Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 1 cited by

Hybrid 3D-4D Gaussian Splatting for Fast Dynamic Scene Representation

T0 review · 3 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper argues that representing static regions with 3D Gaussians and reserving 4D Gaussians for moving content makes dynamic scene training 3-5x faster without losing quality.

desk verdict A genuinely new hybrid 3D-4D Gaussian mechanism with solid quality results, but the headline speedup is confounded by unequal baselines and the tau threshold is tuned on test data. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.13215 v1 pith:W635NKAX submitted 2025-05-19 cs.CV

Seungjun Oh , Younggeun Lee , Hyejin Jeon , Eunbyung Park This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.CV
keywords dynamicscenerepresentation4DGaussiansplatting3Dstatic-dynamicclassificationtemporalscalethresholdnovelviewsynthesishybridtrainingacceleration
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

The paper claims that most of the cost of 4D Gaussian Splatting for dynamic scenes is wasted on static regions, which do not need time-varying parameters. Its proposal is a hybrid representation: start with all 4D Gaussians, then repeatedly convert any Gaussian whose time-axis scale exceeds a threshold into a pure 3D Gaussian, so that temporal modeling is spent only on genuinely moving content. The claimed payoffs are concrete: training on the N3V 10-second clips takes about 12 minutes instead of 5.5 hours for the 4DGS baseline, average PSNR rises slightly from 32.01 to 32.25 dB, and storage drops from 2.1 GB to 273 MB. If true, this makes dynamic scene reconstruction practical for interactive and production workflows that currently wait hours per sequence.

What carries the argument

The central object is the 4D Gaussian's time-axis scale $\exp(s_t)$, a scalar that measures how far the Gaussian stretches along the temporal dimension; a large value means the Gaussian covers the whole sequence and is effectively static. The threshold $\tau$ (set by hand per dataset: 3 for 10-second N3V clips, 6 for the 40-second sequence, 1 for Technicolor) turns this scale into a binary static/dynamic classifier, applied at every densification stage. The conversion operation discards the temporal components of the mean and rotation, producing a standard 3D Gaussian, and a unified CUDA rasterizer projects both 3D and 4D Gaussians into one screen-space list for compositing. The removal of periodic opacity resets is a second mechanism: keeping opacities continuous avoids erasing learned motion cues during the shortened training schedule.

What would settle it

Train the method on a synthetic scene with one known static background and one known moving object, sweeping $\tau$ over a fine grid; if no threshold simultaneously keeps the background in 3D and the moving object in 4D while matching 4DGS quality, then the scalar-threshold separation premise fails. A second check: after training, take every converted 3D Gaussian and test whether any region it covers later moves; re-enabling 4D for those regions should recover quality if the one-way conversion is lossy.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the discovery is that temporally invariant Gaussians carry a reliable signature—their time-axis scale $\exp(s_t)$—and can be collapsed to 3D without harming motion fidelity. The method trains a full 4DGS model for about 500 iterations to stabilize the Gaussians, then classifies at each densification stage: Gaussians with $\exp(s_t) > \tau$ are converted to 3D by discarding the temporal mean and the temporal off-diagonal rotation, keeping the spatial mean, the $3\times3$ rotation, scales, opacity, and spherical-harmonic colors. Dynamic Gaussians keep their full 4D parameters and are sliced at the query timestamp during rendering. Because static 3D Gaussians are updated in every training iteration instead of being culled like many 4D Gaussians, convergence accelerates to roughly 6,000 iterations for 10-second scenes versus 20,000–30,000 for 4DGS, and the reduced parameter count yields the reported speed, memory, and quality results.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that a single hand-set number—the threshold on the time-axis scale $\exp(s_t)$—cleanly separates static from dynamic Gaussians, and that a Gaussian classified as static never needs to become dynamic again; if the threshold is too low, moving content gets folded into the 3D representation and motion collapses, and if it is too high the speedup disappears.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • 10-second N3V scenes train in about 12 minutes on an RTX 4090, roughly 3–5x faster than the 4DGS baseline, making per-scene tuning practical.
  • Static regions shed redundant parameters: a typical N3V scene uses 843k 4D Gaussians plus 230k 3D Gaussians instead of 3.3M 4D Gaussians, and storage drops from 2.1 GB to 273 MB.
  • Rendering quality does not drop with the smaller model: N3V average PSNR is 32.25 dB versus 32.01 dB for 4DGS, with SSIM and LPIPS essentially tied.
  • The 40-second flame salmon sequence trains in 52 minutes and achieves the lowest LPIPS among compared methods, suggesting the speedup carries to longer capture.
  • Eliminating opacity resets stabilizes dynamic optimization, avoiding flicker that periodic reinitialization introduces in time-limited training.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Because the threshold is hand-set per dataset, a learned or per-scene adaptive classifier could remove the main tuning knob and likely widen the gap over 4DGS; this is testable by optimizing $\tau$ per scene and comparing average PSNR.
  • The one-way 4D-to-3D conversion assumes static regions never become dynamic; scenes with moving cameras or newly appearing objects could break that assumption, so a mechanism allowing reclassification back to 4D is a natural extension.
  • The speedup partly comes from updating static 3D Gaussians every iteration while 4DGS culls many Gaussians; this suggests that smarter per-frame update scheduling could accelerate even full-4D training without any conversion.
  • Hybrid 3D-4D representations also invite compression: static 3D Gaussians could be encoded with static-scene codecs and dynamic ones with video codecs, potentially cutting storage well below the reported 273 MB.
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.

