Skip to content
aiqbench takeAI Research

aiqbench analysis

This cs.CL preprint describes a research system that uses LLM-generated alternative scene drafts to revise an entire script adaptation, with a task-specific writing model and a learned human-preference model for ranking drafts. Its main claim is methodological: propagating the effects of a single scene rewrite across characterization, setup, and scene order. The evidence is a blind reader study and content analysis, but it is a single preprint with a narrow creative-writing task, so readers should treat the gains as promising rather than established.
Source coveringarXiv
What this isA model's reading of the article and related coverage, written for aiqbench. Not the publisher's words.

SceneWeave: Audience-Guided Scene Exploration for Dramatic Adaptation

arXiv2 min read

arXiv:2610.21737v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Adapting prose into a script requires transforming narration and inner experience into scenes that convey relationships and psychological contradictions. Planning specifies intended effects but leaves their realization in dialogue and action unresolved. Drawing on screenwriters' accounts of revising scenes and their connections to the surrounding work, we present SceneWeave, which uses alternative scene drafts to revise the adaptation as a whole. It writes contrasting treatments of a focal scene, compares the interactions they create, and revises characterization, preceding preparation, subsequent development, and scene order before generating the complete script. The central contribution is to use actual scene writing to inform adaptation decisions and propagate their consequences across the work. We also develop a task-specific writing model and a human-preference model for comparing script drafts. The writing model learns from adaptation examples and human preferences; the preference model combines human and synthetic supervision. Blind reader comparisons favor SceneWeave over a baseline workflow and description-based controls, while content assessment indicates reduced narrative redundancy and strong psychological treatment.

Abstract:Adapting prose into a script requires transforming narration and inner experience into scenes that convey relationships and psychological contradictions. Planning specifies intended effects but leaves their realization in dialogue and action unresolved. Drawing on screenwriters' accounts of revising scenes and their connections to the surrounding work, we present SceneWeave, which uses alternative scene drafts to revise the adaptation as a whole. It writes contrasting treatments of a focal scene, compares the interactions they create, and revises characterization, preceding preparation, subsequent development, and scene order before generating the complete script. The central contribution is to use actual scene writing to inform adaptation decisions and propagate their consequences across the work. We also develop a task-specific writing model and a human-preference model for comparing script drafts. The writing model learns from adaptation examples and human preferences; the preference model combines human and synthetic supervision. Blind reader comparisons favor SceneWeave over a baseline workflow and description-based controls, while content assessment indicates reduced narrative redundancy and strong psychological treatment.

Computation and Language (cs.CL)

arXiv:2610.21737 [cs.CL]

(or arXiv:2610.21737v1 [cs.CL] for this version)

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2610.21737 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)

arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.

Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.

Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.

Full text under the publisher's open licence · 260 words

Related coverage