Pith. sign in

REVIEW 5 major objections 6 minor 1 cited by

DNF: Unconditional 4D Generation with Dictionary-based Neural Fields

T0 review · 5 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read Dictionary learning on the singular values of shape and motion MLPs yields a compact, continuous weight space on which diffusion can generate high-fidelity 4D animations.

desk verdict The dictionary-based representation is the real contribution; the generation-quality claims outrun the evidence, but the paper is competent and deserves referee time. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.05161 v1 pith:RMG26CW2 submitted 2024-12-06 cs.CV cs.AI

Xinyi Zhang , Naiqi Li , Angela Dai This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.CVcs.AI
keywords 4Dgenerationneuralfieldsdictionarylearningsingularvaluedecompositiondiffusionmodelsweight-spaceshapemotiondisentanglementdeformingshapes
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

4D generative modeling has lagged behind 3D because a deforming shape mixes static geometry with motion and no representation has simultaneously kept fine detail, a smooth latent space, and a compact code. This paper tries to fix that with DNF, a representation that splits a 4D sequence into a shape neural field and a motion neural field, then decomposes the trained MLP weights with singular value decomposition into a shared dictionary plus per-instance singular-value coefficients. Only the coefficients (and a small low-rank residual dictionary) are fine-tuned per sequence, so each animation stays close to a common weight manifold. A transformer-based diffusion model trained on the resulting latent codes and coefficient vectors generates new animations, and the authors report higher quality than prior 4D diffusion methods on DeformingThings4D. If the representation works as claimed, it offers a template for generating deforming content that does not depend on category-specific templates.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the SVD-factored MLP weight. For each layer, the trained global shape and motion networks are decomposed as $W_\ell = U_\ell \Sigma_\ell V_\ell^T$; $U$ and $V$ are frozen as a shared dictionary decoder, while per-instance coefficient vectors $\sigma$ (enforced non-negative by $\sigma = e^\gamma$) are optimized with a clamped SDF loss for shape and an $\ell^1$ flow loss for motion. The dictionary is compressed by keeping only the top $k$ singular directions and then extended by low-rank residual matrices $U_{\mathrm{res}} \Sigma_{\mathrm{res}} V_{\mathrm{res}}^T$ trained with an orthogonality loss. The representation each instance feeds to the generative model is $(L+1)$ tokens: the latent code plus one coefficient vector per MLP layer, which is what the transformer diffusion model denoises.

What would settle it

Train the same dictionary pipeline on sequences with large non-isometric deformations, such as near-topology-changing bends, and compare reconstruction of held-out frames: if Chamfer distance degrades sharply on those cases, or if generated long sequences collapse or show volume distortion beyond the paper's stated limitation, the central balance claim fails. A second check is to ablate the frozen singular vectors by allowing full per-instance fine-tuning of the MLP; if full fine-tuning matches the reported 0.067 Chamfer distance without needing the dictionary, then the dictionary's claimed contribution to fidelity is not load-bearing.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery is that the weight space of a neural field can be turned into a generative space by factoring the weights with SVD: each linear layer $W_\ell = U_\ell \Sigma_\ell V_\ell^T$ is written as a linear combination of rank-one dictionary atoms $u_{\ell,i} v_{\ell,i}^T$, with singular values $\sigma_\ell$ as coefficients. Freezing the singular vectors and fine-tuning only the $\sigma$ values per object gives each shape and each motion its own compact coefficient list while keeping all instances in a shared, continuous dictionary space; truncating small singular values compresses the dictionary, and low-rank residual matrices with an orthogonality loss extend it. The paper argues this balances fidelity, contiguity and compression, and that training a transformer diffusion model on the token list formed by the latent code plus layer-wise coefficients yields state-of-the-art unconditional generation of 16-frame deforming sequences, with reconstruction Chamfer distance $0.067$ and generalization to unseen animal species.

