Riemannian Motion Generation: A Unified Framework for Human Motion Representation and Generation via Riemannian Flow Matching
Authors: Fangran Miao, Jian Huang, Ting Li
Organizations: Department of Data Science and Artificial Intelligence, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University · Department of Applied Mathematics, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University · Department of Data Science and Statistics, Southern University of Science and Technology
Human motion generation is often learned in Euclidean spaces, although valid motions follow structured non-Euclidean geometry. We present Riemannian Motion Generation (RMG), a unified framework that represents motion on a product manifold and learns dynamics via Riemannian flow matching. RMG factorizes motion into several manifold factors, yielding a scale-free representation with intrinsic normalization, and uses geodesic interpolation, tangent-space supervision, and manifold-preserving ODE integration for training and sampling. On HumanML3D, RMG achieves state-of-the-art FID in the HumanML3D format (0.043) and ranks first on all reported metrics under the MotionStreamer format. On MotionMillion, it also surpasses strong baselines (FID 5.6, R@1 0.86). Ablations show that the compact T+R (translation + rotations) representation is the most stable and effective, highlighting geometry-aware modeling as a practical and scalable route to high-fidelity motion generation.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: Text-to-motion samples under our Riemannian Motion Generation framework.
Format
T
ROrientation
RJoint
P
dT
dROrientation
dRJoint
dP
Foot
Ambient
Contact
Dimension
HumanML3D
✗
✗
✓
✓
✓
✓
✗
✓
✓
12J−1
MotionStreamer
✗
✗
✓
✓
✓
✓
✗
✓
✗
12J+8
DART
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✗
✓
✗
12J+12
HY-Motion
✓
✓
✓
✓
✗
✗
✗
✗
✗
9J+3
RMG (Ours)
✓
✓
✓
✗
✗
✗
✗
✗
✗
4J+3
Table 1: Comparison of motion representations. T : global translation; ROrientation : global orientation; RJoint : per-joint rotation; P : joint position; d⋅ : temporal difference of the variable. Compared to existing formats, our method adopts the most concise format, with each factor represented on its natural manifold.
Figure 2: ( Top ) Illustration of the unified Riemannian representation for articulated motion. Each motion frame can be factorized into global translation (MT) , global orientation and per-joint rotations (MR) , and local pose (MP) along with the temporal differences (TMFforF∈{T,R,P} ) . Each factor is represented on its natural Riemannian manifold, yielding a scale-free representation with intrinsic normalization. ( Bottom ) Illustration of the Riemannian flow matching process in the RMG manifold. M is defined by our proposed manifold Equation 3 . The red line is the geodesic between x0 and x1 while the yellow line with arrow is the velocity at xt .
Method
HumanML3D Format
MotionStreamer Format
FID ↓
R@1 ↑
Div →
MModality ↑
FID ↓
R@1 ↑
Div →
MModality ↑
GT
0.002
0.511
9.503
2.799
0.002
0.702
27.492
–
MLD ( 2023 )
0.473
0.481
9.724
2.413
18.236
0.546
26.352
–
T2M-GPT ( 2023 )
0.116
0.492
9.761
1.856
12.475
0.606
27.275
–
MotionGPT ( 2023 )
0.232
0.492
9.528
2.008
14.375
0.456
27.114
–
MoMask ( 2024 )
0.045
0.521
–
1.241
12.232
0.621
27.127
–
Table 2: Evaluation of text-based motion generation on HumanML3D ( Guo et al., 2022 ) dataset. Reported metrics are FID, R@1, Diversity, and MModality. The models in bold are the optimal models, and the models in underline are the sub-optimal models. The guidance scale is set to 6.5 .
Method
G.S.
FID ↓
R@1 ↑
ScaMo ( 2025 )
–
89.0
0.67
MotionMillion-3B
–
10.8
0.79
MotionMillion-7B
–
10.3
0.79
Ours (0.5B+1.7B)
2.0
5.6
0.81
Ours (0.5B+1.7B)
3.0
7.8
0.86
Table 3: Evaluation of text-based motion generation on MotionMillion ( Fan et al., 2025 ) dataset. Reported metrics are FID and R@1. In our method, 0.5B and 1.7B refer to the parameter sizes of our Riemannian flow matching model and Qwen3-1.7B, respectively. G.S. refers to the guidance scale.
Figure 3: Ablation study on different factors of our framework. All the models are trained with the same setting (including the parameter size, random seed) and evaluated on the HumanML3D benchmark.
Appendix figures & tables7 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
Method
HumanML3D Format
FID ↓
R@1 ↑
R@2 ↑
R@3 ↑
MM-Dist ↓
Div →
MM ↑
GT
0.002
0.511
0.703
0.797
2.974
9.503
2.799
MLD
0.473
0.481
0.673
0.772
3.196
9.724
2.413
T2M-GPT
0.116
0.492
0.679
0.775
3.121
9.761
1.856
MotionGPT
0.232
0.492
0.681
0.733
3.096
9.528
2.008
MoMask
0.045
0.521
0.713
0.807
2.958
–
1.241
Appendix
Table 4: Full results on the HumanML3D dataset in H3D format.
