Xuelong Li
Publications
CineWeaver: Training-Free Reference-Controllable Multi-Shot Long Video Generation for Cinematic Storytelling
Cinematic video generation is challenging for text-to-video diffusion models due to concurrent requirements on multi-shot generation, fine-grained controllability over characters and scenes, and long-form generation across extended temporal horizons. Existing methods rely on customization and retraining to separately address specific requirements, and cannot simultaneously fulfill all the requirements with a unified framework. In this paper, we shed light on the training-free paradigm with the key insight that the difficulty of multi-shot generation arises from a structural bias toward temporal continuity in pretrained video diffusion models, and consequently, propose a unified framework named CineWeaver to achieve reference-controllable multi-shot long-video generation without retraining. We manipulate positional encoding and attention patterns to break temporal continuity during inference to enable clear shot transitions using pretrained video diffusion models. Furthermore, we extend the proposed framework with a shot-routed reference conditioning mechanism for per-shot fine-grained controllability, and develop an anchor memory mechanism to allow long-form generation with consistent global appearance cues. To our best knowledge, CineWeaver is the first unified framework to simultaneously enable \textbf{long-form}, \textbf{reference-controllable}, and \textbf{multi-shot} video generation in a training-free fashion. Experimental results demonstrate that CineWeaver produces high-quality cinematic videos of long durations with consistent identities, stable global appearance, and clear shot transitions. The project page is available at: https://cineweaver.github.io.
From World Action Models to Embodied Brains: A Roadmap for Open-World Physical Intelligence
Artificial general intelligence ultimately requires agents that can reason and act in the physical world. Action models, vision-language-action policies, and world models have advanced this goal, while World Action Models (WAMs) are particularly promising because they connect candidate interventions with predicted consequences. However, progress remains fragmented: models use incompatible action spaces and prediction targets, datasets and tasks follow different conventions, and runtime systems expose limited interfaces for reuse and evaluation. We review the evolution toward WAMs and organize these limitations into three coupled gaps: model roles and representations, objectives and standardization, and system composition. Building on this analysis, we propose a co-evolution roadmap for physical intelligence centered on the \emph{embodied brain}, a long-term model target for integrating multimodal context, comparing candidate interventions, and issuing state-transition or capability requests rather than direct actuator commands. WAMs provide promising prototypes for its predictive functions, while a physical harness grounds model outputs through tools, controllers, verification, and trace logging. Shared contracts align heterogeneous models, data, tasks, and embodiments, and closed-loop post-training converts verified interaction into reusable experience. Together, these components define a modular physical-intelligence stack for adaptive and self-improving embodied agents.
Are LLMs Vulnerable to Preference-Undermining Attacks (PUA)? A Factorial Analysis Methodology for Diagnosing the Trade-off between Preference Alignment and Real-World Validity
Large Language Model (LLM) training often optimizes for preference alignment, rewarding outputs that are perceived as helpful and interaction-friendly. However, this preference-oriented objective can be exploited: manipulative prompts can steer responses toward user-appeasing agreement and away from truth-oriented correction. In this work, we investigate whether aligned models are vulnerable to Preference-Undermining Attacks (PUA), a class of manipulative prompting strategies designed to exploit the model's desire to please user preferences at the expense of truthfulness. We propose a diagnostic methodology that provides a finer-grained and more directive analysis than aggregate benchmark scores, using a factorial evaluation framework to decompose prompt-induced shifts into interpretable effects of system objectives (truth- vs. preference-oriented) and PUA-style dialogue factors (directive control, personal derogation, conditional approval, reality denial) within a controlled $2 \times 2^4$ design. Surprisingly, more advanced models are sometimes more susceptible to manipulative prompts. Beyond the dominant reality-denial factor, we observe model-specific sign reversals and interactions with PUA-style factors, suggesting tailored defenses rather than uniform robustness. These findings offer a novel, reproducible factorial evaluation methodology that provides finer-grained diagnostics for post-training processes like RLHF, enabling better trade-offs in the product iteration of LLMs by offering a more nuanced understanding of preference alignment risks and the impact of manipulative prompts.