Load-bearing premise

Every deformation is represented as a per-point flow from the first frame, with no canonical pose, so the model must encode large arbitrary displacements from one reference shape; if such displacements become ill-posed, the representation and its generalization claims collapse.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Unconditional generation of 16-frame deforming sequences becomes tractable: the reported MMD 15.3, COV 54.1 percent and 1-NNA 58.2 percent on DeformingThings4D improve on the two baseline diffusion models.
  • Because shape and motion are disentangled, a motion diffusion model can be conditioned on a shape code; the authors show this produces plausible motions for unseen species by fitting a new shape code and coefficient list.
  • Sequence length is not fixed: the motion diffusion model trains on 6-frame windows with 2-frame context and extends motions by sliding-window outpainting, so longer animations can be synthesized.
  • Keeping singular vectors shared while fine-tuning only singular values preserves a contiguous weight space, which is what makes weight-space diffusion effective; the compressed-plus-residual dictionary keeps the representation compact without sacrificing detail.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The same SVD-of-weights trick could turn other neural field families (static 3D shapes, scenes, radiance fields) into generative weight spaces, wherever a pretrained multi-instance field already exists.
  • The coefficient vectors $\sigma$ may support semantic interpolation: because they are continuous coefficients of shared dictionary atoms, interpolating between two objects' coefficient lists should yield a smooth shape or motion blend, a property the paper does not demonstrate.
  • A testable extension is to train the dictionary on a larger multi-category corpus and measure whether the residual rank needed to reach a target reconstruction error stays constant; if it grows with category count, the shared dictionary is absorbing category diversity rather than truly compressing.
  • The motion-flow assumption suggests the representation will need explicit canonicalization or a time-dependent reference for articulated or open surfaces; adding canonical-pose normalization is a natural next step.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

5 major / 6 minor

Summary. This paper proposes DNF, a dictionary-based neural field representation for unconditional 4D generation. The authors first pretrain shape and motion MLPs with per-instance latent codes, where the shape MLP predicts an SDF from a shape code and the motion MLP predicts per-point flow from the first frame, conditioned on a shape code and a per-frame motion code. They then apply a layer-wise SVD to the MLP weights, freeze the singular vectors as a shared dictionary, compress to the top-k singular components, add low-rank residual dictionaries, and fine-tune only per-instance singular-value coefficient vectors together with the residual matrices using reconstruction and orthogonalization losses. A transformer-based diffusion model is trained on the resulting token lists, with a separate motion diffusion model that generates 6-frame windows and extends them to 16 frames via outpainting. On DeformingThings4D, the method reports improved MMD/COV/1-NNA over HyperDiffusion and Motion2VecSets, a lower reconstruction Chamfer distance than NPMs, and qualitative results for novel sequences and unseen species.

Significance. If validated, the paper makes a useful and transferable contribution: it shows that a shared SVD-based dictionary plus per-instance coefficient vectors can impose shared structure on neural-field weight spaces, and that this representation is amenable to transformer-based diffusion. The reconstruction ablation in Table 2 gives tangible evidence that dictionary-based fine-tuning improves fidelity over a global-latent baseline, and the tokenization of latent codes and coefficient vectors is a sensible design. The main gap is that the central 4D claims — temporal consistency, long-horizon coherence, and generalization to unseen species — rest primarily on qualitative examples and on shape-distribution metrics that do not directly measure motion quality. The paper would be substantially stronger if it quantified temporal behavior, decoding success rates, and held-out-species performance.

