Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 1 cited by

Generative Densification: Learning to Densify Gaussians for High-Fidelity Generalizable 3D Reconstruction

T0 review · 3 major / 5 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 Generative Densification claims that sparse-view 3D reconstruction improves by up-sampling the feature representations of selected Gaussians and generating fine Gaussians in a single forward pass, beating existing object- and scene-level…

desk verdict A genuinely new learned-densification mechanism for feed-forward Gaussian models with solid cross-dataset results, but the gains are not fully isolated from bundled backbone changes; worth sending to review with an attribution-fixing revision. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.06234 v3 pith:EY5O6FBB submitted 2024-12-09 cs.CV cs.GR

Seungtae Nam , Xiangyu Sun , Gyeongjin Kang , Younggeun Lee , Seungjun Oh , Eunbyung Park This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.CVcs.GR
keywords generativedensificationfeed-forward3Dreconstructionsparse-viewGaussiansplattingview-spacepositionalgradientsserializedattentionlearnablemaskingnovelviewsynthesis
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

Generative Densification is a method for making feed-forward 3D Gaussian models produce high-frequency detail. The paper argues that the usual per-scene densification strategy of 3D Gaussian splatting, which iteratively splits and clones raw Gaussians, is a poor fit for generalized models that reconstruct from a few images in one forward pass. Instead, the method up-samples feature representations of selected Gaussians and decodes fine Gaussians directly, using the model's learned prior for generalization. Integrated into LaRa for objects and MVSplat for scenes, it reports the best results on Gobjaverse, GSO, Co3D, RE10K, ACID, and DTU with comparable or smaller models. If correct, this means fine details in novel views can be recovered without per-scene optimization.

What carries the argument

The machinery is a densification module driven by view-space positional gradients: a per-Gaussian score measuring how much its projected position moves with rendering error identifies the top K Gaussians needing detail. An up-sampling module predicts offsets and feature residuals; a learnable confidence mask, trained with a straight-through gradient, decides which up-sampled Gaussians need another round; and a Gaussian head decodes opacities, spherical harmonics, quaternions, and scales. Serialized attention, which sorts Gaussians by space-filling-curve order and applies attention within non-overlapping groups, makes point-level attention efficient, while global adaptive normalization supplies global context. For scene-level reconstruction, fine Gaussians are generated by adding residuals across densification layers.

What would settle it

Train the same backbone and refinement modules with and without the generative densification module while holding the Gaussian representation, training schedule, and loss fixed, then compare PSNR, SSIM, and LPIPS on GSO and RE10K; if the metrics are unchanged, the claim that densification itself drives the improvement is refuted.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that selectively densifying feature representations, rather than raw Gaussian parameters, improves feed-forward sparse-view reconstruction. For Gaussians with large view-space positional gradients, the model predicts offsets and feature residuals, refines them through serialized attention plus learnable confidence masking, and decodes fine Gaussians; selected and remaining Gaussians are merged and rendered. The paper reports that this beats the object-level baselines GS-LRM and LaRa and the scene-level baselines DepthSplat and MVSplat, with 134M versus 300M parameters and 28M versus 37M parameters respectively, while also improving cross-dataset generalization to GSO, Co3D, ACID, and DTU.

Load-bearing premise

The measured gains are credited to the densification module, but the object-level system also switches the backbone from 2D to 3D Gaussians and adds cross-attention feature refinement, while the scene-level system adds residual learning; these changes are not ablated separately.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Detailed regions receive many small Gaussians while smooth regions keep few large ones, so rendering quality and speed do not degrade uniformly across the scene.
  • Thin structures, edges, and contours appear in novel views without per-scene optimization or repeated splitting and cloning steps.
  • The method transfers across datasets: the object-level model trained on Gobjaverse improves on GSO and Co3D, and the scene-level model trained on RE10K improves on ACID and DTU.
  • Learnable masking cuts the final Gaussian count by about 25% for a negligible PSNR drop, so fidelity and memory use can be traded off explicitly.
  • Because densification operates on features rather than specialized parameters, the recipe can be attached to other feed-forward Gaussian backbones, not only LaRa and MVSplat.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Beyond the paper's comparisons, the same gradient-criterion plus feature-up-sampling recipe could extend to other feed-forward representations such as triplane or point-cloud Gaussians, where per-scene densification is too slow.
  • The confidence masks are learned end-to-end but are not directly supervised; adding a rendering-loss-based supervision signal to the mask might make the selected Gaussians align even more tightly with visible detail.
  • The paper reports that fine Gaussians have smaller scales and lower opacities than coarse ones, which suggests a complementary pruning or merging step could reduce memory further without hurting image quality.
  • The reported gains mix the densification module with backbone changes, including a switch from 2D to 3D Gaussians and added cross-attention refinement, so the isolated contribution of the densification module itself remains an open question.
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

