45
2.58
0.71
4.08
0.59
3.40
0.61
2.98
8.1
Nano Banana Pro [ 57 ]
0.82
4.11
0.85
3.94
0.80
3.96
0.83
3.72
0.92
3.38
0.90
4.30
0.87
4.02
9.2
TABLE I : Quantitative comparison on the proposed GroundEdit-Bench. EGA and ES denote the editing grounding accuracy and editing score, respectively. The “Average” column indicates the overall mean across all samples, rather than the mean of the listed categories.
Fig. 4 : Qualitative comparisons on our proposed GroundEdit-Bench. Our method consistently delivers highly precise and spatially accurate edits, particularly in multi-entity and fine-grained reasoning scenarios. Best viewed at screen!
Fig. 5 : Visualization of the interleaved chain-of-grounding reasoning processing. InterCoG first interprets user-intended referential targets via textual reasoning and then highlights the object via visualizing bounding boxes and masks in pixel space. By interleaving these multimodal grounding cues, InterCoG is able to precisely locate the editing regions and achieve spatially exact modifications. Best viewed at screen!
Method
SmartEdit Reasoning Scenarios
PSNR ↑
SSIM ↑
LPIPS ↓
CLIP Score ↑
InstructPix2Pix [ 1 ]
24.234
0.707
0.083
19.413
MagicBrush [ 2 ]
22.101
0.694
0.113
19.755
InstructDiffusion [ 64 ]
21.453
0.666
0.117
19.523
SmartEdit-7B [ 15 ]
25.258
0.742
0.055
20.950
SmartEdit-13B [ 15 ]
25.757
0.747
0.051
20.777
TABLE II : Quantitative comparison results on SmartEdit benchmark (Reasoning Scenarios).
Method
SmartEdit Understanding Scenarios
PSNR ↑
SSIM ↑
LPIPS ↓
CLIP Score ↑
InstructPix2Pix [ 1 ]
21.576
0.721
0.089
22.762
MagicBrush [ 2 ]
18.120
0.680
0.143
22.620
InstructDiffusion [ 64 ]
23.258
0.743
0.067
23.080
SmartEdit-7B [ 15 ]
22.049
0.731
0.087
23.611
SmartEdit-13B [ 15 ]
23.596
0.751
0.068
23.536
TABLE III : Quantitative comparison results on SmartEdit benchmark (Understanding Scenarios).
Method
GEdit-Bench-EN
SC ↑
PQ ↑
O ↑
InstructPix2Pix [ 1 ]
3.58
5.49
3.68
MagicBrush [ 2 ]
4.68
5.66
4.52
AnyEdit [ 3 ]
3.18
5.82
3.21
UniWorld-v1 [ 16 ]
4.93
7.43
4.85
OmniGen2 [ 29 ]
7.16
6.77
6.41
TABLE IV : Comparison of Semantic Consistency (SC), Perceptual Quality (PQ), and Over all Score (O) on GEdit-Bench.
Fig. 6 : Visualization of model performance on lobal and multi-object editing.
Variant
EGA ↑
ES ↑
w/o Reasoning
0.70
3.15
w Text-Only Grounding Reasoning
0.76
3.57
w Vision-Only Grounding Reasoning
0.74
3.23
w/o Grounding Reconstruction
0.85
3.83
w/o Reasoning Alignment
0.83
3.71
InterCoG (Ours)
0.89
4.02
TABLE V : Ablation studies on the GroundEdit-Bench.
Fig. 7 : Visual comparison between text-only grounding reasoning and interleaved chain-of-grounding reasoning.
Fig. 8 : Visual comparison with or without our proposed multimodal grounding reconstruction supervision.
Fig. 9 : Visual comparison with or without our proposed multimodal grounding reasoning alignment.
Layer
EGA ↑
ES ↑
3
0.79
3.70
10
0.83
3.95
14
0.89
4.02
28
0.84
3.89
TABLE VI : Ablation studies of layer choices for multimodal grounding reasoning alignment on GroundEdit-Bench.
Method
Latency
Peak GPU Mem.