major comments (5)
  1. [§4.2, Table 1] The three reported metrics, MMD, COV, and 1-NNA, are geometric distribution metrics computed from Chamfer distances between surfaces and a reference set, but the paper does not state how they are aggregated over the 16 frames of a sequence. If they are computed frame-wise, they are insensitive to temporal coherence, and the claims of 'superior temporal consistency' and 'significantly improved temporal consistency' (§4.2) are unsupported by the quantitative evaluation. The paper needs a temporal metric (e.g., frame-to-frame flow smoothness, drift over the outpainting horizon, per-sequence Chamfer agreement, or a user study) and a report of the fraction of generated sequences that decode to valid, non-degenerate meshes, especially given the decoder-unawareness limitation acknowledged at the end of §4.4.
  2. [§4.2, Table 1] All quantitative results are reported from a single run with no error bars, no multiple seeds, and no specification of the number of generated samples. The MMD gap to HyperDiffusion is small (15.3 vs. 16.0, roughly 4.6%) and could arise from sampling noise; the COV and 1-NNA gains are larger but still need variance estimates. To support the 'state-of-the-art' claim, the authors should report mean and standard deviation over several sampling seeds for a fixed, equal-sized set of generated sequences.
  3. [§4.2 and §4.3, Tables 1–2] The evaluation protocol is underspecified: it is not stated whether MMD/COV/1-NNA are computed against the training split, validation split, or held-out test split, nor whether matching is done per frame, per sequence, or by pooling all frames. This is not a mere implementation detail: because the representation is an autoencoder-style compression of the training set, comparing against training data would give an optimistic novelty measure, and per-frame matching would ignore sequence-level fidelity. The authors should specify the reference set and the matching granularity, and ideally report both training-set and held-out-set comparisons.
  4. [§4.4 and Limitations] The claim that the method generalizes to unseen species is supported only by qualitative images and a single nearest-neighbor example. The Limitations paragraph explicitly concedes that the diffusion model is 'unaware of the full dictionary decoding process and the final surface to be decoded,' so generated tokens may lie off the manifold of decodable representations. The paper should quantify (i) the success rate at which generated sequences decode to valid surfaces and (ii) reconstruction and generation quality on held-out species using quantitative metrics, rather than relying on qualitative demonstration.
  5. [§3.1, Eq. (2)] The motion representation is defined as a per-point flow from the first frame, which is used as the canonical shape without pose normalization. This is well-posed for the correspondence-based, relatively smooth deformations in DeformingThings4D, but the paper provides no analysis of how the representation behaves under large, non-isometric, or near-topology-changing deformations. Since the unseen-species generalization claim depends on this assumption, the authors should provide a quantitative breakdown of reconstruction or generation quality by deformation magnitude or sequence type, or qualify the generalization claim accordingly.
minor comments (6)
  1. [§1, §2, §3.2/§4.1] There are several typos and inconsistent usages: 'reprsentations' and 'individial' in §1, 'In particulary' in §2, and inconsistent 'out-painting' / 'outpainting' in §3.2 and §4.1.
  2. [§4.1] The sentence 'we use a list of nine vectors (the original latent code and eight coefficient vectors for eight MLP layers) to represent each object' should state explicitly whether this describes the shape feature, the motion feature, or both, since the tokenization and diffusion conditioning depend on this distinction.
  3. [§3.2 and §6.3] The outpainting procedure noisifies the context frames with a d-step forward diffusion process before concatenating them with the noisy continuation; this protocol is described only in the supplementary material. The main text should at least state this, because it affects the interpretation of the long-sequence generation results.
  4. [Figure 5] The nearest-neighbor histogram is not compared with baselines, and Chamfer distance to the training set measures geometric novelty in only a limited sense. The figure should be presented as an illustration of diversity rather than as evidence of superior novelty.
  5. [§3.1, Eq. (10)] The orthogonalization loss L_orth is introduced without specifying its weight relative to L_rec and L_m in the total fine-tuning objective; the implementation details should report the relative loss weight.
  6. [Table 2] The 'sft' row reports a Chamfer distance of 0.154, which is worse than the NPMs baseline of 0.128 even though it includes additional per-shape fine-tuning. This is surprising and should be explained, as it bears on the interpretation of the ablation.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity in the DNF pipeline or its evaluation.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is self-contained and non-circular. The representation is built by (i) pretraining disentangled shape and motion MLPs with per-instance latents, (ii) factorizing each MLP weight layer via SVD (Eq. 3-4), freezing the singular-vector dictionaries, fine-tuning per-instance singular values with SDF and flow losses (Eq. 5-6), and optionally adding low-rank residuals, and (iii) training transformer-based diffusion models directly on the resulting latent-and-coefficient tokens with the standard denoising objective (Eq. 11). Each stage is a constructive transformation of the previous stage's outputs; no term in these equations is defined in terms of the final evaluation metric. The headline generation results (Table 1) use Chamfer-based MMD, COV, and 1-NNA against a reference set, which is a held-out comparison and not the same quantity as the reconstruction or fine-tuning losses. Table 2 measures reconstruction quality on training sequences, which is a representation-capacity check, not a disguised prediction of generated samples. The use of NPMs as inspiration is a genuine external starting point, and the authors' own HyperDiffusion appears only as a baseline; no uniqueness theorem or self-citation is invoked to force the dictionary construction. The acknowledged limitation that the diffusion model is unaware of the full decoding process is a weakness in the modeling loop but not a circular dependency. Consequently, no load-bearing step reduces to its own inputs by construction.

