Organizations: School of Computer Science and Technology, East China Normal University, Shanghai 200062, China · Shanghai Institute of Artificial Intelligence for Education, East China Normal University, Shanghai 200062, China · School of Statistics, East China Normal University, Shanghai 200062, China · School of Artificial Intelligence, Beihang University, Beijing 100191, China · Hangzhou Research Institute, Beihang University, Hangzhou 310051, China · Zhongguancun Laboratory, Beijing 100081, China · School of Computer Science and Engineering, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, China · Department of Electrical Engineering, National Tsing Hua University, Hsinchu 300044, Taiwan
Text-driven human motion editing aims to modify existing motion sequences according to natural language instructions while maintaining the structural consistency of the original motion. Existing diffusion-based approaches struggle to balance text-responsive "change" and inertial "invariance". They often rely on coarse spatial constraints and rigid uniform time assumptions, leading to spatial motion distortions and the destruction of intrinsic physical rhythms during variable-length editing. To handle these challenges, we propose Change and Invariance Motion Editing (CIME), a unified framework that comprehensively decouples change and invariance into spatial pose and temporal rhythm dimensions. For spatial poses, our method integrates an omni-supervised positive-negative learning mechanism comprising hierarchical retrospective feature supervision, subtle motion preservation, and triplet-based semantic alignment. For temporal rhythms, we introduce the Riemannian Non-uniform Integral Manifold Mapping (RNIMM) module, which achieves high-fidelity reproduction of physical beats in the edited text via kinematics-aware non-uniform timestamps. Extensive experiments on the MotionFix and STANCE Adjustment datasets demonstrate that CIME achieves state-of-the-art performance in editing alignment and structural fidelity, validating the effectiveness of our unified architecture. Our source codes and models have been released at: github.com/ZhenwuShi/CIME.git
Figures & tables
Fig. 1: Display information on fast motion and slow motion.
Fig. 2: CIME is a unified framework for text-driven 3D human motion editing. Given a source motion and a natural language instruction, CIME edits the source motion to produce the desired target motion while balancing change and invariance across both spatial pose and temporal rhythm dimensions.
Fig. 3: Overview of CIME : First, the input text and source motion are projected into a shared semantic space via a CLIP encoder and aggregated by a Fusion Transformer. Next, the RNIMM module aligns these text-infused features with the target temporal dimension and injects them into the noise target. Finally, the composite features are processed by a Diffusion Transformer. This backbone is co-optimized by three auxiliary supervision mechanisms to achieve an optimal balance between precise editing and structure preservation, ultimately yielding the target motion.
Fig. 4: Illustration of arc length on Riemannian manifolds and encoding on non-uniform Riemannian manifolds. The orange boxes indicate regions of intense motion, and the red bars reflect higher instantaneous kinematic intensity.
Figure 5
Method
Venue
Generated-to-Target (Batch)
Generated-to-Target (Test Set)
R@1 ↑
R@2 ↑
R@3 ↑
AvgR ↓
R@1 ↑
R@2 ↑
R@3 ↑
AvgR ↓
Ground Truth
–
100
100
100
1.00
64.36
88.75
95.56
1.74
MDM [ 7 ]
ICLR’23
4.03
7.56
10.48
15.55
0.10
0.10
0.10
–
MDM-BP [ 8 ]
SIGGRAPH Asia’24
39.10
50.09
54.84
6.46
8.69
14.71
18.36
180.99
TMED [ 8 ]
SIGGRAPH Asia’24
62.90
76.51
83.06
2.71
14.51
21.72
28.73
56.63
MotionReFit [ 66 ]
CVPR’25
66.33
80.05
84.98
2.64
–
–
–
–
TABLE I: Comparison of retrieval performance (Generated-to-Target) on MotionFix dataset [ 8 ] . In the following tables and figures, R@k indicates recall at top- k ( ↑ higher is better, ↓ lower is better). * : no explicit text conditioning in the DiT stage.
