GSAVS: Gaussian Splatting-based Autonomous Vehicle Simulator

Rami Wilson

REVIEW 4 major objections 6 minor 21 references

GSAVS: Gaussian Splatting-based Autonomous Vehicle Simulator

T0 review · 4 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 An autonomous-vehicle simulator whose every asset is a 3D Gaussian splat offers a lightweight route to photorealistic digital twins for driving-agent training.

desk verdict A plausible engineering prototype that combines 3D Gaussian splats with Unity for AV simulation, but the evidence is too thin to support the central claims. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.18816 v1 pith:WAHVRX4J submitted 2024-12-25 cs.RO cs.AIcs.LG

Rami Wilson This is my paper · ORCID

classification cs.ROcs.AIcs.LG

keywords Gaussiansplattingautonomousdrivingsimulatordigitaltwincameraextrinsicsreinforcementlearningnovelviewsynthesissim-to-realtransfer

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

This paper introduces GSAVS, an autonomous-vehicle simulator whose environment, ego vehicle, and agent vehicles are all 3D Gaussian splats rendered in real time inside a conventional 3D engine. The aim is to combine the photorealism and compact storage of Gaussian splatting with the customization and physics of a classical engine, so that a digital twin of a real street scene can be built from multi-view driving video without hand-authoring meshes. To make the photoreal but geometrically unreliable splat usable for driving, the simulator builds a spline from the reconstruction's camera extrinsics and lays an invisible walled track along it, keeping the ego vehicle near views the splat can render accurately. The author reports that a reinforcement-learning agent trained on this simulator reaches 86%, 68%, and 81% test accuracy on three tasks at modest GPU utilization and VRAM usage.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing mechanism is the camera-extrinsic spline plus the RoadBlockAsset track. 3D Gaussian splatting, a scene-reconstruction technique that renders a scene as a cloud of colored 3D Gaussians, is the asset format for the environment and vehicles. Because these splats are photorealistic but geometrically unreliable in large unbounded scenes, the simulator cannot use the splat geometry itself for collision detection or road following. Instead, the positions of the input cameras recovered during reconstruction become knots of a spline, and identical road sections with invisible walls are instantiated repeatedly along that spline. The road is offset downward by half the ego-vehicle height so the virtual front camera sits where the real camera sat, which keeps the ego vehicle on views the splat can render accurately while letting standard engine physics act on the vehicle through colliders.

What would settle it

Find a driving sequence with a ground-truth vehicle trajectory, such as GPS or IMU data, and compare each reconstructed camera extrinsic with the true camera position projected onto the road surface; if the spline knots deviate from the lane by more than roughly one vehicle width, or if the reconstructed upward vectors tilt away from the road plane, then the claim that the track keeps agents on accurate views is falsified.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

GSAVS's central claim is that rendering every visible asset as a 3D Gaussian splat inside a classical 3D engine yields a practical autonomous-driving training environment with high photorealism and low resource cost. The environment is a splat trained from multi-view driving imagery, and the ego and agent vehicles are separately captured splats that are cleaned and given colliders. Because standard Gaussian splatting reconstructs geometry unreliably in large unbounded scenes, the simulator does not use the splat for collisions; instead, camera extrinsics from the reconstruction define a spline, and a prefabricated road section with invisible walls—the RoadBlockAsset—is tiled along it. This track both constrains the ego vehicle to accurate views and provides physical walls for wheel and box colliders. Training experiments with a standard reinforcement-learning policy report accuracies of 86%, 68%, and 81% on straight-line, turn, and dynamic-agent tasks, with average GPU utilization between 36% and 41% and VRAM between 25% and 32%.

Load-bearing premise

The simulator's physics and view accuracy both rest on the assumption that the camera extrinsics recovered during Gaussian-splat reconstruction lie on the drivable road; the ego vehicle is constrained to a spline through those extrinsics, so if the extrinsics are noisy or off-surface the agent trains on inaccurate views and positions.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

A digital twin of a real street can be assembled from multi-view driving video plus separately captured object splats, replacing manual mesh authoring for environment and vehicle assets.
The drivable region is implicitly determined by the data-collection route, so the simulator automatically keeps agents within views where the splat reconstruction is reliable.
Doubling the drivable area or adding one dynamic agent changed average GPU utilization by only a few percentage points in the reported runs, suggesting the splat representation scales cheaply with scene complexity.
Because agents and obstacles are independent splat assets with collision proxies, novel obstacles and scenarios can be inserted into a real-scene twin without rebuilding the environment.

