AIM-Bench: Benchmarking and Improving Affective Image Manipulation via Fine-Grained Hierarchical Control
Organizations: Xi’an Jiaotong University · Zhengzhou University · National University of Singapore · Fudan University · Zhejiang Lab
Abstract
Affective Image Manipulation (AIM) aims to evoke specific emotions through targeted editing. Current image editing benchmarks primarily focus on object-level modifications in general scenarios, lacking the fine-grained granularity to capture affective dimensions. To bridge this gap, we introduce the first benchmark designed for AIM termed AIM-Bench. This benchmark is built upon a dual-path affective modeling scheme that integrates the Mikels emotion taxonomy with the Valence-Arousal-Dominance framework, enabling high-level semantic and fine-grained continuous manipulation. Through a hierarchical human-in-the-loop workflow, we finally curate 800 high-quality samples covering 8 emotional categories and 5 editing types. To effectively assess performance, we also design a composite evaluation suite combining rule-based and model-based metrics to holistically assess instruction consistency, aesthetics, and emotional expressiveness. Extensive evaluations reveal that current editing models face significant challenges, most notably a prevalent positivity bias, which stemming from inherent imbalances in training data distribution. To tackle this, we propose a scalable data engine utilizing an inverse repainting strategy to construct AIM-40k, a balanced instruction-tuning dataset comprising 40k samples. Concretely, we enhance raw affective images via generative redrawing to establish high-fidelity ground truths, and synthesize input images with divergent emotions and paired precise instructions. Fine-tuning a baseline model on AIM-40k yields a 9.15% relative improvement in overall performance, demonstrating the effectiveness of our AIM-40k. Our data and related code will be made open soon.
Figures & tables
| Method | Organization | Semantic | Image Quality | Emotion | Overall | |||||
| CLIP-T | SC | PQ | ACC | F1 | ||||||
| Commercial proprietary models | ||||||||||
| Doubao-Seedream-4.0 ( Doubao, 2024b ) | ByteDance | 0.2211 | 8.28 | 5.53 | 6.97 | 7.06 | 61.55 | 61.49 | 2.54 | 48.94 |
| Qwen-Image-Edit-Plus ( Wu et al., 2025a ) | Alibaba | 0.2173 | 7.74 | 5.52 | 6.11 | 6.41 | 58.39 | 58.17 | 2.72 | 40.25 |
| Flux-kontext-max ( Batifol et al., 2025 ) | Black Forest Labs | 0.2176 | 7.72 | 5.49 | 6.77 | 5.98 | 57.01 | 56.92 | 2.67 | 41.14 |
| Doubao-Seededit-3-0-i2i ( Doubao, 2024a ) | ByteDance | 0.2175 | 7.85 | 5.42 | 6.02 | 6.03 | 52.73 | 52.63 | 2.65 | 38.79 |
| Method | Positive | Negative | ||
| ACC | ACC | |||
| Commercial proprietary models | ||||
| Doubao-Seedream-4.0 ( Doubao, 2024b ) | 66.32 | 2.00 | 56.74 | 3.09 |
| Qwen-Image-Edit-Plus ( Wu et al., 2025a ) | 62.94 | 2.10 | 53.75 | 3.36 |
| Flux-kontext-pro ( Batifol et al., 2025 ) | 61.01 | 2.18 | 47.71 | 3.36 |
| Flux-kontext-max ( Batifol et al., 2025 ) | 58.94 | 2.12 | 55.00 | 3.24 |