ReDesign: Recovering Editable Design Structures from Images via Agentic Decomposition

Recent image-generation models and multimodal agents can produce high-quality visuals for increasingly complex visual communication tasks. Yet their raster outputs remain difficult to use directly because meaningful content and relationships are flattened into pixels, preventing users from inspecting, modifying, rearranging, or reusing individual components. We formulate image-to-editable reconstruction, which recovers a structured, directly manipulable artifact from a raster image while preserving its visual and semantic content. The central challenge is to jointly satisfy Fidelity and Editability, which often trade off in practice. To study this task, we introduce DrawAI, comprising an agentic benchmark, DrawAI-Bench, and a reconstruction workflow, DrawAI-Flow. DrawAI-Bench spans scientific figures, presentation slides, posters, and diagrams, combining real and AI-generated images to reflect practical visual-creation scenarios. It evaluates Fidelity and Editability through a hybrid protocol of 39 criteria: deterministic rule-based metrics measure properties with direct correspondences, while asset-specific vision-language rubrics capture semantic and perceptual qualities for which exact matching is misleading. Besides, we propose DrawAI-Flow, a two-stage agentic workflow in which a Parser Agent turns extracted elements evidence into an explicit reconstruction plan, and a Reconstruction Agent realizes the plan as executable graphics code through an iterative code-render-validate-revise loop. On DrawAI-Bench, we systematically evaluate thirteen models across five agent harnesses to study the effects of model capability, harness choice, and workflow design. The results show that reconstruction quality and costs vary substantially across model-harness configurations, while DrawAI-Flow consistently improves editable structure.

Graphic design images consist of multiple editable layers, such as text, background, and decorative elements, while most generative models produce rasterized outputs without explicit layer structures, limiting downstream editing. Existing graphic design parsing methods typically rely on multi-stage pipelines combining layout prediction, matting, and inpainting, which suffer from error accumulation and limited controllability. We propose a hybrid generative framework for raster-to-layer graphic design parsing that decomposes a design image into editable text, background, and sticker layers. Text regions are parsed using a vision-language model into a text rendering protocol, enabling faithful reconstruction and flexible re-editing, while background and sticker layers are generated using a multi-branch diffusion architecture with RGBA support. We further introduce ParserReward and integrate it with Group Relative Policy Optimization to align generation quality with human design preferences. Extensive experiments on two challenging datasets, \emph{i.e.,} the Parser-40K and Crello datasets, demonstrate superior performance over existing methods, \emph{eg.,} achieving an overall average improvement of 23.7% across all metrics.

Graphic design editing requires precise manipulation of typography, layout, and visual hierarchy under strict design constraints. Following the introduction of large language models, organizations have increasingly promoted vision-language models to enhance productivity. However, current models operate on pixels and achieve only 52% constraint satisfaction on structured design edits, thereby limiting their reliability for professional workflows. We present StructuredEdit, a pipeline that reframes design editing as parameter manipulation rather than pixel generation. Our core technical contribution is Differentiable Parameter Propagation (DPP), a training method that embeds hard design constraints into vision-language model fine-tuning by backpropagating pixel-level constraint violations through a lightweight differentiable rasterizer. A hybrid candidate-and-filter pipeline produces 125k validated edit triplets. The resulting system reaches 89% constraint satisfaction versus 52% for GPT-4V, 0.82 matched-element Intersection over Union, and 76% top-1 font accuracy over the 100 most-frequent design typefaces. In a user study (N=35), editing time drops 33% and correction iterations drop 44% relative to a GPT-4V baseline.