Reading between the lines

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

A testable extension is to measure Gaussian-splat reconstruction error as a function of perpendicular distance from the extrinsic spline; the track width and spline spacing could then be set from that curve rather than fixed by vehicle dimensions.
The same extrinsic spline that guides the vehicle could be reused to auto-generate drivable-area annotations or a coarse lane graph for training perception modules, an output the paper does not claim.
The invisible-wall design cannot represent pedestrians, cross-traffic, or off-road events; the paper lists such dynamic elements as future work, so claims about training diversity currently apply only to on-route vehicle interactions.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

The one thing to know: this paper is a plausible engineering prototype, not a validated system. The new bit is using a 3D Gaussian splat environment inside Unity and building the drivable track from the SfM camera extrinsics, which is a sensible way to keep the ego vehicle near high-quality views. That combination, as far as the citations show, hasn't been done before. The paper also deserves credit for being straightforward about known 3DGS problems: floaters, baked lighting, poor large-scene geometry, and the need for an invisible collider track because physics can't engage splats directly.

The soft spots are real, though. The "every asset is a 3D Gaussian splat" claim is contradicted two sections later by the mesh RoadBlockAsset with colliders. That's a minor wording issue, not a fatal one, because the track is invisible. The bigger issue is the one the stress test flags: the spline comes from uncalibrated SfM extrinsics, and nothing in the paper addresses metric scale or alignment to the real road. nuScenes provides calibrated extrinsics and GPS/IMU, but the paper doesn't say they use them, just that they feed multi-view images into standard 3DGS and then read extrinsics out. If those poses have arbitrary scale or drift, the track won't line up with the rendered road and the ego vehicle learns to follow an invisible corridor rather than the visual route. The accuracy numbers can't rule that out because there are no baselines, no error bars, and no route generalization test. The resource claims also compare only within the system, not against a mesh-based equivalent, so "Gaussian splats are cheaper" is asserted more than shown.

On the citation pattern: the relevant 3DGS and AV simulator literature is covered, including dynamic Gaussian methods, and the paper correctly notes that standard 3DGS doesn't support dynamic scenes. That's fine.

Who is this for? Someone working on 3DGS-based simulation or digital twins will find the architecture useful as a starting point. A reader looking for evidence that this improves sim-to-real will be disappointed. The paper deserves a serious referee because the idea is worth scrutinizing, but it needs major revisions: clarify the asset claim, add scale/alignment evaluation, compare against a mesh baseline, and release code.

Referee Report

4 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper proposes GSAVS, a Unity-based autonomous vehicle simulator in which the environment, the ego vehicle, and dynamic vehicle agents are rendered as 3D Gaussian splats reconstructed from multi-view driving data. Physical interaction is provided by an invisible, prefabricated mesh track, the RoadBlockAsset, whose placement is derived from a spline through the camera extrinsics obtained during Gaussian splatting reconstruction. The authors describe the pipeline, report PPO training results on three tasks built from nuScenes-derived scenes, and report FPS, GPU utilization, and VRAM usage. The central claim is that this pipeline delivers a photorealistic, physically usable AV training environment at low resource cost relative to mesh-based simulators.

Significance. If the central claims hold, GSAVS would offer a lightweight route from real driving video to interactive, photorealistic AV training environments, addressing a practical bottleneck in building digital twins for autonomous driving. The paper makes a concrete use of nuScenes multi-view imagery, integrates 3D Gaussian splatting into a classical game engine, and explicitly lists relevant limitations and future directions. However, the evidence presented does not yet establish that the physically constrained training signal corresponds to the photorealistic visual route, because the spline geometry is not registered to metric ground truth and the quantitative evaluation lacks baselines and statistical support.

major comments (4)

