American Sign Language (ASL) generation remains challenging due to limited paired text-ASL motion data and the difficulty of learning motion representations both precise for reconstruction and predictable from linguistic input. Existing methods rely on motion tokenizers optimized for reconstruction, without explicit semantic supervision from paired text. As a result, the learned tokens remain limited in supporting semantically consistent and fine-grained ASL motion generation. To address this limitation, we propose SeRV (Semantic-Aligned Residual Vector Quantization), a semantic-aligned RVQ tokenizer for ASL generation. SeRV learns a semantically structured residual token space by combining global-level motion-text alignment with token-level text-conditioned supervision. Building on this tokenizer, a Hierarchical GPT predicts residual motion tokens in a coarse-to-fine manner, generating structurally coherent and semantically aligned 3D ASL motion. We further construct a large-scale reconstructed 3D ASL motion-text benchmark by recovering paired 3D motion from OpenASL videos. Experiments on How2Sign and OpenASL show that SeRV outperforms six state-of-the-art baselines, with user studies assessing reconstruction quality and semantic fidelity. Samples of our reconstructed 3D ASL motion are available on our project page: https://signvideos.github.io/Demo/.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: Left : ASL generated by SeRV from text for two example sentences, rendered as 3D avatars alongside the reference signer. Right: comparison with state-of-the-art methods on six metrics across How2Sign and YouTube-ASL datasets (body/hand DTW-JPE, lower better; SiBLEU-4, higher better; all axes oriented so larger area = better). SeRV achieves the best result on five of six metrics. Note MaDiS Zuo et al. (2026) is concurrent work reporting How2Sign only; its YouTube-ASL axes are drawn at the center to indicate results are unavailable, not zero.
Figure 2: Overview of SeRV. We introduce a global-level loss Lglobal on the level-0 motion representation and a token-level loss Ltok on the fully quantized latent sequence. Together with the standard RVQ tokenizer objective LRVQ , these objectives encourage the learned discrete motion tokens to preserve motion fidelity while retaining text-relevant semantics.
Figure 3: Hierarchical GPT for coarse-to-fine ASL motion generation. Given the text feature from the frozen condition encoder, the generator autoregressively predicts SeRV tokens over time and RVQ levels. For each time step, a coarse decoder first predicts the level- 0 token, while residual decoders progressively predict higher-level tokens conditioned on the temporal history, the generated coarser tokens, and the text feature. The predicted multi-level tokens are then decoded by the shared motion decoder to reconstruct the ASL motion sequence.
Method
How2Sign
YouTube-ASL
Body ↓
Hands ↓
SiBLEU-4 ↑
Body ↓
Hands ↓
SiBLEU-4 ↑
S-MotionGPT ∗ Jiang et al. (2023)
12.41
13.74
2.32
8.95
10.12
1.84
MoMask++ ∗ Guo et al. (2025a)
9.06
11.34
1.53
6.54
8.35
1.67
SOKE † Zuo et al. (2025)
7.75
10.08
2.37
5.42
7.44
2.18
MaDiS Zuo et al. (2026)
6.59
9.45
4.47
–
–
–
Ours
6.51
9.22
4.12
4.98
6.70
3.13
Table 1: Comparison with state-of-the-art methods on How2Sign and YouTube-ASL. Lower is better for DTW-JPE, and higher is better for SiBLEU-4.
Figure 4: Qualitative comparison of text-to-3D ASL generation. For each of six sentences, we show the reference signer video (top) and the 3D motion generated by SOKE and by our method (SeRV). The top three examples are from How2Sign; the bottom three are from YouTube-ASL (faces masked for privacy).
Method
How2Sign(PA-MPJPE ↓ )
YouTube-ASL(PA-MPJPE ↓ )
Body ↓
Hands ↓
Body ↓
Hands ↓
VQ-VAE
24.07
7.96
19.53
4.45
Multi-VAE
19.37
6.65
16.96
3.62
SeRV
16.23
6.13
13.91
3.31
Table 2: Reconstruction performance of different motion tokenizers on How2Sign and YouTube-ASL.
Dataset
Tokenizer
Direction
R@1 ↑
R@5 ↑
R@10 ↑
How2Sign
RVQ
T → S
11.61
37.28
59.04
SeRV
14.52
46.97
73.21
RVQ
S → T
6.73
27.05
47.10
SeRV
8.42
34.08
58.41
YouTube-ASL
RVQ
T → S
7.55
24.23
38.38
SeRV
9.73
31.50
49.01
Table 3: Per-batch bidirectional text–sign retrieval analysis with batch size 64. Higher is better for all recall metrics.