Assumptions & free parameters 6 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 1 invented entities

The method rests on several unproved modeling choices: SVD-truncated MLP weights form a sufficiently expressive dictionary; residual low-rank terms with an orthogonality penalty are needed and sufficient; the first frame is a valid canonical shape; and the learned coefficient space is continuous enough for diffusion. No external physical entities are introduced beyond the internal dictionary.

free parameters (6)
  • Shape latent dimension D_s = 384
    Dimension of the shape code in Eq. 1, chosen in Sec. 4.1.
  • Motion latent dimension D_m = 384
    Dimension of the motion code in Eq. 2, chosen in Sec. 4.1.
  • Shape dictionary compression rank k and residual rank r_k = k=384 (from 512), r_k=256
    Chosen in Sec. 4.1; controls the capacity of the shape dictionary after truncation and residual extension.
  • Motion dictionary compression rank k and residual rank r_k = k=768 (from 1024), r_k=512
    Chosen in Sec. 4.1; controls the capacity of the motion dictionary.
  • Clamp distance δ in Eq. 5 = not specified
    Controls how much of the SDF is emphasized near the surface in the reconstruction loss; the paper does not report its value.
  • Diffusion outpainting window size (t=6, context k=2) = 6 frames, 2 context frames
    Chosen in Sec. 3.2 to extend generated sequences; affects temporal coherence and generation length.
assumptions (5)
  • standard math SVD low-rank approximation of MLP weights preserves enough information for high-fidelity shape and motion representation.
    The entire dictionary construction (Eqs. 3-7) relies on truncating singular values with acceptable reconstruction error; this is asserted, not derived for the specific MLPs used.
  • domain assumption The first frame of each sequence is a valid canonical shape for all subsequent frames.
    Sec. 3.1 states that the initial shape is used as canonical form without pose normalization; the motion field is defined as flow from this frame.
  • domain assumption The learned latent and coefficient spaces are continuous enough for diffusion to generate valid samples.
    Sec. 3.1 claims 'the global latent space is continuous in its nature' and uses this to justify diffusion modeling; the paper does not measure contiguity directly.
  • ad hoc to paper Residual dictionary matrices U_res and V_res should be orthogonal to reduce redundancy and improve generalization.
    Eq. 10 enforces orthogonality through a loss; this is a design choice without theoretical proof that it is necessary or sufficient.
  • domain assumption Barycentric-weight-based point correspondences plus small normal noise provide valid supervision for motion flow.
    Supplementary Sec. 7.1 assumes that points with the same barycentric weights across frames correspond, which may fail for large or topology-changing deformations.
invented entities (1)
  • Shared singular-vector dictionary (U and V matrices)
    purpose: Acts as a frozen basis set for representing all shapes and motions via per-instance coefficients.
    This is an internal model component, validated only by the paper's reconstruction and generation experiments; there is no external falsifiable handle.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of DNF: Unconditional 4D Generation with Dictionary-based Neural Fields." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/RMG26CW2

@misc{pith2026241205161,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: DNF: Unconditional 4D Generation with Dictionary-based Neural Fields},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/RMG26CW2}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.05161}
}
read the original abstract

