We introduce Semantic Task Completion Video Generation, an outcome-oriented video generation task. Under this formulation, success requires both achievement of the intended outcome and semantic grounding. Semantic grounding characterizes the correspondence between the reference image and the generated outcome in terms of high-level semantics relevant to the task. Evaluation focuses on the generated outcome and requires neither the presentation of a complete sequence of intermediate task steps nor conventional appearance consistency with the reference image. To support systematic evaluation, we construct SemComp-Data, an evaluation dataset covering six domains. Each instance comprises a reference image, a detailed instruction, a brief instruction, and an outcome-centric video clip. A scalable four-stage curation pipeline converts raw videos into standardized SemComp-Data instances. We further introduce SemComp-Bench, an evaluation protocol that uses a vision-language model (VLM) to answer structured binary questions. SemComp-Bench reports the OA Score and the GR Score for Outcome Achievement and Generation Reliability, respectively. Experiments on representative video generation models show that achieving intended outcomes while maintaining task-relevant semantic grounding in reference images remains challenging.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: Demonstration of Semantic Task Completion Video Generation, which focuses not on the transformation process but solely on outcome achievement and semantic grounding.
Figure 2: Representative SemComp-Data instances. Each example shows a reference frame, its outcome-centric video clip, and the brief instruction for compact presentation; every instance also includes a detailed instruction.
Figure 3: Overview of the four-stage SemComp-Data curation pipeline. Panels (a)–(d) show Candidate Filtering, State Mining, Video Extension, and Instruction Structuring, respectively. The right column shows the corresponding stage outputs, and the bottom row presents the final data triplet.
Figure 4: Statistics of SemComp-Data: (a) distribution of alignment types across domains, with distinct textures denoting different types; (b) high-frequency words in the instructions; and (c) distribution of evaluation instances across the six domains.
Models
Aor
Asg
Agec
Agvc
OA Score
Seedance 2.0 [ 5 ]
0.839
0.744
0.444
0.594
20.0%
Wan2.2-TI2V-5B [ 28 ]
0.589
0.400
0.689
0.922
23.3%
Wan2.2-I2V-A14B [ 28 ]
0.800
0.528
0.628
0.789
28.3%
CogVideoX1.5-5B-I2V [ 30 ]
0.550
0.389
0.506
0.744
14.4%
SkyReels-V2-I2V-14B-720P [ 7 ]
0.733
0.489
0.522
0.772
22.8%
HY † -1.5-720P-I2V
0.878
0.706
0.583
0.794
37.8%
Table 1: SemComp-Core Outcome Achievement with detailed instructions. Aor , Asg , Agec , and Agvc denote pass rates for outcome realization, semantic grounding, grounded entity consistency, and global visual continuity, respectively. The OA Score is the joint pass rate across four criteria. † HY denotes HunyuanVideo [ 27 ] . Bold and underlined values indicate the best and second-best values, respectively.
Models
Gpp
Gvc
Gafr
Gwsc
Gti
GR Score
Seedance 2.0 [ 5 ]
0.883
0.994
0.994
0.739
0.978
91.8%
Wan2.2-TI2V-5B [ 28 ]
0.794
0.978
0.889
0.722
0.889
85.4%
Wan2.2-I2V-A14B [ 28 ]
0.911
0.972
0.967
0.672
0.928
89.0%
CogVideoX1.5-5B-I2V [ 30 ]
0.944
0.811
0.772
0.583
0.828
78.8%
SkyReels-V2-I2V-14B-720P [ 7 ]
0.778
0.922
0.739
0.328
0.789
71.1%
HY † -1.5-720P-I2V
0.800
0.939
0.883
0.472
0.861
79.1%
Table 2: SemComp-Core Generation Reliability with detailed instructions. Each Gc denotes the pass rate for a reliability criterion, and the GR Score is the mean across five criteria. † HY denotes HunyuanVideo [ 27 ] . Bold and underlined values indicate the best and second-best values.
Model
Modality
Instruction Type
Aor
Asg
Agec
Agvc
OA Score
Wan2.2-A14B [ 28 ]
I2V
Detailed
0.800
0.528
0.628
0.789
28.3%
T2V
Detailed
0.889
0.522
0.317
0.117
4.4%
T2V
Brief
0.389
0.111
0.806
0.250
0.6%
CogVideoX1.5-5B [ 30 ]
I2V
Detailed
0.550
0.389
0.506
0.744
14.4%
T2V
Detailed
0.567
0.272
0.361
0.161
5.0%
T2V
Brief
0.567
0.150
0.678
0.161
0.6%
Table 3: Outcome Achievement on SemComp-Core across modalities and instruction settings. Within each model family, the I2V and T2V variants use checkpoints of the same parameter scale. Each Ac denotes a criterion-level pass rate, and the OA Score is the joint pass rate. † HY denotes HunyuanVideo [ 27 ] .
Figure 5: Generated-video examples. The outcome-centric video clip and the reference image are extracted from the same full-context video.
Configuration Group
Keyword Strings
news_keywords (13)
News; Briefing; Coverage; Current Affairs; Deep Dive; Documentary; Exclusive; Headline; Interview; Live; Live Update; Press Conference; Report.
movie_keywords (13)
Behind the scenes; Blooper; Casting; Movie Clip; Playback; Preview; Review; Spoiler; Teaser; TV Series; Talk; Talks; TalkShow.