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. Generative Densification (GD) selects the top-K Gaussians from a feed-forward Gaussian model using view-space positional gradient norms, then up-samples their positions and features through serialized attention, learnable masking, and a Gaussian head, producing fine Gaussians in a single forward pass. The module is integrated into LaRa for object-level reconstruction and MVSplat for scene-level reconstruction; the latter also incorporates residual learning. The paper reports in-domain and cross-dataset improvements on Gobjaverse/GSO/Co3D, RE10K/ACID/DTU, and DL3DV-10K, with ablations over K and learnable masking on GSO. The central claim is that GD itself, rather than the accompanying backbone changes, is responsible for the improvements.

Significance. If the attribution were clean, the paper would make a solid contribution: a generalizable, optimization-free densification mechanism that improves high-frequency detail, with stronger cross-dataset generalization than the baselines. The end-to-end training, the use of gradients from the reconstruction loss for selection, the masking ablation, and the DL3DV evaluation are all strengths. However, the current experiments bundle GD with several other modifications (2D-to-3D Gaussian representation, decoder architecture changes, added cross-attention features, residual learning, and a 2.3x parameter increase at scene level), so the measured gains do not yet establish the paper's central claim. The missing controls are achievable within the manuscript's scope.

major comments (3)
  1. [Appendix C] The object-level system changes LaRa from 2D to 3D Gaussians, replaces the residual-SH decoder with an MLP that also outputs refined volume features, and trains the decoder from iteration 0, while the baseline LaRa checkpoint was trained with the original schedule. Since all of these changes are bundled with GD, the Table 1 gains cannot be attributed to GD alone. Please add an object-level control that applies these backbone/decoder changes but disables densification (or matches the final Gaussian count without the GD selection/up-sampling), and report it on the same Gobjaverse and GSO splits.
  2. [Table 4] The K(0)=0 row is the only direct test of removing GD, but it also removes all extra generated Gaussians: the final count drops from 114,351 to 46,693. This conflates the absence of the densification mechanism with a change in output capacity. A control that keeps the final Gaussian count comparable while disabling GD (for example, uniform densification without selection, or decoding all K(0) features at the target density) is needed to show that the selective generative up-sampling, not simply more Gaussians, produces the improvement. This ablation should also be run at scene level.
  3. [Appendix B / Table 2] The scene-level model adds residual learning (Appendix B) and a cross-attention feature-refinement MLP (Appendix C) while the parameter count grows from 12.0M to 27.8M. There is no scene-level ablation that keeps these additions and disables GD, so the RE10K improvement (27.08 vs 26.46 PSNR) and the ACID/DTU gains could come from the refinement capacity or parameters rather than from GD. Please provide a scene-level no-densification control with the same residual and refinement modules, and report it on RE10K and at least one cross-dataset benchmark.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Sec. 4.2, Table 2] The sentence 'outperforms DepthSplat with fewer parameters (37M vs. 28M)' is ambiguous; it should state clearly that Ours has 27.8M parameters while DepthSplat has 37M.
  2. [Related Work / Table 2] The acronym for the method in reference [27] appears as 'GPNR' in Table 2 but 'GNPR' in the Related Work; please unify the spelling.
  3. [Appendix C] Typo: 'Impelmentation Details' should be 'Implementation Details'.
  4. [Figure 5] The caption contains 'densifcation', and Figure 2 text has missing spacing ('topK'); please proofread.
  5. [Sec. 3.2] The cross-reference to the straight-through estimator equation says 'Eq. (13)' but the equation is Eq. (11); please correct.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity; the paper's claims rest on independent empirical evaluations, and no predicted quantity reduces by construction to a fitted input or self-citation.