While remarkable success has been achieved through diffusion-based 3D generative models for shapes, 4D generative modeling remains challenging due to the complexity of object deformations over time. We propose DNF, a new 4D representation for unconditional generative modeling that efficiently models deformable shapes with disentangled shape and motion while capturing high-fidelity details in the deforming objects. To achieve this, we propose a dictionary learning approach to disentangle 4D motion from shape as neural fields. Both shape and motion are represented as learned latent spaces, where each deformable shape is represented by its shape and motion global latent codes, shape-specific coefficient vectors, and shared dictionary information. This captures both shape-specific detail and global shared information in the learned dictionary. Our dictionary-based representation well balances fidelity, contiguity and compression -- combined with a transformer-based diffusion model, our method is able to generate effective, high-fidelity 4D animations.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.05161 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. We propose DNF, a dictionary-based representation for the unconditional generation of 4D deforming shapes, with a transformer [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p001_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Overview for learning our 4D dynamic DNF representation. We first pre-train disentangled shape and motion MLPs with [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Training and generation of our DNFs for unconditional 4D synthesis. We employ transformer-based diffusion models to model [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (2 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Qualitative comparison with state of the art. Our dictionary-based approach enables generating 4D sequences with higher shape [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_4.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Visualizations of shape fitting and motion generation [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_6.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Distilling Physical Priors into Streaming World Models

    cs.CV 2026-08 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    PhyS adds physics-aware video data, teacher distillation, and windowed reward routing to make streaming world models generate more physically plausible long rollouts.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

46 extracted references · 27 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    Gesturediffuclip: Gesture diffusion model with clip latents.ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG), 42(4):1–18, 2023

    Tenglong Ao, Zeyi Zhang, and Libin Liu. Gesturediffuclip: Gesture diffusion model with clip latents.ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG), 42(4):1–18, 2023. 2

    work page 2023

  2. [2]

    A morphable model for the synthesis of 3d faces

    V olker Blanz and Thomas Vetter. A morphable model for the synthesis of 3d faces. In Seminal Graphics Papers: Pushing the Boundaries, Volume 2, pages 157–164. 2023. 1, 2

    work page 2023

  3. [3]

    Motion2vecsets: 4d latent vector set diffusion for non-rigid shape reconstruction and tracking

    Wei Cao, Chang Luo, Biao Zhang, Matthias Nießner, and Ji- apeng Tang. Motion2vecsets: 4d latent vector set diffusion for non-rigid shape reconstruction and tracking. In Proceed- ings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 20496–20506, 2024. 3, 6

    work page 2024

  4. [4]

    SDFusion: Multimodal 3d shape completion, reconstruction, and generation

    Yen-Chi Cheng, Hsin-Ying Lee, Sergey Tuyakov, Alex Schwing, and Liangyan Gui. SDFusion: Multimodal 3d shape completion, reconstruction, and generation. In CVPR,

    work page

  5. [5]

    Diffusionsdf: Conditional generative modeling of signed distance func- tions

    Gene Chou, Yuval Bahat, and Felix Heide. Diffusionsdf: Conditional generative modeling of signed distance func- tions. arXiv preprint arXiv:2211.13757, 2022. 3

    arXiv 2022

  6. [6]

    Diffcomplete: Diffusion-based generative 3d shape completion

    Ruihang Chu, Enze Xie, Shentong Mo, Zhenguo Li, Matthias Nießner, Chi-Wing Fu, and Jiaya Jia. Diffcomplete: Diffusion-based generative 3d shape completion. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 2023. 3

    work page 2023

  7. [7]

    Diffusion models beat gans on image synthesis

    Prafulla Dhariwal and Alexander Nichol. Diffusion models beat gans on image synthesis. Advances in neural informa- tion processing systems, 34:8780–8794, 2021. 3

    2021

  8. [8]

    Hyperdiffusion: Generating implicit neural fields with weight-space diffusion

    Ziya Erkoc ¸, Fangchang Ma, Qi Shan, Matthias Nießner, and Angela Dai. Hyperdiffusion: Generating implicit neural fields with weight-space diffusion. arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.17015, 2023. 3, 6

    arXiv 2023

Show all 46 references
  1. [9]