Method
Venue
Generated-to-Target (Batch)
Generated-to-Target (Test Set)
R@1 ↑
R@2 ↑
R@3 ↑
AvgR ↓
R@1 ↑
R@2 ↑
R@3 ↑
AvgR ↓
TMED [ 8 ]
SIGGRAPH Asia’24
29.69
44.01
52.08
6.97
11.22
17.86
25.51
35.56
TMED w/ MCM [ 8 , 66 ]
CVPR’25
32.22
45.03
54.83
6.56
-
-
-
-
SimMotionEdit * [ 9 ]
CVPR’25
36.46
48.96
57.81
5.71
12.76
23.98
29.59
29.05
MotionReFit [ 66 ]
CVPR’25
42.45
56.25
62.76
5.12
-
-
-
-
OmniME [ 14 ]
CVPR’26
43.75
56.25
66.15
4.66
22.45
31.63
36.22
22.77
TABLE II: Comparison of retrieval performance (Generated-to-Target) on STANCE Adjustment dataset [ 66 ] .
#
Components
Generated-to-Target (Batch)
Generated-to-Target (Test Set)
Lretro
Ltriplet
Lpres
MRNIMM
R@1 ↑
R@2 ↑
R@3 ↑
AvgR ↓
R@1 ↑
R@2 ↑
R@3 ↑
AvgR ↓
1
71.04
83.96
89.58
2.22
26.88
44.27
51.98
20.88
2
✓
72.71
85.62
88.75
2.09
30.63
45.26
54.35
18.62
3
✓
73.54
85.00
88.54
2.04
28.26
42.49
51.78
17.99
4
✓
75.62
87.50
90.42
1.88
30.24
45.65
56.92
15.58
5
✓
73.54
87.92
91.04
1.88
29.64
44.27
55.34
15.71
TABLE III: Ablation study on the MotionFix dataset [ 8 ] . Comparison of retrieval performance (Generated-to-Target).
Method
Generated-to-Target (Batch)
Generated-to-Target (Test Set)
R@1 ↑
R@2 ↑
R@3 ↑
AvgR ↓
R@1 ↑
R@2 ↑
R@3 ↑
AvgR ↓
Baseline
71.04
83.96
89.58
2.22
26.88
44.27
51.98
20.88
infoNCE [ 71 ]
68.33
83.12
86.04
2.38
25.10
38.14
48.62
24.14
K-means
70.21
82.50
87.92
2.35
27.47
42.29
50.79
21.06
Triplet(Ours)
73.54
85.00
88.54
2.04
28.26
42.49
51.78
17.99
TABLE IV: Analysis of Negative Text Sampling Strategies. The evaluation is conducted on the MotionFix dataset [ 8 ] .
Method
R@1 ↑
R@2 ↑
R@3 ↑
AvgR ↓
Curriculum Scheduling
72.92
84.79
90.21
2.07
Ours
73.54
85.00
88.54
2.04
TABLE V: Comparison with Curriculum Scheduling based on Generated-to-Target (Batch).
Method
Venue
Generated-to-Target (Batch)
Generated-to-Target (Test Set)
R@1 ↑
R@2 ↑
R@3 ↑
AvgR ↓
R@1 ↑
R@2 ↑
R@3 ↑
AvgR ↓
SimMotionEdit* † [ 9 ]
CVPR’25
21.43
33.04
42.41
8.80
7.42
11.35
14.41
58.67
OmniME [ 14 ]
CVPR’26
22.40
35.94
47.40
7.44
6.63
10.71
15.82
41.23
CIME (Ours)
—
29.69
43.23
54.69
6.36
10.20
18.37
23.47
34.74
TABLE VI: Trained on MotionFix and tested on STANCE adjustment. † indicates our re-implementation.
Fig. 7: Subjective evaluation: CIME vs SimMotionEdit [ 9 ] . The charts report average human ratings (scale 1–10) across four perceptual metrics: Semantic Alignment, Motion Preservation, Transition Smoothness, and Overall Naturalness. Results for the MotionFix [ 8 ] and STANCE Adjustment [ 66 ] datasets are displayed on the left and right , respectively. Our proposed CIME consistently outperforms the baseline across all metrics on both datasets.