A dish or food product is completed from ingredients.
Food Transformation
The same food item undergoes a visible cooking-related state change.
Food Plating
Food elements are arranged into a complete presentation.
Beauty and Fashion
Styling
The appearance of the same person is visibly restyled.
Tool Cleaning
A beauty or fashion tool is cleaned to a reusable condition.
Try-on
An external appearance reference is applied to a subject.
Table S2: Domain–category taxonomy and category definitions used in SemComp-Data.
Category
Reference State
Outcome State
Dish Making
Ingredients or an incomplete food preparation are visible.
A recognizable completed dish or food product is visible.
Food Transformation
A food item is visible before a cooking-related state change.
The same food item exhibits the intended visible state change.
Food Plating
Food components are present before final arrangement.
The food components form a complete plated presentation.
Styling
A person is visible before the target styling change.
The same person visibly exhibits the completed styling result.
Tool Cleaning
A beauty or fashion tool is visibly soiled or not ready for reuse.
The same tool is visibly clean and reusable.
Try-on
The subject and an external appearance reference are identifiable.
The subject visibly exhibits the referenced garment, accessory, or appearance.
Table S3: Category-specific reference and outcome state definitions used for State Mining.
Alignment Type
Operational Definition
Typical Relevant Attributes
Object Element
Grounds the outcome in task-relevant object categories, components, ingredients, materials, quantities, or colors appearing in the reference, without requiring the exact appearance of a specific object instance.
Object category, composition, count, material, and color palette.
Identity
Requires the depicted person to remain identifiable across the reference and generated outcome.
Person identity, face appearance, body appearance, and pose.
Object Appearance
Grounds the outcome in the instance-level visual appearance of a specific reference object.
Object category, color palette, material, shape structure, surface appearance, and graphic details.
Scene
Grounds the outcome in the organization or context of the reference scene.
Scene type, scene layout, spatial relation, background context, and viewpoint.
Table S4: Operational definitions of the four alignment types and the complete preservation-attribute vocabulary. Attribute selection remains instance-specific.
Figure S1 : Common system prompt used for SemComp-Bench evaluation.
Figure S2 : Outcome Achievement prompt for Outcome Realization ( QOA1 ) and Semantic Grounding ( QOA2 ).
Figure S3 : Outcome Achievement prompt for Grounded Entity Consistency ( QOA3 ) and Global Visual Continuity ( QOA4 ).
Figure S5 : Generation Reliability prompt for Visual Clarity, Artifact-Free Rendering, Within-Scene Spatiotemporal Coherence, and Text and Interface Integrity ( QGR2 – QGR5 ).
Figure S7 : Additional generated-video comparisons on four SemComp-Core instances. Outputs from all seven I2V models in each block were generated using the shared reference condition and detailed instruction; the paired brief instruction is displayed only for compact presentation. Temporally ordered output frames illustrate differences in both outcome achievement and generation reliability.
Model
σ(Aor)
σ(Asg)
σ(Agec)
σ(Agvc)
σ(OA Score)
Seedance 2.0
0.96
0.96
2.55
7.52
4.41
Wan2.2-TI2V-5B
4.19
4.41
3.85
0.96
3.33
Wan2.2-I2V-A14B
1.67
2.55
5.09
3.47
2.89
CogVideoX1.5-5B-I2V
3.33
4.19
2.55
0.96
0.96
SkyReels-V2-I2V-14B-720P
1.67
3.47
3.47
2.55
0.96
HY † -1.5-720P-I2V
2.55
2.55
2.89
1.92
3.47
Table S6 : Sample standard deviations for SemComp-Core Outcome Achievement under detailed instructions (pp; three runs). † HY denotes HunyuanVideo.
Model
σ(Gpp)
σ(Gvc)
σ(Gafr)
σ(Gwsc)
σ(Gti)
σ(GR Score)
Seedance 2.0
3.33
0.96
0.96
1.92
0.96
1.58
Wan2.2-TI2V-5B
0.96
2.55
6.74
12.95
0.96
3.95
Wan2.2-I2V-A14B
5.85
0.96
1.67
1.92
4.19
1.53
CogVideoX1.5-5B-I2V
2.55
13.47
6.31
8.82
8.55
7.12
SkyReels-V2-I2V-14B-720P
0.96
3.47
6.74
11.10
3.85
4.53
HY † -1.5-720P-I2V
8.82
1.92
0.00
6.94
0.96
1.35
Table S7 : Sample standard deviations across three evaluation runs for the SemComp-Core Generation Reliability results under detailed instructions. All values are in percentage points. † HY denotes HunyuanVideo.
Model
Modality
Instruction
σ(Aor)
σ(Asg)
σ(Agec)
σ(Agvc)
σ(OA Score)
Wan2.2-A14B
I2V
Detailed
1.67
2.55
5.09
3.47
2.89
T2V
Detailed
2.55
4.19
1.67
4.41
2.55
T2V
Brief
0.96
0.96
2.55
7.26
0.96
CogVideoX1.5-5B
I2V
Detailed
3.33
4.19
2.55
0.96
0.96
T2V
Detailed
3.33
0.96
2.55
0.96
1.67
T2V
Brief
2.89
1.67
0.96
3.47
0.96
Table S8 : Sample standard deviations across three evaluation runs for the Outcome Achievement conditioning study. All values are in percentage points. † HY denotes HunyuanVideo.