    Singular value de- composition and least squares solutions

    Gene H Golub and Christian Reinsch. Singular value de- composition and least squares solutions. In Handbook for Automatic Computation: Volume II: Linear Algebra , pages 134–151. Springer, 1971. 2

    1971

  2. [10]

    Denoising dif- fusion probabilistic models

    Jonathan Ho, Ajay Jain, and Pieter Abbeel. Denoising dif- fusion probabilistic models. Advances in neural information processing systems, 33:6840–6851, 2020. 3, 5

    2020

  3. [11]

    Video dif- fusion models

    Jonathan Ho, Tim Salimans, Alexey Gritsenko, William Chan, Mohammad Norouzi, and David J Fleet. Video dif- fusion models. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 35:8633–8646, 2022. 3

    2022

  4. [12]

    Diffusionavatars: Deferred diffusion for high- fidelity 3d head avatars

    Tobias Kirschstein, Simon Giebenhain, and Matthias Nießner. Diffusionavatars: Deferred diffusion for high- fidelity 3d head avatars. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition , pages 5481–5492, 2024. 2

    2024

  5. [13]

    Tianye Li, Timo Bolkart, Michael. J. Black, Hao Li, and Javier Romero. Learning a model of facial shape and ex- pression from 4D scans. ACM Transactions on Graphics, (Proc. SIGGRAPH Asia), 36(6):194:1–194:17, 2017. 2

    2017

  6. [14]

    4dcomplete: Non-rigid motion es- timation beyond the observable surface

    Yang Li, Hikari Takehara, Takafumi Taketomi, Bo Zheng, and Matthias Nießner. 4dcomplete: Non-rigid motion es- timation beyond the observable surface. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vi- sion, pages 12706–12716, 2021. 2, 6

    2021

  7. [15]

    Smpl: A skinned multi- person linear model

    Matthew Loper, Naureen Mahmood, Javier Romero, Gerard Pons-Moll, and Michael J Black. Smpl: A skinned multi- person linear model. In Seminal Graphics Papers: Pushing the Boundaries, Volume 2, pages 851–866. 2023. 1, 2

    2023

  8. [16]

    Lt3sd: Latent trees for 3d scene diffusion

    Quan Meng, Lei Li, Matthias Nießner, and Angela Dai. Lt3sd: Latent trees for 3d scene diffusion. arXiv preprint arXiv:2409.08215, 2024. 3

    2024 arXiv

  9. [17]

    Occupancy networks: Learning 3d reconstruction in function space

    Lars Mescheder, Michael Oechsle, Michael Niemeyer, Se- bastian Nowozin, and Andreas Geiger. Occupancy networks: Learning 3d reconstruction in function space. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pages 4460–4470, 2019. 1

    2019

  10. [18]

    Nerf: Representing scenes as neural radiance fields for view syn- thesis

    Ben Mildenhall, Pratul P Srinivasan, Matthew Tancik, Jonathan T Barron, Ravi Ramamoorthi, and Ren Ng. Nerf: Representing scenes as neural radiance fields for view syn- thesis. Communications of the ACM , 65(1):99–106, 2021. 1

    2021

  11. [19]

    Point-e: A system for generat- ing 3d point clouds from complex prompts

    Alex Nichol, Heewoo Jun, Prafulla Dhariwal, Pamela Mishkin, and Mark Chen. Point-e: A system for generat- ing 3d point clouds from complex prompts. arXiv preprint arXiv:2212.08751, 2022. 3

    2022 arXiv

  12. [20]

    Occupancy flow: 4d reconstruction by learning particle dynamics

    Michael Niemeyer, Lars Mescheder, Michael Oechsle, and Andreas Geiger. Occupancy flow: 4d reconstruction by learning particle dynamics. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF international conference on computer vision , pages 5379– 5389, 2019. 2

    2019

  13. [21]