full rationale

The central claim is that Generative Densification improves sparse-view reconstruction quality over LaRa and MVSplat baselines. This claim is supported by held-out test-set metrics on Gobjaverse, GSO, Co3D, RE10K, ACID, DTU, and DL3DV, with the densification module trained jointly under image reconstruction losses. The gradient-based selection of Gaussians to densify is a heuristic derived from the 3D-GS literature, not a parameter fitted to the reported test metrics; the fine Gaussian attributes themselves are produced by learned MLPs and evaluated through rendering, so the reported PSNR/SSIM/LPIPS numbers are not definitionally equal to the training signal. The paper does not invoke any uniqueness theorem, and its citations to LaRa, MVSplat, 3D-GS, and Point Transformer V3 are external prior works rather than self-citations. The main weakness is that the object-level system also changes LaRa from 2D to 3D Gaussians, adds cross-attention feature refinement, and trains the decoder from iteration 0, while the scene-level system adds residual learning, so the improvements are not cleanly attributed to the densification mechanism alone. That is an experimental ablation/attribution gap, not circularity: the results do not reduce by construction to the method's inputs. Accordingly, no circular step is identified and the circularity score is 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 3 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The method's design relies on hand-chosen hyperparameters that are only partially ablated. The central claim is empirical and depends on trained network capacity, not on a closed-form derivation, so the main burden is on the comparison design rather than on free parameters.

free parameters (4)
  • K(0) = 12,000 (object), 30,000 (scene)
    Number of Gaussians selected by gradient masking for densification; chosen by hand and partially ablated in Table 4.
  • Upsampling factors R(l) = 2 and 4 for object; 2, 2, 2 for scene
    Controls how many fine Gaussians are generated per selected Gaussian; chosen by hand in Appendix C.
  • Masking ratios P(l) = 0.8 and 0.8 for object; 0.5 and 0.8 for scene
    Fraction of upsampled Gaussians passed to the next densification layer; chosen by hand in Appendix C.
  • Loss weights = 0.5 SSIM (object), 0.05 LPIPS (scene)
    Weights in the training objectives; standard practice but selected without a grid search.
assumptions (3)
  • domain assumption View-space positional gradient is a reliable indicator of where additional Gaussians improve rendering quality.
    Adapted from 3D-GS densification; the method relies on this criterion to select the top-K Gaussians in Section 3.1.
  • domain assumption The feature representations from feed-forward models contain enough information to generate fine Gaussians.
    The whole approach depends on features F(0) being sufficient to decode finer geometry and appearance; assumed in Section 3.1.
  • standard math Space-filling curve ordering preserves local neighborhood structure for attention.
    Borrowed from Point Transformer V3; used to group Gaussians for serialized attention in Section 3.2.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Generative Densification: Learning to Densify Gaussians for High-Fidelity Generalizable 3D Reconstruction." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/EY5O6FBB

@misc{pith2026241206234,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Generative Densification: Learning to Densify Gaussians for High-Fidelity Generalizable 3D Reconstruction},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/EY5O6FBB}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.06234}
}
read the original abstract

Generalized feed-forward Gaussian models have achieved significant progress in sparse-view 3D reconstruction by leveraging prior knowledge from large multi-view datasets. However, these models often struggle to represent high-frequency details due to the limited number of Gaussians. While the densification strategy used in per-scene 3D Gaussian splatting (3D-GS) optimization can be adapted to the feed-forward models, it may not be ideally suited for generalized scenarios. In this paper, we propose Generative Densification, an efficient and generalizable method to densify Gaussians generated by feed-forward models. Unlike the 3D-GS densification strategy, which iteratively splits and clones raw Gaussian parameters, our method up-samples feature representations from the feed-forward models and generates their corresponding fine Gaussians in a single forward pass, leveraging the embedded prior knowledge for enhanced generalization. Experimental results on both object-level and scene-level reconstruction tasks demonstrate that our method outperforms state-of-the-art approaches with comparable or smaller model sizes, achieving notable improvements in representing fine details.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.06234 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Our method selectively densifies (a) coarse Gaussians from generalized feed-forward models. (c) The top [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p001_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Generative Densification overview. We selectively densifies the top [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Key components in Generative Densification Module. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (8 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Overview of the Generative Densification pipelines for object-level (top) and scene-level (bottom) reconstruction tasks. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Qualitative comparisons of our object-level model trained for 50 epochs against the original LaRa. The zoomed-in parts within [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Qualitative comparisons of our scene-level model against the original MVSplat on the RE10K [ [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Qualitative comparisons of our scene-level model against the original MVSplat on the ACID [ [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: 2D histograms of Gaussian attributes. Each pixel repre [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Additional qualitative results of our object-level and scene-level model trained for 50 epochs and 450,000 iterations, respectively. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Qualitative comparisons of our object-level model against the original LaRa [ [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_10.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Qualitative comparisons of our scene-level model against the original MVSplat [ [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_11.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. AdaptiveSplat:Texture Aware Controllable 3D Gaussian Allocation for Feed-Forward Reconstruction

    cs.CV 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Texture-aware SuperCluster pruning plus an adaptive Gaussian head lets feed-forward 3DGS models hit a user budget β while outperforming post-hoc pruners on RE10K, ACID, DL3DV and DTU.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

