Posted by schopra909 4 days ago
Video models today are too slow/expensive and lack sufficient controls. Creativity is an iterative process. You make, you tweak, you get better. In our opinion, they're not usable yet for storytelling.
When we set out to build Linum v3 (our next video model) earlier this year, the primary goal was to bring the cost envelope of inference down significantly. If our model is fast and cheap, it's the first step (of many) towards useful creative tools.
Typically, you see "latent diffusion models". A VAE (Variational Autoencoder) compresses the input data into a smaller "latent space" and the diffusion model learns how to generate within this subspace.
Over the past few months, we've been publishing our work on efficient pixel-space diffusion models. These throw away the VAE, having the diffusion model learn a latent-space optimized for its exact task.
This serves 3 purposes: 1) Simplify Architecture (no 2-stage model training) 2) Faster Convergence (11x faster convergence vs. our latent diffusion counterpart) 3) Cheaper Inference (4x more aggressive token reduction in attention context-windows, without significant loss in quality)
This past month we were pressure testing our latest architecture (Pyramid-JiT) by training a text-to-image model longer than the typical one-off experiment. Specifically, we trained it for ~$20K on 660M samples.
We were surprised by the quality of results, so we thought we'd release it as open weights for the community (Apache 2.0). The research itself is already public, on our website.
For us, it's a big stepping stone towards cheaper video models, since pretty much all video models start as image models. We like to say these models have to learn nouns before they learn verbs.
Really happy to see a small shop like yours doing this sort of work!
Are pictures easier than English, or did the methods advance so much?
Edit: I guess I should have said, are pictures plus English easier than English!
>The text representation comes from a frozen Qwen3.5-4B model, which we read at layers 7, 15 and 27 (its three full-attention layers). We concatenate and project these representations into the text refiner.
Still, as a layperson I would have expected text to be simpler than images, so I'm still amazed by this.
I'm sure Moore's Law for GPUs helped a little, but I'm really curious about the savings on the methodology side. (The repo mentions "hyperparameters")
Have you thought about setting up auto-research on this for smaller experiments? What's the minimum-viable budget for these types of workloads?
Also I'm a little intrigued on looking into efficiency techniques for video gen. What are current research directions in that field and promising directions you are particularly interested in? Any pointers for beginners?
CVPR 2026 paper list (after filtering on video generation) might be a good start - asking LLMs to take a look and filter relevant papers sound even better.
[1] https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.15810 [2] https://arxiv.org/abs/2602.13515 [3] https://arxiv.org/abs/2605.23381
Reminds me of this great paper where they trained a LLM that beats LLaMA2-13B from scratch with < $0.1M: https://arxiv.org/abs/2404.07413
Any chance you'll release your training recipe as well? I know the model code is public, but I'd love to dive into the full process.
If you swap the text encoder for something like T5-small or CLIP, this could be <2.5Gb at INT4; doable on a lot of machines.