    Star: Sparse trained articulated human body regressor

    Ahmed AA Osman, Timo Bolkart, and Michael J Black. Star: Sparse trained articulated human body regressor. In Computer Vision–ECCV 2020: 16th European Conference, Glasgow, UK, August 23–28, 2020, Proceedings, Part VI 16, pages 598–613. Springer, 2020. 1

    2020

  14. [22]

    Npms: Neural parametric models for 3d de- formable shapes

    Pablo Palafox, Alja ˇz Boˇziˇc, Justus Thies, Matthias Nießner, and Angela Dai. Npms: Neural parametric models for 3d de- formable shapes. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Interna- tional Conference on Computer Vision, pages 12695–12705,

  15. [23]

    Spams: Structured implicit parametric models

    Pablo Palafox, Nikolaos Sarafianos, Tony Tung, and Angela Dai. Spams: Structured implicit parametric models. In Pro- ceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 12851–12860, 2022. 2

    2022

  16. [24]

    Deepsdf: Learning con- tinuous signed distance functions for shape representation

    Jeong Joon Park, Peter Florence, Julian Straub, Richard Newcombe, and Steven Lovegrove. Deepsdf: Learning con- tinuous signed distance functions for shape representation. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vi- sion and pattern recognition, pages 165–174, 2019. 1

    2019

  17. [25]

    Dreamfusion: Text-to-3d using 2d diffusion

    Ben Poole, Ajay Jain, Jonathan T Barron, and Ben Milden- hall. Dreamfusion: Text-to-3d using 2d diffusion. arXiv preprint arXiv:2209.14988, 2022. 3

    2022 arXiv

  18. [26]

    L3dg: Latent 3d gaussian diffusion

    Barbara Roessle, Norman M ¨uller, Lorenzo Porzi, Samuel Rota Bul `o, Peter Kontschieder, Angela Dai, and Matthias Nießner. L3dg: Latent 3d gaussian diffusion. In SIGGRAPH Asia 2024 Conference Papers, 2024. 3

    2024

  19. [27]

    High-resolution image synthesis with latent diffusion models

    Robin Rombach, Andreas Blattmann, Dominik Lorenz, Patrick Esser, and Bj ¨orn Ommer. High-resolution image synthesis with latent diffusion models. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pages 10684–10695, 2022. 3

    2022

  20. [28]

    Javier Romero, Dimitrios Tzionas, and Michael J. Black. Embodied hands: Modeling and capturing hands and bod- 9 ies together. ACM Transactions on Graphics, (Proc. SIG- GRAPH Asia), 36(6), 2017. 1, 2

    2017

  21. [29]

    Em- bodied hands: Modeling and capturing hands and bodies to- gether

    Javier Romero, Dimitrios Tzionas, and Michael J Black. Em- bodied hands: Modeling and capturing hands and bodies to- gether. arXiv preprint arXiv:2201.02610, 2022. 1

    2022 arXiv

  22. [30]

    3d neural field generation using triplane diffusion

    J Ryan Shue, Eric Ryan Chan, Ryan Po, Zachary Ankner, Jiajun Wu, and Gordon Wetzstein. 3d neural field generation using triplane diffusion. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition , pages 20875–20886, 2023. 3

    2023

  23. [31]

    Denoising diffusion implicit models

    Jiaming Song, Chenlin Meng, and Stefano Ermon. Denoising diffusion implicit models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2010.02502, 2020. 3

    2010 arXiv

  24. [32]

    Learning par- allel dense correspondence from spatio-temporal descriptors for efficient and robust 4d reconstruction

    Jiapeng Tang, Dan Xu, Kui Jia, and Lei Zhang. Learning par- allel dense correspondence from spatio-temporal descriptors for efficient and robust 4d reconstruction. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 6022–6031, 2021. 2

    2021

  25. [33]

    Neural shape deformation priors

    Jiapeng Tang, Lev Markhasin, Bi Wang, Justus Thies, and Matthias Nießner. Neural shape deformation priors. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems , 35: 17117–17132, 2022. 2

    2022

  26. [34]