Referee Report

3 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper proposes 3D-4DGS, a hybrid Gaussian splatting representation for dynamic scenes. Training starts with a fully 4D Gaussian model; at each densification stage, Gaussians whose temporal scale exp(s_t) exceeds a threshold tau are classified as static and converted to 3D Gaussians by discarding the temporal mean and rotation components. The rendering pipeline projects both 3D and 4D Gaussians into screen space in a unified CUDA rasterizer. Experiments on the N3V dataset (10-second clips and one 40-second sequence) and the Technicolor dataset report PSNR/SSIM/LPIPS comparable to or better than 4DGS, with substantially reduced training times (e.g., 11m53s versus 5.5h on the 10-second N3V clips). The paper also ablates the threshold tau and the use of opacity resets, and it includes a short Limitations section.

Significance. If the speed advantage were cleanly established, the hybrid representation would be a practically useful contribution to dynamic Gaussian splatting, and the paper has real strengths: it evaluates on standard multi-view dynamic benchmarks, reports consistent metrics including LPIPS, provides ablations and qualitative visualizations, and explicitly acknowledges limitations. However, the headline speed advantage is currently not attributable to the proposed 3D-4D conversion because the comparison changes several implementation variables at once, and the key threshold tau is selected after inspecting trained models on the same datasets on which the method is evaluated. With controlled ablations and a more principled threshold analysis, the contribution could be substantial; in its current form the paper supports an engineering result whose main advertised advantage is under-supported.

major comments (3)
  1. [§5.2 and Table 1] The central speed claim is not isolated from other implementation changes. The proposed method is trained for 6,000 iterations on 10-second N3V clips and uses the Taming-3DGS backward pass, while the 4DGS baseline is compared at 20,000-30,000 iterations and is not stated to receive that backward pass or the reset-free schedule. The paper also removes opacity resets in the proposed pipeline. Table 4 ablates tau and opacity resets but does not report training time, so it cannot attribute the 5.5h-to-11m53s gain to the 3D-4D conversion. Please add controlled runs: (a) 4DGS with the Taming-3DGS backward pass, no opacity resets, and 6,000 iterations; (b) the proposed pipeline with conversion disabled, holding all other choices fixed; and report wall-clock times for all Table 4 rows.
  2. [§4.1 and Table 4] The temporal-scale threshold tau is load-bearing and is selected post hoc. The text states that tau was empirically determined based on the distribution of temporal scales in fully trained 4DGS and the characteristics of the target datasets, i.e., after inspecting trained models on the same datasets used for evaluation. The ablation in Table 4 tests only tau=2.5, 3.0, and 3.5 on N3V and does not include Technicolor or the 40-second sequence. Because a wrong tau produces a clear failure mode (e.g., flame steak collapse in Fig. 8), the paper should either provide a principled selection rule or report sensitivity across all datasets and scenes; otherwise the reported averages reflect a hyperparameter tuned to the test sets.
  3. [§4.2, Eq. (9)] The quaternion conversion is not numerically robust as written. Eq. (9) computes w = 0.5*sqrt(1+tr(R3D)) and then x, y, z with 4w in the denominator; when R3D is a rotation by pi, the trace is -1, w=0, and the expression divides by zero. A standard branch based on the largest quaternion component is needed. Since this conversion is the core operation of the method, the manuscript should specify the robust version or explicitly state an assumption that such rotations do not occur.
minor comments (6)
  1. [§4.3] Typo: 'piplines' should be 'pipelines'.
  2. [Table 2] The ** marker on 4DGS** and 4K4D** is not explained in the caption; clarify which training protocol (e.g., all 300 frames split for training, sparse COLMAP initialization) applies to each baseline and whether the proposed method uses the same protocol.
  3. [Tables 1 and 3] Training times in Table 3 are measured on an RTX 3090 while Table 1 uses an RTX 4090; the text should state explicitly that wall-clock values across the two tables are not directly comparable.
  4. [Fig. 2] The histogram would be more informative with axis labels and a marked position of tau; as shown, the claimed valley between dynamic and static temporal scales cannot be verified by the reader.
  5. [§2.2] There are typographical issues in the related work text, e.g., 'V olumes' for 'Volumes'.
  6. [§4.1 and Limitations] The 4D-to-3D conversion is irreversible: a converted 3D Gaussian is never re-promoted to 4D, even though the iterative classification suggests adaptivity. This design choice is not discussed in the Limitations section and should be acknowledged.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the core results are empirical engineering measurements, not derivations that reduce to their own inputs.