EGA
ES
Qwen-Image-Edit
1m 50s
60.6GB
0.59
2.97
Bagel
1m 03s
30.6GB
0.64
2.70
InterCoG w/o Reasoning
1m 03s
30.6GB
0.75
3.51
InterCoG (Ours)
2m 16s
31.9GB
0.89
4.02
TABLE VII : Average latency and peak GPU memary comparison under 1024 × 1024 resolution on an NVIDIA A100 GPU.
Fig. 10 : Failure cases with ambiguous position and boundary.
Existing image editing methods struggle to perceive where to edit, especially under complex scenes and nuanced spatial instructions. To address this issue, we propose Generative Visual Chain-of-Thought (GVCoT), a unified framework that performs native visual reasoning by first generating spatial cues to localize the target region and then executing the edit. Unlike prior text-only CoT or tool-dependent visual CoT paradigms, GVCoT jointly optimizes visual tokens generated during the reasoning and editing phases in an end-to-end manner. This way fosters the emergence of innate spatial reasoning ability and enables more effective utilization of visual-domain cues. The main challenge of training GCVoT lies in the scarcity of large-scale editing data with precise edit region annotations; to this end, we construct GVCoT-Edit-Instruct, a dataset of 1.8M high-quality samples spanning 19 tasks. We adopt a progressive training strategy: supervised fine-tuning to build foundational localization ability in reasoning trace before final editing, followed by reinforcement learning to further improve reasoning and editing quality. Finally, we introduce SREdit-Bench, a new benchmark designed to comprehensively stress-test models under sophisticated scenes and fine-grained referring expressions. Experiments demonstrate that GVCoT consistently outperforms state-of-the-art models on SREdit-Bench and ImgEdit. We hope our GVCoT will inspire future research toward interpretable and precise image editing.
Zijin Yin, Tiankai Hang, Yiji Cheng +9
Beijing University of Posts and Telecommunications · Beijing Key Laboratory of Multimodal Data Intelligent Perception and Governance · Tencent Hunyuan +1
Large Language Models (LLMs) and Vision Language Models (VLMs) have shown impressive reasoning abilities, yet they struggle with spatial understanding and layout consistency when performing fine-grained visual editing. We introduce a Structured Reasoning framework that performs text-conditioned spatial layout editing via scene-graph reasoning. Given an input scene graph and a natural-language instruction, the model reasons over the graph to generate an updated scene graph that satisfies the text condition while maintaining spatial coherence. By explicitly guiding the reasoning process through structured relational representations, our approach improves both interpretability and control over spatial relationships. We evaluate our method on a new text-guided layout editing benchmark encompassing sorting, spatial alignment, and room-editing tasks. Our training paradigm yields an average 15% improvement in IoU and 25% reduction in center-distance error compared to Chain of Thought Fine-tuning (CoT-SFT) and vanilla GRPO baselines. Compared to SOTA zero-shot LLMs, our best models achieve up to 20% higher mIoU, demonstrating markedly improved spatial precision.
Text-driven instruction-based video editing in complex scenes remains challenging: purely textual prompts often fail to capture precise spatial relationships and physical constraints, resulting in target ambiguity and physically implausible outcomes. To address this, we propose a plan--guide--edit framework that explicitly bridges semantic intent and spatial execution. In our framework, a Chain-of-Thought (CoT)-enhanced multimodal large language model (MLLM) serves as a planner, performing structured reasoning over the video and instructions to derive a precise sequence of bounding boxes and attribute-enriched editing directives. These spatial priors then guide a box-conditioned mask generator, transforming ambiguous global retrieval into localized, context-aware refinement and producing masks that more accurately capture object scale, contact relationships, and placement. Building on these spatial and semantic signals, a diffusion-based editor integrates the masks, enriched instructions, and frame features to render high-fidelity edits that remain temporally coherent and spatially well aligned. Trained first in a modular manner and then jointly, our framework achieves superior performance with reduced data requirements, delivering precise localization in scenes with multiple similar objects and physically consistent object additions, and extensive experiments demonstrate state-of-the-art performance over multiple strong baseline methods. More details are available at: https://github.com/flying-sky999/CoT-Edit
Sen Liang, Fengbin Guan, Youliang Zhang +2
University of Science and Technology of China · Tsinghua University · Zhongguancun Academy