    Dphms: Diffusion paramet- ric head models for depth-based tracking

    Jiapeng Tang, Angela Dai, Yinyu Nie, Lev Markhasin, Jus- tus Thies, and Matthias Nießner. Dphms: Diffusion paramet- ric head models for depth-based tracking. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 1111–1122, 2024. 2

    2024

  27. [35]

    Diffuscene: Denoising diffu- sion models for generative indoor scene synthesis

    Jiapeng Tang, Yinyu Nie, Lev Markhasin, Angela Dai, Justus Thies, and Matthias Nießner. Diffuscene: Denoising diffu- sion models for generative indoor scene synthesis. In Pro- ceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pages 20507–20518, 2024. 3

    2024

  28. [36]

    Ordinary differential equations and dynami- cal systems

    Gerald Teschl. Ordinary differential equations and dynami- cal systems. American Mathematical Society, 2024. 2

    2024

  29. [37]

    Human motion diffu- sion model

    Guy Tevet, Sigal Raab, Brian Gordon, Yoni Shafir, Daniel Cohen-or, and Amit Haim Bermano. Human motion diffu- sion model. In The Eleventh International Conference on Learning Representations, 2023. 2

    2023

  30. [38]

    Lion: Latent point dif- fusion models for 3d shape generation

    Arash Vahdat, Francis Williams, Zan Gojcic, Or Litany, Sanja Fidler, Karsten Kreis, et al. Lion: Latent point dif- fusion models for 3d shape generation. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 35:10021–10039, 2022. 3, 6

    2022

  31. [39]

    Cogvideox: Text-to-video diffusion models with an expert transformer

    Zhuoyi Yang, Jiayan Teng, Wendi Zheng, Ming Ding, Shiyu Huang, Jiazheng Xu, Yuanming Yang, Wenyi Hong, Xiao- han Zhang, Guanyu Feng, et al. Cogvideox: Text-to-video diffusion models with an expert transformer. arXiv preprint arXiv:2408.06072, 2024. 3

    2024 arXiv

  32. [40]

    Motiondif- fuse: Text-driven human motion generation with diffusion model

    Mingyuan Zhang, Zhongang Cai, Liang Pan, Fangzhou Hong, Xinying Guo, Lei Yang, and Ziwei Liu. Motiondif- fuse: Text-driven human motion generation with diffusion model. arXiv preprint arXiv:2208.15001, 2022. 2

    2022 arXiv

  33. [41]

    3d shape generation and completion through point-voxel diffusion

    Linqi Zhou, Yilun Du, and Jiajun Wu. 3d shape generation and completion through point-voxel diffusion. In Proceed- ings of the IEEE/CVF international conference on computer vision, pages 5826–5835, 2021. 3, 6 10 DNF: Unconditional 4D Generation with Dictionary-based Neural Fie...

    2021

  34. [42]

    Network Architecture Details 6.1. Dictionary Decoder With a pre-trained shape and motion MLP, we first con- duct SVD to each linear layer of the MLP and compress the matrices U ∈ RJ×J, Σ ∈ RJ×F and V ∈ RF ×F to Uk ∈ RJ×k,Vk ∈ RF ×k and Σk ∈ Rk×k. For each layer in the MLP, we ...

  35. [43]

    A spatial self-attention layerto aggregate tokens within each frame,

  36. [44]

    A condition cross-attention layer to incorporate shape conditions, and

  37. [45]

    In the sampling stage, our motion diffusion is capable of generating sequences longer thant frames through diffusion out-painting with a sliding window

    A temporal self-attention layer to aggregate tokens from the same position across different frames (e.g., mo- tion codes of different frames). In the sampling stage, our motion diffusion is capable of generating sequences longer thant frames through diffusion out-painting with...

  38. [46]

    Data processing Shape space

    Implementation Details 7.1. Data processing Shape space. For each shape identity in the train dataset, we sample 200k points on the given mesh. We then cal- culate its grid SDF with resolution equals to 256, sampling 50k points uniformly within the unit bounding box and 150k r...

Pith tools

Reviewed August 11, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.