47 extracted references · 31 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    Revising densification in gaussian splatting

    Samuel Rota Bul `o, Lorenzo Porzi, and Peter Kontschieder. Revising densification in gaussian splatting. arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.06109, 2024. 3

    arXiv 2024

  2. [2]

    Emerg- ing properties in self-supervised vision transformers

    Mathilde Caron, Hugo Touvron, Ishan Misra, Herv ´e J´egou, Julien Mairal, Piotr Bojanowski, and Armand Joulin. Emerg- ing properties in self-supervised vision transformers. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision, 2021. 3

    work page 2021

  3. [3]

    pixelsplat: 3d gaussian splats from image pairs for scalable generalizable 3d reconstruction

    David Charatan, Sizhe Lester Li, Andrea Tagliasacchi, and Vincent Sitzmann. pixelsplat: 3d gaussian splats from image pairs for scalable generalizable 3d reconstruction. In Pro- ceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2024. 1, 2, 3, 6, 8

    work page 2024

  4. [4]

    Mvsnerf: Fast general- izable radiance field reconstruction from multi-view stereo

    Anpei Chen, Zexiang Xu, Fuqiang Zhao, Xiaoshuai Zhang, Fanbo Xiang, Jingyi Yu, and Hao Su. Mvsnerf: Fast general- izable radiance field reconstruction from multi-view stereo. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision, 2021. 6

    work page 2021

  5. [5]

    Lara: Efficient large-baseline radiance fields

    Anpei Chen, Haofei Xu, Stefano Esposito, Siyu Tang, and Andreas Geiger. Lara: Efficient large-baseline radiance fields. In European Conference on Computer Vision, 2025. 1, 3, 5, 6, 11, 12, 14

    work page 2025

  6. [6]

    Mvsplat360: Feed-forward 360 scene synthesis from sparse views

    Yuedong Chen, Chuanxia Zheng, Haofei Xu, Bohan Zhuang, Andrea Vedaldi, Tat-Jen Cham, and Jianfei Cai. Mvsplat360: Feed-forward 360 scene synthesis from sparse views. arXiv preprint arXiv:2411.04924, 2024. 11

    arXiv 2024

  7. [7]

    Mvsplat: Efficient 3d gaussian splatting from sparse multi-view images

    Yuedong Chen, Haofei Xu, Chuanxia Zheng, Bohan Zhuang, Marc Pollefeys, Andreas Geiger, Tat-Jen Cham, and Jianfei Cai. Mvsplat: Efficient 3d gaussian splatting from sparse multi-view images. In European Conference on Computer Vision, 2025. 1, 3, 5, 6, 8, 12, 14

    work page 2025

  8. [8]

    Objaverse: A universe of annotated 3d objects

    Matt Deitke, Dustin Schwenk, Jordi Salvador, Luca Weihs, Oscar Michel, Eli VanderBilt, Ludwig Schmidt, Kiana Ehsani, Aniruddha Kembhavi, and Ali Farhadi. Objaverse: A universe of annotated 3d objects. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2023. 1

    work page 2023

Show all 47 references
  1. [9]

    Objaverse-xl: A universe of 10m+ 3d objects

    Matt Deitke, Ruoshi Liu, Matthew Wallingford, Huong Ngo, Oscar Michel, Aditya Kusupati, Alan Fan, Christian Laforte, Vikram V oleti, Samir Yitzhak Gadre, et al. Objaverse-xl: A universe of 10m+ 3d objects. Advances in Neural Informa- tion Processing Systems, 36, 2024. 1

    2024

  2. [10]