[Section 2.2, Figure 3] The RoadBlockAsset track is placed along a spline whose knots are the camera extrinsics output by the 3D Gaussian splatting/SfM process, but the paper never describes how those coordinates are converted to metric Unity units or registered to ground truth. SfM/3DGS reconstructions generally have arbitrary scale, gauge ambiguity, and drift. Since the nuScenes dataset provides calibrated camera extrinsics and GPS/IMU ego poses, the authors should use those or another explicit metric-alignment step to place the spline; without such registration, the RoadBlockAsset width, wall height, downward offset, and wheel-collider geometry may not correspond to the visible road, and the trained policy is not guaranteed to be learning the claimed photorealistic visual task.
[Abstract, Section 2.2] The central claim that 'every asset within the simulator is a 3D Gaussian splat' is contradicted by the RoadBlockAsset, which is introduced as a prefabricated mesh section with mesh colliders and a disabled mesh renderer. This mesh is an asset of the simulator and is load-bearing for physics interaction, so the claim should either be restricted to visible/rendered assets or the RoadBlockAsset should be replaced by a mechanism consistent with the stated design principle.
[Section 5, Table 1] The accuracy results (86%, 68%, 81%) are each based on 50 test episodes and are reported without error bars, without multiple seeds, and without any baseline comparison to CARLA or to a mesh-based version of the same scenes. The sentence in Section 5 attributing the resource-utilization numbers to the efficiency of 3D Gaussian splatting assets is therefore unsupported; repeated trials and matching baselines are needed before the efficiency and accuracy claims can be evaluated.
[Section 2.2, Section 4] Because the spline is constructed from the same camera extrinsics that define the visual training task, the experiments only test the ego vehicle on the captured route and do not evaluate generalization to routes, lateral offsets, or perturbations outside the data. The paper should either add experiments that displace or re-route the spline, or explicitly state this as a limitation and discuss its consequences for the sim-to-real transfer claim.

minor comments (6)

[Section 1 and throughout] 'break force' should be 'brake force', the spacing in 'GSA VS' should be consistent, and headings such as 'V ehicle' contain stray spacing/typographic issues.
[Section 5] The text says 'average FPS only marginally increases when the drivable area is doubled', but Table 1 shows average FPS decreasing from 28 in task 1 to 25 in task 2; the wording should be corrected to match the data.
[Figure 2 caption] The caption refers to 'Figure 2B' when it should refer to 'Figure 2b' (lowercase) to match the figure panel labels.
[Section 2.1] The description of setting gravity to the inverse of the first camera's Z axis is confusing; clarify whether the Z axis is the optical axis and how the upward vector is computed from the extrinsics.
[Section 4] The experimental section does not specify which nuScenes scene(s) were used, how many multi-view frames fed the Gaussian splatting reconstruction, or how the small and large scenes were defined; these details are needed for reproducibility.
[References] Reference [17] contains the typo 'Sanja annd Williams' and reference [16] should use the proper diacritics in 'Pranckevičius'.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: GSAVS is an engineering/systems paper whose road spline construction is an explicit design mechanism, not a derived prediction or fitted quantity.

full rationale

GSAVS makes no mathematical derivation whose output is equivalent to its input. The road spline is constructed from camera extrinsics produced by the 3D Gaussian splatting pipeline and is then used to place an invisible RoadBlockAsset track that constrains the ego vehicle. This is not a prediction or a fitted parameter being renamed as a result; it is an openly stated engineering choice for keeping the ego vehicle near input viewpoints, as the paper says: 'This observation allows us to utilize the camera extrinsics resulting from the 3D Gaussian splatting process to construct a spline where we know the environment would look the most accurate.' The reported accuracies (86/68/81) come from empirical test episodes after PPO training, not from the spline construction itself. Section 6 explicitly acknowledges that the RoadBlockAsset is a temporary stand-in and that future accurate 3D reconstruction 'would no longer need the RoadBlockAsset,' which further confirms that the track is a practical mechanism rather than a hidden restatement of the evaluation. The claim that 'every asset' is a 3D Gaussian splat is internally contradicted by the mesh-based RoadBlockAsset, but that is a correctness or consistency issue, not circularity under the specified definitions. There are no load-bearing self-citations: the cited packages and datasets (nuScenes, UnityGaussianSplatting, ml-agents, SuperSplat, 3DGS references) are external and independently checkable. The evaluation design limits generalization to routes outside the captured camera trajectory, but that is a limitation of the training setup, not a circular derivation. Score 0.