Text-based human motion editing aims to modify existing motion sequences according to natural language instructions while maintaining the consistency of the original motion. Existing diffusion-based approaches often rely on heuristic similarity cues or coarse global conditioning, leading to motion distortion and suboptimal semantic alignment. The key challenge lies in balancing change (i.e. precisely editing target regions) and invariance (i.e. preserving unedited parts). To handle such challenge, we propose an Omni-Supervised Positive-Negative Learning framework, named OmniME. Our method integrates three complementary components: (1) retrospective feature supervision that enforces coarse-to-fine consistency across transformer layers,(2) motion preservation mechanism that focuses on subtle variations according to the source-target similarity, and (3) triplet-based semantic alignment that strengthens text-motion correspondence. Together, these components form a unified supervision paradigm that balances change and invariance. Extensive experiments on the MotionFix and STANCE Adjustment datasets demonstrate that OmniME achieves state-of-the-art performance in editing alignment, validating the effectiveness of our unified learning framework. Our source codes and models have been released at: https://github.com/rocket-ycyer/OmniME.git
Zhenwu Shi, Jingyu Gong, Peiwei Wang +7
Shanghai Institute of Artificial Intelligence for Education, East China Normal University, China · School of Computer Science and Technology, East China Normal University, China · Shanghai Key Laboratory of Computer Software Evaluating and Testing, China +4
Instruction-driven editing of 3D human motion requires precise spatiotemporal localization, rich semantic grounding, and strict preservation of unmodified content. Existing methods either resort to training-free adaptation of generative models or rely solely on triplet supervision; however, adaptation often yields suboptimal control, and manually curated triplet datasets remain severely limited in scale and semantic diversity. To overcome this bottleneck, we ground motion editing directly within text-to-motion generation across data, architecture, and inference. At the data level, we develop a closed-loop synthesis-and-verification pipeline that produces Omni-MoEdit, a large-scale dataset spanning body-part, amplitude, temporal, action, and style edits. At the architectural level, we introduce UniMoFlow, a unified latent flow-matching model that shares broad semantic and kinematic knowledge between generation and editing. At the inference level, SAFE (Source-Anchored Flow Editing) complements UniMoFlow with controllable, source-anchored refinement. Furthermore, we augment standard evaluations with semantics-aware metrics to account for valid edits that inherently deviate from a single ground-truth reference. Extensive experiments demonstrate improved target-text alignment, edit effectiveness, and cycle consistency, while maintaining competitive source fidelity and text-to-motion generation quality.
Yilei Hua, Beibei Jing, Ce Zheng +3
School of Computer Science, Huazhong University of Science and Technology · School of Software Technology, Zhejiang University
Text-driven human motion editing aims to realize a requested change while preserving compatible source content. Existing diffusion editors rely largely on learned conditioning for preservation of the unedited part, yet their outputs can lose temporal detail as denoising proceeds. We propose the Source-Preserving Denoising framework (SuperMotion), which explicitly reuses the source at each reverse step for source preservation. We first align the source motion to the output timeline and predict a preservation gate that controls reuse across frames and feature dimensions. A clean-space source anchor then utilizes the learned preservation gate to blend the predicted clean motion with the aligned source and passes the corrected estimate directly to the sampling posterior. Because the aligned source is a realized motion rather than a regression output, the anchor injects sample-level temporal detail that a reconstruction-trained denoiser tends to smooth away. To learn effective source reuse, we supervise the anchored estimate against the editing target and match its second temporal differences through a temporal high-frequency loss. These objectives require no explicit edit masks. Extensive experiments show that SuperMotion improves editing accuracy, reaching 33.20% full-pool R@1 on MotionFix, while reducing temporal-detail attenuation and preserving motion dynamics as it realizes the requested changes. Ablations confirm that the learned preservation gate is responsible for the gain and that it reuses the source to retain the unedited content properly.
Fa-Ting Hong, Peter Wonka
King Abdullah University of Science and Technology