Effective multi-shot generation demands purposeful, film-like transitions and strict cinematic continuity. Current methods, however, often prioritize basic visual consistency, neglecting crucial editing patterns (e.g., shot/reverse shot, cutaways) that drive narrative flow for compelling storytelling. This yields outputs that may be visually coherent but lack narrative sophistication and true cinematic integrity. To bridge this, we introduce Next Shot Generation (NSG): synthesizing a subsequent, high-quality shot that critically conforms to professional editing patterns while upholding rigorous cinematic continuity. Our framework, Cut2Next, leverages a Diffusion Transformer (DiT). It employs in-context tuning guided by a novel Hierarchical Multi-Prompting strategy. This strategy uses Relational Prompts to define overall context and inter-shot editing styles. Individual Prompts then specify per-shot content and cinematographic attributes. Together, these guide Cut2Next to generate cinematically appropriate next shots. Architectural innovations, Context-Aware Condition Injection (CACI) and Hierarchical Attention Mask (HAM), further integrate these diverse signals without introducing new parameters. We construct RawCuts (large-scale) and CuratedCuts (refined) datasets, both with hierarchical prompts, and introduce CutBench for evaluation. Experiments show Cut2Next excels in visual consistency and text fidelity. Crucially, user studies reveal a strong preference for Cut2Next, particularly for its adherence to intended editing patterns and overall cinematic continuity, validating its ability to generate high-quality, narratively expressive, and cinematically coherent subsequent shots.

The visual world is fundamentally compositional. Visual scenes are defined by the composition of objects and their relations. Hence, it is essential for computer vision systems to reflect and exploit this compositionality to achieve robust and generalizable scene understanding. While major strides have been made toward the development of general-purpose, multimodal generative models, including both text-to-image models and multimodal vision-language models, it remains unclear whether these systems are capable of accurately generating and interpreting scenes involving the composition of multiple objects and relations. In this work, we present an evaluation of the compositional visual processing capabilities in the current generation of text-to-image (DALL-E 3) and multimodal vision-language models (GPT-4V, GPT-4o, Claude Sonnet 3.5, QWEN2-VL-72B, and InternVL2.5-38B), and compare the performance of these systems to human participants. The results suggest that these systems display some ability to solve compositional and relational tasks, showing notable improvements over the previous generation of multimodal models, but with performance nevertheless well below the level of human participants, particularly for more complex scenes involving many ($>5$) objects and multiple relations. These results highlight the need for further progress toward compositional understanding of visual scenes.

Constructing benchmarks that test the abilities of modern natural language understanding models is difficult - pre-trained language models exploit artifacts in benchmarks to achieve human parity, but still fail on adversarial examples and make errors that demonstrate a lack of common sense. In this work, we propose gamification as a framework for data construction. The goal of players in the game is to compose questions that mislead a rival AI while using specific phrases for extra points. The game environment leads to enhanced user engagement and simultaneously gives the game designer control over the collected data, allowing us to collect high-quality data at scale. Using our method we create CommonsenseQA 2.0, which includes 14,343 yes/no questions, and demonstrate its difficulty for models that are orders-of-magnitude larger than the AI used in the game itself. Our best baseline, the T5-based Unicorn with 11B parameters achieves an accuracy of 70.2%, substantially higher than GPT-3 (52.9%) in a few-shot inference setup. Both score well below human performance which is at 94.1%.