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

The central claim rests on two hand-chosen design parameters (track width and height, RoadBlockAsset spacing) and on several domain assumptions about the accuracy of SfM, Gaussian splatting, and the premise that the data capture route equals the drivable route. No new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (4)

RoadBlockAsset spacing f
Configurable spacing between track blocks; lower f gives smoother track at higher performance cost.
Road width (approximately twice the ego vehicle width)
Hand-chosen track width to keep the ego vehicle on the road.
Wall height (approximately twice the ego vehicle height)
Hand-chosen wall height for the invisible track colliders.
RoadBlockAsset vertical offset (half of the ego vehicle height)
Chosen so the front camera aligns with the input camera positions.

assumptions (4)

domain assumption Structure-from-motion on multi-view nuScenes images yields sufficiently accurate camera extrinsics and point clouds for Gaussian splatting.
The entire road spline is built from these extrinsics (Section 2.2).
domain assumption The ego vehicle and data capture vehicle follow the same road, so constraining the ego vehicle to the camera path keeps views accurate.
Stated in Section 2.2: the data capture vehicle route constrains where the ego vehicle may go.
domain assumption 3D Gaussian splatting reconstruction of the nuScenes scene is accurate enough to train a driving model.
The paper acknowledges floaters and inaccurate features in Section 2.1 but proceeds to use the splat anyway.
domain assumption Standard 3D Gaussian splatting works with the UnityGaussianSplatting package for real-time rendering.
The simulator depends on this package (Section 2.1).

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of GSAVS: Gaussian Splatting-based Autonomous Vehicle Simulator." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/WAHVRX4J

@misc{pith2026241218816,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: GSAVS: Gaussian Splatting-based Autonomous Vehicle Simulator},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/WAHVRX4J}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.18816}
}

read the original abstract

Modern autonomous vehicle simulators feature an ever-growing library of assets, including vehicles, buildings, roads, pedestrians, and more. While this level of customization proves beneficial when creating virtual urban environments, this process becomes cumbersome when intending to train within a digital twin or a duplicate of a real scene. Gaussian splatting emerged as a powerful technique in scene reconstruction and novel view synthesis, boasting high fidelity and rendering speeds. In this paper, we introduce GSAVS, an autonomous vehicle simulator that supports the creation and development of autonomous vehicle models. Every asset within the simulator is a 3D Gaussian splat, including the vehicles and the environment. However, the simulator runs within a classical 3D engine, rendering 3D Gaussian splats in real-time. This allows the simulator to utilize the photorealism that 3D Gaussian splatting boasts while providing the customization and ease of use of a classical 3D engine.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.18816 by the authors.

**Figure 3.** RoadBlockAssets are offset down by half the height of the ego vehicle so that the virtual [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 4.** Example of an ego vehicle asset. Attached to the wheels are the wheel colliders that allow [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png] view at source ↗

Figures from the paper (1 more)

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: Example of a vehicle agent asset. The vehicle’s position is manipulated for each time-step [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_5.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

21 extracted references · 18 canonical work pages

[1]

3d gaussian splatting: Survey, technologies, challenges, and opportunities, 2024

Yanqi Bao, Tianyu Ding, Jing Huo, Yaoli Liu, Yuxin Li, Wenbin Li, Yang Gao, and Jiebo Luo. 3d gaussian splatting: Survey, technologies, challenges, and opportunities, 2024

work page 2024
[2]

Lang, Sourabh V ora, Venice Erin Liong, Qiang Xu, Anush Krishnan, Yu Pan, Giancarlo Baldan, and Oscar Beijbom

Holger Caesar, Varun Bankiti, Alex H. Lang, Sourabh V ora, Venice Erin Liong, Qiang Xu, Anush Krishnan, Yu Pan, Giancarlo Baldan, and Oscar Beijbom. nuscenes: A multimodal dataset for autonomous driving. In CVPR, 2020

work page 2020
[3]