Method
MotionStreamer Format
FID ↓
R@1 ↑
R@2 ↑
R@3 ↑
MM-Dist ↓
Div →
MM ↑
GT
0.002
0.702
0.864
0.914
15.151
27.492
–
MLD
18.236
0.546
0.730
0.792
16.638
26.352
–
T2M-GPT
12.475
0.606
0.774
0.838
16.812
27.275
–
MotionGPT
14.375
0.456
0.598
0.628
17.892
27.114
–
MoMask
12.232
0.621
0.784
0.846
16.138
27.127
–
Appendix
Table 5: Full results on the HumanML3D dataset in MotionStreamer format.
Method
Guidance Scale
FID ↓
R@1 ↑
R@2 ↑
R@3 ↑
ScaMo
–
89.0
0.67
0.81
0.87
MotionMillion-3B
–
10.8
0.79
0.91
0.94
MotionMillion-7B
–
10.3
0.79
0.90
0.94
Ours (0.5B+1.7B)
2.0
5.6
0.81
0.92
0.95
Ours (0.5B+1.7B)
3.0
7.8
0.86
0.95
0.97
Appendix
Table 6: Full results of MotionMillion dataset.
Figure 4: Training loss curves for MotionMillion.
Figure 5: Gradient norm curves for MotionMillion.
Hyperparameter
RMG-base
RMG
Input Dim.
91
91
Hidden Dim.
384
1024
No. of Layers
6
24
No. of Heads
8
8
FFN Multiplier
8
4
Max Learning Rate
1e-4
1e-4
Appendix
Table 7: Training hyperparameters for different model scales.
Figure 6: The conversion functions between different motion representations.
Recent advances in diffusion and flow models have substantially improved text-driven human motion generation. Yet most methods generate in low-dimensional, temporally downsampled latent spaces learned primarily for reconstruction, a bottleneck that can limit generation quality and preclude direct manipulation of individual frames and joints. We introduce MotionSpaceFlow (MSFlow), a representation-aware flow-matching framework that predicts clean motion directly in continuous motion space without a learned encoder or decoder. To account for the anisotropic structure of direct motion representations, we propose representation-aware noise scaling and show how the initial Gaussian source scale governs the covariance of intermediate probability-path marginals. We further introduce a Representation-Aware Multimodal Diffusion Transformer (RA-MMDiT), which jointly updates token-level language and full-resolution motion features through joint attention while adapting temporal information flow to the motion representation: causal attention for incremental features defined by frame-to-frame changes, and bidirectional attention for global features such as absolute joint coordinates. Across different datasets and motion representations, MSFlow achieves state-of-the-art text-to-motion performance. Its global representation variant additionally enables zero-shot, inference-time control over any joint or frame through projection sampling without control-conditioned training, delivering leading motion quality with exact constraint satisfaction.
Flow Matching enables simulation-free training of generative models on Riemannian manifolds, yet sampling typically still relies on numerically integrating a probability-flow ODE. We propose Riemannian MeanFlow (RMF), extending MeanFlow to manifold-valued generation where velocities lie in location-dependent tangent spaces. RMF defines an average-velocity field via parallel transport and derives a Riemannian MeanFlow identity that links average and instantaneous velocities for intrinsic supervision. We make this identity practical in a log-map tangent representation, avoiding trajectory simulation and heavy geometric computations. For stable optimization, we decompose the RMF objective into two terms and apply conflict-aware multi-task learning to mitigate gradient interference. RMF also supports conditional generation via classifier-free guidance. Experiments on spheres, tori, SO(3), and SE(3) demonstrate competitive one-step sampling with improved quality-efficiency trade-offs and substantially reduced sampling cost.
Zichen Zhong, Haoliang Sun, Yukun Zhao +2
School of Software, Shandong University, Jinan, China
We introduce VideoMDM, a diffusion-based framework that trains 3D human motion priors directly from accurate 2D poses extracted from monocular videos, without any 3D ground truth. A pretrained 2D-to-3D lifter provides approximate 3D pose sequences that serve as a noisy teacher: these are diffused, denoised by the model in 3D, and supervised in 2D by reprojecting the prediction and comparing against accurate keypoints. We show that, under mild assumptions, a depth-weighted 2D reprojection loss is equivalent in expectation to direct 3D supervision, and we adapt standard 3D motion regularizers - velocity consistency and over-parameterized representation alignment - to this 2D setting. Unlike methods that lift 2D to 3D only at inference, VideoMDM learns a coherent 3D motion manifold during training. On HumanML3D it nearly closes the gap to fully 3D-supervised MDM (FID 0.88 vs 0.54); On real video datasets Fit3D and NBA the method learns to generate motions consistently preferred by humans, with strong quantitative results.