    Google scanned objects: A high- quality dataset of 3d scanned household items

    Laura Downs, Anthony Francis, Nate Koenig, Brandon Kin- man, Ryan Hickman, Krista Reymann, Thomas B McHugh, and Vincent Vanhoucke. Google scanned objects: A high- quality dataset of 3d scanned household items. In Interna- tional Conference on Robotics and Automation , 2022. 6, 8, 14

    2022

  3. [11]

    2d gaussian splatting for geometrically ac- curate radiance fields

    Binbin Huang, Zehao Yu, Anpei Chen, Andreas Geiger, and Shenghua Gao. 2d gaussian splatting for geometrically ac- curate radiance fields. In SIGGRAPH, 2024. 12

    2024

  4. [12]

    Large scale multi-view stereopsis evalu- ation

    Rasmus Jensen, Anders Dahl, George V ogiatzis, Engin Tola, and Henrik Aanæs. Large scale multi-view stereopsis evalu- ation. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Com- puter Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2014. 6, 7, 8

    2014

  5. [13]

    3d gaussian splatting for real-time radiance field rendering

    Bernhard Kerbl, Georgios Kopanas, Thomas Leimk ¨uhler, and George Drettakis. 3d gaussian splatting for real-time radiance field rendering. ACM Transactions on Graphics ,

  6. [14]

    3d gaussian splatting as markov chain monte carlo

    Shakiba Kheradmand, Daniel Rebain, Gopal Sharma, Wei- wei Sun, Jeff Tseng, Hossam Isack, Abhishek Kar, An- drea Tagliasacchi, and Kwang Moo Yi. 3d gaussian splatting as markov chain monte carlo. arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.09591, 2024. 3

    2024 arXiv

  7. [15]

    Adam: A method for stochastic opti- mization

    Diederik P Kingma. Adam: A method for stochastic opti- mization. arXiv preprint arXiv:1412.6980, 2014. 12

    2014 arXiv

  8. [16]

    Dl3dv-10k: A large-scale scene dataset for deep learning-based 3d vision

    Lu Ling, Yichen Sheng, Zhi Tu, Wentian Zhao, Cheng Xin, Kun Wan, Lantao Yu, Qianyu Guo, Zixun Yu, Yawen Lu, et al. Dl3dv-10k: A large-scale scene dataset for deep learning-based 3d vision. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition ,

  9. [17]

    Infinite na- ture: Perpetual view generation of natural scenes from a sin- gle image

    Andrew Liu, Richard Tucker, Varun Jampani, Ameesh Makadia, Noah Snavely, and Angjoo Kanazawa. Infinite na- ture: Perpetual view generation of natural scenes from a sin- gle image. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision, 2021. 6, 7, 8

    2021

  10. [18]

    Mvsgaussian: Fast generalizable gaussian splatting recon- struction from multi-view stereo

    Tianqi Liu, Guangcong Wang, Shoukang Hu, Liao Shen, Xinyi Ye, Yuhang Zang, Zhiguo Cao, Wei Li, and Ziwei Liu. Mvsgaussian: Fast generalizable gaussian splatting recon- struction from multi-view stereo. In European Conference on Computer Vision, 2025. 3

    2025

  11. [19]

    Decoupled weight decay regularization

    I Loshchilov. Decoupled weight decay regularization. arXiv preprint arXiv:1711.05101, 2017. 12

    2017 arXiv

  12. [20]

    Large point-to-gaussian model for image-to-3d generation

    Longfei Lu, Huachen Gao, Tao Dai, Yaohua Zha, Zhi Hou, Junta Wu, and Shu-Tao Xia. Large point-to-gaussian model for image-to-3d generation. In Proceedings of the ACM In- ternational Conference on Multimedia, 2024. 3

    2024

  13. [21]

    Dinov2: Learning robust visual features without supervision

    Maxime Oquab, Timoth ´ee Darcet, Th ´eo Moutakanni, Huy V o, Marc Szafraniec, Vasil Khalidov, Pierre Fernandez, Daniel Haziza, Francisco Massa, Alaaeldin El-Nouby, et al. Dinov2: Learning robust visual features without supervision. arXiv preprint arXiv:2304.07193, 2023. 3

    2023 arXiv

  14. [22]

    Sur une courbe, qui remplit toute une aire plane

    Giuseppe Peano and G Peano. Sur une courbe, qui remplit toute une aire plane. Springer, 1990. 2, 4

    1990

  15. [23]

    Scalable diffusion models with transformers

    William Peebles and Saining Xie. Scalable diffusion models with transformers. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Interna- tional Conference on Computer Vision, 2023. 5