A survey on 3d gaussian splatting, 2024

Guikun Chen and Wenguan Wang. A survey on 3d gaussian splatting, 2024

work page 2024
[4]

Robbersmyr, and Kristian Muri Knausgård

Anurag Dalal, Daniel Hagen, Kjell G. Robbersmyr, and Kristian Muri Knausgård. Gaussian splatting: 3d reconstruction and novel view synthesis: A review. IEEE Access, 12:96797–96820, 2024

work page 2024
[5]

López, and Vladlen Koltun

Alexey Dosovitskiy, Germán Ros, Felipe Codevilla, Antonio M. López, and Vladlen Koltun. Carla: An open urban driving simulator. In CoRL, volume 78 of Proceedings of Machine Learning Research, pages 1–16. PMLR, 2017

work page 2017
[6]

3d gaussian splatting as new era: A survey

Ben Fei, Jingyi Xu, Rui Zhang, Qingyuan Zhou, Weidong Yang, and Ying He. 3d gaussian splatting as new era: A survey. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, page 1–20, 2024

work page 2024
[7]

Relightable 3d gaussians: Realistic point cloud relighting with brdf decomposition and ray tracing, 2024

Jian Gao, Chun Gu, Youtian Lin, Zhihao Li, Hao Zhu, Xun Cao, Li Zhang, and Yao Yao. Relightable 3d gaussians: Realistic point cloud relighting with brdf decomposition and ray tracing, 2024

work page 2024
[8]

How simulation helps autonomous driving: A survey of sim2real, digital twins, and parallel intelligence

Xuemin Hu, Shen Li, Tingyu Huang, Bo Tang, Rouxing Huai, and Long Chen. How simulation helps autonomous driving: A survey of sim2real, digital twins, and parallel intelligence. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent V ehicles, 9(1):593–612, 2024

work page 2024

Show all 21 references

[9]

S3gaussian: Self-supervised street gaussians for autonomous driving, 2024

Nan Huang, Xiaobao Wei, Wenzhao Zheng, Pengju An, Ming Lu, Wei Zhan, Masayoshi Tomizuka, Kurt Keutzer, and Shanghang Zhang. S3gaussian: Self-supervised street gaussians for autonomous driving, 2024. 8

2024
[10]

Li-gs: Gaussian splatting with lidar incorporated for accurate large-scale reconstruction

Changjian Jiang, Ruilan Gao, Kele Shao, Yue Wang, Rong Xiong, and Yu Zhang. Li-gs: Gaussian splatting with lidar incorporated for accurate large-scale reconstruction. ArXiv, abs/2409.12899, 2024

2024 arXiv
[11]

Unity: A general platform for intelligent agents

Arthur Juliani, Vincent-Pierre Berges, Ervin Teng, Andrew Cohen, Jonathan Harper, Chris Elion, Chris Goy, Yuan Gao, Hunter Henry, Marwan Mattar, and Danny Lange. Unity: A general platform for intelligent agents. arXiv preprint arXiv:1809.02627, 2020

2020 arXiv
[12]

3d gaussian splatting for real-time radiance field rendering

Bernhard Kerbl, Georgios Kopanas, Thomas Leimkühler, and George Drettakis. 3d gaussian splatting for real-time radiance field rendering. ACM Transactions on Graphics, 42(4), July 2023

2023
[13]

Jonathan Wellington Morris, Vishrut Shah, Alex Besanceney, Daksh Shah, and Leilani H. Gilpin. Slug mobile: Test-bench for rl testing, 2024

2024
[14]

Supersplat, 2024

PlayCanvas. Supersplat, 2024

2024
[15]

Pomerleau

Dean A. Pomerleau. Alvinn: An autonomous land vehicle in a neural network. In D. Touretzky, editor, Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems , volume 1. Morgan-Kaufmann, 1988

1988
[16]

Unitygaussiansplatting, 2023

Aras Pranckevi ˇcius. Unitygaussiansplatting, 2023

2023
[17]

Scube: Instant large-scale scene reconstruction using voxsplats

Xuanchi Ren, Yifan Lu, Hanxue Liang, Jay Zhangjie Wu, Huan Ling, Mike Chen, Francis Fidler, Sanja annd Williams, and Jiahui Huang. Scube: Instant large-scale scene reconstruction using voxsplats. In The Thirty-eighth Annual Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems, 2024