Tokenizer Objective
How2Sign
YouTube-ASL
Body ↓
Hands ↓
SiB4. ↑
Body ↓
Hands ↓
SiB4. ↑
Baseline (RVQ)
6.82
9.63
3.20
5.39
7.20
2.56
+ Lglobal
6.67
9.50
3.53
5.24
7.01
2.62
+ Ltok
6.53
9.31
3.80
5.15
6.85
2.87
+ Lglobal + Ltok
6.51
9.22
4.12
4.98
6.70
3.13
Table 4: Effect of SeRV tokenizer objectives on How2Sign and YouTube-ASL. We report DTW-JPE (lower is better) and SiBLEU-4 (higher is better). All variants use the same generator.
Generator
How2Sign (DTW-JPE ↓ )
YouTube-ASL (DTW-JPE ↓ )
Body
Hands
Body
Hands
Flat AR
7.73
10.41
7.59
9.25
Two-stage
7.21
9.86
6.92
8.33
Hierarchical GPT
6.51
9.22
4.98
6.70
Table 5: Ablation on generator architectures on How2Sign and YouTube-ASL. All variants use the same SeRV tokenizer. Lower is better for DTW-JPE.
Appendix figures & tables10 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
Tokenizer
H2S Recon. B/H
YT Recon. B/H
H2S Gen. B/H, SiB4
YT Gen. B/H, SiB4
RVQ only
17.65 / 6.85
15.60 / 3.85
6.82 / 9.63, 3.20
5.39 / 7.20, 2.56
RVQ +Lglobal
17.05 / 6.55
15.05 / 3.62
6.67 / 9.50, 3.53
5.24 / 7.01, 2.62
RVQ +Ltok
16.65 / 6.35
14.45 / 3.45
6.53 / 9.31, 3.80
5.15 / 6.85, 2.87
Full SeRV
16.23 / 6.13
13.91 / 3.31
6.51 / 9.22, 4.12
4.98 / 6.70, 3.13
Appendix
Table 6: Controlled tokenizer-objective ablation. All variants share the same RVQ architecture, reconstruction objective, data split, and training protocol. A separate Hierarchical GPT is trained from scratch for each tokenizer under identical settings. Lower is better for PA-MPJPE and DTW-JPE, while higher is better for SiBLEU-4.
Supervision target
SiBLEU-4
DTW-JPE B/H
T2S R@1
Level 0
3.70
6.62 / 9.45
12.65
Levels 0–1
3.91
6.56 / 9.32
13.80
Full latent
4.12
6.51 / 9.22
14.52
Appendix
Table 7: Effect of the supervision target for Ltok on How2Sign. Applying token-level semantic supervision to progressively more complete cumulative RVQ representations improves both generation and text-to-sign retrieval.
Representation
PA-MPJPE B/H
T2S / S2T R@1
Level 0
20.84 / 8.06
13.61 / 7.79
Levels 0–1
17.42 / 6.71
14.18 / 8.16
Full latent
16.23 / 6.13
14.52 / 8.42
Appendix
Table 8: Cumulative contribution of RVQ levels. Level 0 captures most of the cross-modal retrieval signal, while subsequent residual levels progressively improve geometric reconstruction and provide smaller but consistent semantic gains.
λsem
Recon. PA-MPJPE B/H
Gen. DTW-JPE B/H
SiBLEU-4
0.05
18.71 / 7.02
6.73 / 9.58
3.63
0.005
16.23 / 6.13
6.51 / 9.22
4.12
0.0005
15.77 / 6.05
6.66 / 9.40
3.82
Appendix
Table 9: Sensitivity to the semantic-loss weight on How2Sign. The reported weight of 0.005 provides the best downstream generation performance. A smaller value slightly favors reconstruction, whereas an excessively large value degrades both reconstruction and generation.
Method
Ranked first
Mean rank
SeRV pairwise win
SOKE
23.3%
2.19
72.9%
S-MotionGPT
17.8%
2.28
74.4%
SeRV
58.9%
1.53
–
Appendix
Table 10: Human perceptual evaluation results. SeRV is ranked first most frequently and obtains the lowest mean rank. Pairwise preference rates are derived from the valid rankings.
Processing stage
Number of clips
Metadata records
611,533
Successfully downloaded
561,145
Removed: multiple signers
187,880
Removed: unreliable signer or low confidence
136,728
Retained ASL–text pairs
236,537
Appendix
Table 11: Summary of the YouTube-ASL data processing pipeline.