    2023

  16. [24]

    Pointnet: Deep learning on point sets for 3d classification and segmentation

    Charles R Qi, Hao Su, Kaichun Mo, and Leonidas J Guibas. Pointnet: Deep learning on point sets for 3d classification and segmentation. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Con- ference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2017. 5

    2017

  17. [25]

    Com- mon objects in 3d: Large-scale learning and evaluation of real-life 3d category reconstruction

    Jeremy Reizenstein, Roman Shapovalov, Philipp Henzler, Luca Sbordone, Patrick Labatut, and David Novotny. Com- mon objects in 3d: Large-scale learning and evaluation of real-life 3d category reconstruction. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision ,

  18. [26]

    Mvdream: Multi-view diffusion for 3d gen- eration

    Yichun Shi, Peng Wang, Jianglong Ye, Mai Long, Kejie Li, and Xiao Yang. Mvdream: Multi-view diffusion for 3d gen- eration. arXiv preprint arXiv:2308.16512, 2023. 3 9

    2023 arXiv

  19. [27]

    Generalizable patch-based neural render- ing

    Mohammed Suhail, Carlos Esteves, Leonid Sigal, and Ameesh Makadia. Generalizable patch-based neural render- ing. In European Conference on Computer Vision, 2022. 6, 8

    2022

  20. [28]

    Flash3d: Feed-forward gener- alisable 3d scene reconstruction from a single image

    Stanislaw Szymanowicz, Eldar Insafutdinov, Chuanxia Zheng, Dylan Campbell, Jo ˜ao F Henriques, Christian Rup- precht, and Andrea Vedaldi. Flash3d: Feed-forward gener- alisable 3d scene reconstruction from a single image. arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.04343, 2024. 3

    2024 arXiv

  21. [29]

    Splatter image: Ultra-fast single-view 3d recon- struction

    Stanislaw Szymanowicz, Chrisitian Rupprecht, and Andrea Vedaldi. Splatter image: Ultra-fast single-view 3d recon- struction. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2024. 1, 3

    2024

  22. [30]

    Lgm: Large multi-view gaussian model for high-resolution 3d content creation

    Jiaxiang Tang, Zhaoxi Chen, Xiaokang Chen, Tengfei Wang, Gang Zeng, and Ziwei Liu. Lgm: Large multi-view gaussian model for high-resolution 3d content creation. In European Conference on Computer Vision, 2025. 1, 3, 6

    2025

  23. [31]

    Point transformer v3: Simpler faster stronger

    Xiaoyang Wu, Li Jiang, Peng-Shuai Wang, Zhijian Liu, Xi- hui Liu, Yu Qiao, Wanli Ouyang, Tong He, and Hengshuang Zhao. Point transformer v3: Simpler faster stronger. In Pro- ceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2024. 2, 4

    2024

  24. [32]

    Snowflakenet: Point cloud completion by snowflake point deconvolution with skip-transformer

    Peng Xiang, Xin Wen, Yu-Shen Liu, Yan-Pei Cao, Pengfei Wan, Wen Zheng, and Zhizhong Han. Snowflakenet: Point cloud completion by snowflake point deconvolution with skip-transformer. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Interna- tional Conference on Computer Vision, 2021. 5

    2021

  25. [33]

    G-buffer objaverse: High-quality rendering dataset of objaverse

    Chao Xu, Yuan Dong, Qi Zuo, Junfei Zhang, Xiaodan Ye, Wenbo Geng, Yuxiang Zhang, Xiaodong Gu, Lingteng Qui, Zhengyi Zhao, Qing Ran, Jiayi Jiang, Zilong Dong, and Liefeng Bo. G-buffer objaverse: High-quality rendering dataset of objaverse. https://aigc3d.github.io/ gobjaverse/....