2024
[18]

Dn-splatter: Depth and normal priors for gaussian splatting and meshing, 2024

Matias Turkulainen, Xuqian Ren, Iaroslav Melekhov, Otto Seiskari, Esa Rahtu, and Juho Kannala. Dn-splatter: Depth and normal priors for gaussian splatting and meshing, 2024

2024
[19]

Unity, 2023

Unity Technologies. Unity, 2023. Game development platform

2023
[20]

V oogd, Jean Pierre Allamaa, Javier Alonso-Mora, and Tong Duy Son

Kevin L. V oogd, Jean Pierre Allamaa, Javier Alonso-Mora, and Tong Duy Son. Reinforce- ment learning from simulation to real world autonomous driving using digital twin. IF AC- PapersOnLine, 56(2):1510–1515, 2023. 22nd IFAC World Congress

2023
[21]

Drivinggaussian: Composite gaussian splatting for surrounding dynamic autonomous driving scenes, 2024

Xiaoyu Zhou, Zhiwei Lin, Xiaojun Shan, Yongtao Wang, Deqing Sun, and Ming-Hsuan Yang. Drivinggaussian: Composite gaussian splatting for surrounding dynamic autonomous driving scenes, 2024. 9

2024

Pith tools

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

[1] [1]

3d gaussian splatting: Survey, technologies, challenges, and opportunities, 2024

Yanqi Bao, Tianyu Ding, Jing Huo, Yaoli Liu, Yuxin Li, Wenbin Li, Yang Gao, and Jiebo Luo. 3d gaussian splatting: Survey, technologies, challenges, and opportunities, 2024

work page 2024

[2] [2]

Lang, Sourabh V ora, Venice Erin Liong, Qiang Xu, Anush Krishnan, Yu Pan, Giancarlo Baldan, and Oscar Beijbom

Holger Caesar, Varun Bankiti, Alex H. Lang, Sourabh V ora, Venice Erin Liong, Qiang Xu, Anush Krishnan, Yu Pan, Giancarlo Baldan, and Oscar Beijbom. nuscenes: A multimodal dataset for autonomous driving. In CVPR, 2020

work page 2020

[3] [3]

A survey on 3d gaussian splatting, 2024

Guikun Chen and Wenguan Wang. A survey on 3d gaussian splatting, 2024

work page 2024

[4] [4]

Robbersmyr, and Kristian Muri Knausgård

Anurag Dalal, Daniel Hagen, Kjell G. Robbersmyr, and Kristian Muri Knausgård. Gaussian splatting: 3d reconstruction and novel view synthesis: A review. IEEE Access, 12:96797–96820, 2024

work page 2024

[5] [5]

López, and Vladlen Koltun

Alexey Dosovitskiy, Germán Ros, Felipe Codevilla, Antonio M. López, and Vladlen Koltun. Carla: An open urban driving simulator. In CoRL, volume 78 of Proceedings of Machine Learning Research, pages 1–16. PMLR, 2017

work page 2017

[6] [6]

3d gaussian splatting as new era: A survey

Ben Fei, Jingyi Xu, Rui Zhang, Qingyuan Zhou, Weidong Yang, and Ying He. 3d gaussian splatting as new era: A survey. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, page 1–20, 2024

work page 2024

[7] [7]

Relightable 3d gaussians: Realistic point cloud relighting with brdf decomposition and ray tracing, 2024

Jian Gao, Chun Gu, Youtian Lin, Zhihao Li, Hao Zhu, Xun Cao, Li Zhang, and Yao Yao. Relightable 3d gaussians: Realistic point cloud relighting with brdf decomposition and ray tracing, 2024

work page 2024

[8] [8]

How simulation helps autonomous driving: A survey of sim2real, digital twins, and parallel intelligence

Xuemin Hu, Shen Li, Tingyu Huang, Bo Tang, Rouxing Huai, and Long Chen. How simulation helps autonomous driving: A survey of sim2real, digital twins, and parallel intelligence. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent V ehicles, 9(1):593–612, 2024

work page 2024