full rationale

The paper's central claims are that a hybrid 3D-4D Gaussian representation trains faster than a full 4DGS baseline while preserving quality. These are supported by direct measurements on benchmark datasets (Tables 1-3), not by a derivation chain that could be circular. The static/dynamic classification rule (Sec 4.1) is definitional in the sense that a Gaussian with temporal scale exp(s_t) above a threshold tau is labeled static and converted to 3D, but the paper does not present this classification as a predicted scientific outcome; it presents it as a heuristic design choice, and the ablation in Sec 5.4 explicitly shows that the threshold can fail (tau=2.5 merges dynamic content into static representation), which demonstrates the result is not forced by construction. The threshold tau is empirically selected from fully trained 4DGS distributions on the same datasets, which is a methodological weakness (test-set hyperparameter tuning), but it is not circularity under the defined patterns because the reported speed and quality numbers are measurements, not quantities algebraically implied by the threshold. The skeptical concern about the speedup comparison being confounded by the Taming-3DGS backward pass, the elimination of opacity resets, and the reduced iteration budget (Sec 5.2) is a validity and attribution issue, not a circularity issue: the paper does not define the speedup in terms of any fitted parameter, nor does it invoke a self-citation as the load-bearing justification. No uniqueness theorem is imported, no ansatz is smuggled via self-citation, and no known result is merely renamed. The authors' own Limitations paragraph acknowledges that the threshold is heuristic, further confirming that no overclaim of derivation is being made. Therefore the appropriate finding is no significant circularity, consistent with the default expectation for an empirical systems paper.

Assumptions & free parameters 1 free parameters · 3 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The core method rests on a threshold tau that is fitted to the evaluation datasets, an assumption that static content is safe to convert to 3D, and the standard Gaussian splatting background. No new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (1)
  • temporal scale threshold tau = 3 (10s N3V), 6 (40s N3V), 1 (Technicolor)
    Chosen empirically from the distribution of exp(s_t) in fully trained 4DGS on the same datasets (Sec 4.1, Sec 5.2). The method's static/dynamic split depends directly on this value.
assumptions (3)
  • standard math Gaussian splatting rendering equations (Eq 1-3) from prior work are correct and applicable.
    Assumed from 3DGS and 4DGS baselines; the paper builds on the existing representation without re-deriving it.
  • domain assumption Static scene content can be faithfully represented by time-invariant 3D Gaussians with no temporal parameters.
    The whole method rests on this; the paper argues it via Eq 8 but also admits the ideal block-diagonal case rarely happens (Sec 4.2).
  • ad hoc to paper A Gaussian with exp(s_t) > tau is static and can be safely converted to 3D without future reversion.
    This is the core heuristic; no proof that the classification is stable or correct, and ablation shows tau=2.5 can merge dynamic content.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Hybrid 3D-4D Gaussian Splatting for Fast Dynamic Scene Representation." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/W635NKAX

@misc{pith2026250513215,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Hybrid 3D-4D Gaussian Splatting for Fast Dynamic Scene Representation},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/W635NKAX}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.13215}
}
read the original abstract