  26. [34]

    Murf: Multi-baseline radiance fields

    Haofei Xu, Anpei Chen, Yuedong Chen, Christos Sakaridis, Yulun Zhang, Marc Pollefeys, Andreas Geiger, and Fisher Yu. Murf: Multi-baseline radiance fields. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2024. 6, 8

    2024

  27. [35]

    Depthsplat: Connecting gaussian splatting and depth

    Haofei Xu, Songyou Peng, Fangjinhua Wang, Hermann Blum, Daniel Barath, Andreas Geiger, and Marc Pollefeys. Depthsplat: Connecting gaussian splatting and depth. arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.13862, 2024. 3, 6, 7, 8

    2024 arXiv

  28. [36]

    Understanding and improving layer normaliza- tion

    Jingjing Xu, Xu Sun, Zhiyuan Zhang, Guangxiang Zhao, and Junyang Lin. Understanding and improving layer normaliza- tion. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems ,

  29. [37]

    Grm: Large gaussian reconstruction model for ef- ficient 3d reconstruction and generation

    Yinghao Xu, Zifan Shi, Wang Yifan, Hansheng Chen, Ceyuan Yang, Sida Peng, Yujun Shen, and Gordon Wet- zstein. Grm: Large gaussian reconstruction model for ef- ficient 3d reconstruction and generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:2403.14621, 2024. 1, 3

    2024 arXiv

  30. [38]

    Absgs: Recovering fine details in 3d gaussian splat- ting

    Zongxin Ye, Wenyu Li, Sidun Liu, Peng Qiao, and Yong Dou. Absgs: Recovering fine details in 3d gaussian splat- ting. In Proceedings of the ACM International Conference on Multimedia, 2024. 3

    2024

  31. [39]

    Understanding straight-through estimator in training activation quantized neural nets

    Penghang Yin, Jiancheng Lyu, Shuai Zhang, Stanley Osher, Yingyong Qi, and Jack Xin. Understanding straight-through estimator in training activation quantized neural nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:1903.05662, 2019. 5

    1903 arXiv

  32. [40]

    pixelnerf: Neural radiance fields from one or few images

    Alex Yu, Vickie Ye, Matthew Tancik, and Angjoo Kanazawa. pixelnerf: Neural radiance fields from one or few images. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2021. 8

    2021

  33. [41]

    Geolrm: Geometry-aware large re- construction model for high-quality 3d gaussian generation

    Chubin Zhang, Hongliang Song, Yi Wei, Yu Chen, Jiwen Lu, and Yansong Tang. Geolrm: Geometry-aware large re- construction model for high-quality 3d gaussian generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.15333, 2024. 1, 3

    2024 arXiv

  34. [42]

    Gs-lrm: Large recon- struction model for 3d gaussian splatting

    Kai Zhang, Sai Bi, Hao Tan, Yuanbo Xiangli, Nanxuan Zhao, Kalyan Sunkavalli, and Zexiang Xu. Gs-lrm: Large recon- struction model for 3d gaussian splatting. In European Con- ference on Computer Vision, 2025. 1, 3, 6

    2025

  35. [43]

    The unreasonable effectiveness of deep features as a perceptual metric

    Richard Zhang, Phillip Isola, Alexei A Efros, Eli Shecht- man, and Oliver Wang. The unreasonable effectiveness of deep features as a perceptual metric. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2018. 12

    2018

  36. [44]

    Pixel-gs: Density control with pixel- aware gradient for 3d gaussian splatting

    Zheng Zhang, Wenbo Hu, Yixing Lao, Tong He, and Hengshuang Zhao. Pixel-gs: Density control with pixel- aware gradient for 3d gaussian splatting. arXiv preprint arXiv:2403.15530, 2024. 3, 6

    2024 arXiv

  37. [45]

    Gps- gaussian: Generalizable pixel-wise 3d gaussian splatting for real-time human novel view synthesis

    Shunyuan Zheng, Boyao Zhou, Ruizhi Shao, Boning Liu, Shengping Zhang, Liqiang Nie, and Yebin Liu. Gps- gaussian: Generalizable pixel-wise 3d gaussian splatting for real-time human novel view synthesis. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Re...

    2024

  38. [46]

    Stereo magnification: Learning view synthesis using multiplane images

    Tinghui Zhou, Richard Tucker, John Flynn, Graham Fyffe, and Noah Snavely. Stereo magnification: Learning view synthesis using multiplane images. arXiv preprint arXiv:1805.09817, 2018. 1, 3, 6, 7, 8, 14

    2018 arXiv

  39. [47]

    3K” and “4K

    Zi-Xin Zou, Zhipeng Yu, Yuan-Chen Guo, Yangguang Li, Ding Liang, Yan-Pei Cao, and Song-Hai Zhang. Triplane meets gaussian splatting: Fast and generalizable single-view 3d reconstruction with transformers. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern...

    2024

Pith tools

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