Rating
Percentage
Number of ratings
Good
85.75%
343
Partially correct
11.25%
45
Poor
2.25%
9
Uncertain
0.75%
3
At least partially correct
97.0%
388
Appendix
Table 12: Human audit of reconstructed YouTube-ASL motion. Four raters independently evaluate 100 randomly sampled clips, producing 400 ratings.
Dataset
Lang.
Clips / Pairs
Duration
Text Paired
How2Sign-3D Duarte et al. (2021)
ASL
35K
80+h
✓
SOKE Curated 3D Poses Zuo et al. (2025)
ASL / CSL / DGS
35K / 20K / 8K
–
✓
SignAvatars Yu et al. (2024)
Multi-SL
70K
117h
✓
Reconstructed YouTube-ASL (Ours)
ASL
236,537
295.1h
✓
Appendix
Table 13: Comparison with existing 3D sign language motion resources. “Text paired” indicates whether spoken-language text is paired with the 3D motion.
Figure 5: Qualitative comparison of tokenizer reconstruction results. Our tokenizer preserves motion details more effectively, especially for hand articulations.
Figure 6: Qualitative comparison of generated 3D ASL motions on two examples. For each example, the top row shows the baseline and the bottom row shows SeRV. With semantic-aligned RVQ, SeRV better captures hand information and produces more faithful signing motions.
Generating natural, correct, and visually smooth 3D avatar sign language motion conditioned on the text inputs continues to be very challenging. In this work, we train a generative model of 3D body motion and explore the role of phonological attribute conditioning for sign language motion generation, using ASL-LEX 2.0 annotations such as hand shape, hand location and movement. We first establish a strong diffusion baseline using an Human Motion MDM-style diffusion model with SMPL-X representation, which outperforms SignAvatar, a state-of-the-art CVAE method, on gloss discriminability metrics. We then systematically study the role of text conditioning using different text encoders (CLIP vs. T5), conditioning modes (gloss-only vs. gloss+phonological attributes), and attribute notation format (symbolic vs. natural language). Our analysis reveals that translating symbolic ASL-LEX notations to natural language is a necessary condition for effective CLIP-based attribute conditioning, while T5 is largely unaffected by this translation. Furthermore, our best-performing variant (CLIP with mapped attributes) outperforms SignAvatar across all metrics. These findings highlight input representation as a critical factor for text-encoder-based attribute conditioning, and motivate structured conditioning approaches where gloss and phonological attributes are encoded through independent pathways.
Sign language production (SLP) aims to generate continuous signing motion from spoken language, often through gloss-to-pose generation. Prior work mainly follows two paradigms. Generative models synthesize motion from a learned prior or from noise, without reference to an observed signing instance, making rare hand configurations and signer-specific articulation difficult to preserve. Retrieval-based methods reuse real, well-articulated motion segments, but concatenating segments from different signers and co-articulation contexts can introduce rhythm and style inconsistencies across the full sequence, not only at segment boundaries. These limitations suggest a complementary solution: use retrieval to provide realistic articulation, and use learned refinement to impose the global coherence that retrieval alone lacks. We therefore propose retrieve-and-refine, a paradigm that starts from real retrieved motion and refines it into a globally coherent signing sequence rather than generating motion from scratch. Our framework, SignRR, initializes motion from a dictionary of real sign segments and refines the full sequence with a part-aware Residual VQ-VAE, where residual quantization preserves fine hand articulation and temporal length differences are handled in the latent space. Experiments on PHOENIX14T and CSL-Daily show that SignRR achieves state-of-the-art back-translation performance while maintaining competitive pose quality.
Discrete motion representations have substantially advanced autoregressive text-to-motion generation. However, most motion tokenizers are optimized for reconstruction and do not explicitly allocate capacity according to semantic role. Action-level meaning and fine-grained kinematic detail must therefore be encoded through the same reconstruction-driven hierarchy. We introduce SeMoCo, a semantic-first motion codec, together with a dual-axis motion generator for language-conditioned motion generation. Each motion token contains one semantic token and a residual sequence of kinematic tokens. The generator models semantic progression across time and autoregressively refines the residual entries. We also construct Ω-MotionVerse, a large-scale, multi-source human-motion dataset unified under the SOMA representation. Across the reported comparisons, SeMoCo achieves the best reconstruction accuracy among the compared codecs, while strong text-to-motion results demonstrate the effectiveness of its motion tokens for downstream generation.
Tianlv Huang, Hetian Guo, Ziyi Cai +6
Jilin University · Frontier Robotics · Harbin Institute of Technology, Shenzhen