Recent advancements in dynamic 3D scene reconstruction have shown promising results, enabling high-fidelity 3D novel view synthesis with improved temporal consistency. Among these, 4D Gaussian Splatting (4DGS) has emerged as an appealing approach due to its ability to model high-fidelity spatial and temporal variations. However, existing methods suffer from substantial computational and memory overhead due to the redundant allocation of 4D Gaussians to static regions, which can also degrade image quality. In this work, we introduce hybrid 3D-4D Gaussian Splatting (3D-4DGS), a novel framework that adaptively represents static regions with 3D Gaussians while reserving 4D Gaussians for dynamic elements. Our method begins with a fully 4D Gaussian representation and iteratively converts temporally invariant Gaussians into 3D, significantly reducing the number of parameters and improving computational efficiency. Meanwhile, dynamic Gaussians retain their full 4D representation, capturing complex motions with high fidelity. Our approach achieves significantly faster training times compared to baseline 4D Gaussian Splatting methods while maintaining or improving the visual quality.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2505.13215 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Left: Rendering results on the coffee martini scene. Right: PSNR vs. training time. The proposed method converges in 12 minutes while maintaining competitive rendering quality. All methods were evaluated under the same machine equipped with the NVIDIA RTX4090 GPU, except for 4D-Rotor GS [11]—whose results were estimated from iteration counts since the code is not publicly available. Abstract Recent advancements in d… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Distribution of the t-axis scale for Gaussians in the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Overview of our hybrid 3D–4D Gaussian Splatting framework. (a) 4D Gaussians are optimized over time, and those exceeding a [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (8 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Qualitative comparison on the N3V dataset. While most methods yield comparable results, our approach can preserve subtle [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_4.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Influence of opacity resets on a dynamic scene. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_6.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Visual comparison of different scale thresholds [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_5.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Visualization of spatially distributed Gaussians. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Per-scene PSNR curves on the N3V dataset for different temporal scale thresholds (τ = 2.5, 3.0, 3.5). Each plot corresponds to one scene, showing how PSNR evolves over 6000 iterations of training. The mid-range setting (τ = 3.0) often strikes a balance, maintaining com…
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Comparison with Ground Truth on the 40-second sequence. We sample frames at different timestamps (top: GT, bottom: ours) to illustrate that our approach preserves both global structure and subtle motion details over extended temporal ranges. 14 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figure…
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Additional results on N3V and Technicolor scenes. Despite challenging lighting conditions and fast motion, our hybrid 3D-4D approach maintains crisp object boundaries and more consistent textures across frames. 15 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_10.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Dynamic vs. Static Visualization. Each row shows (left) the dynamic portion on a white background, (middle) the static region, and (right) the fully rendered result. By converting most static elements into 3D Gaussians, our approach effectively handles dynamic scenes …

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. Does it matter which Gaussians you pick in 4D Gaussian streaming?

    cs.CV 2026-03 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    A reinforcement-learned plug-in sampler can match or beat IGS@8192 quality on N3DV and MeetingRoom using as few as 256 anchors while reducing per-frame time.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

61 extracted references · 33 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [10]

    4d scaffold gaussian splatting for memory efficient dynamic scene reconstruction

    Woong Oh Cho, In Cho, Seoha Kim, Jeongmin Bae, Youngjung Uh, and Seon Joo Kim. 4d scaffold gaussian splatting for memory efficient dynamic scene reconstruction. arXiv preprint arXiv:2411.17044, 2024

    arXiv 2024

  2. [1]

    Hyperreel: High-fidelity 6-dof video with ray- conditioned sampling

    Benjamin Attal, Jia-Bin Huang, Christian Richardt, Michael Zollhoefer, Johannes Kopf, Matthew O’Toole, and Changil Kim. Hyperreel: High-fidelity 6-dof video with ray- conditioned sampling. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition , pages 16610–16620, 2023

    work page 2023

  3. [2]

    Per-gaussian embedding- based deformation for deformable 3d gaussian splatting

    Jeongmin Bae, Seoha Kim, Youngsik Yun, Hahyun Lee, Gun Bang, and Youngjung Uh. Per-gaussian embedding- based deformation for deformable 3d gaussian splatting. In European Conference on Computer Vision, pages 321–335. Springer, 2024

    work page 2024

  4. [3]

    Mip-nerf: A multiscale representation for anti-aliasing neu- ral radiance fields

    Jonathan T Barron, Ben Mildenhall, Matthew Tancik, Peter Hedman, Ricardo Martin-Brualla, and Pratul P Srinivasan. Mip-nerf: A multiscale representation for anti-aliasing neu- ral radiance fields. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF inter- national conference on computer vision , pages 5855–5864, 2021

    work page 2021

  5. [4]

    Mip-nerf 360: Unbounded anti-aliased neural radiance fields

    Jonathan T Barron, Ben Mildenhall, Dor Verbin, Pratul P Srinivasan, and Peter Hedman. Mip-nerf 360: Unbounded anti-aliased neural radiance fields. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pages 5470–5479, 2022

    2022

  6. [5]

    Zip-nerf: Anti-aliased grid-based neural radiance fields

    Jonathan T Barron, Ben Mildenhall, Dor Verbin, Pratul P Srinivasan, and Peter Hedman. Zip-nerf: Anti-aliased grid-based neural radiance fields. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision , pages 19697–19705, 2023

    2023

  7. [6]

    V ol- ume rendering

    Robert A Brebin, Loren Carpenter, and Pat Hanrahan. V ol- ume rendering. In Seminal graphics: pioneering efforts that shaped the field, pages 363–372. ACM, 1998

    work page 1998

  8. [7]

    Hexplane: A fast representa- tion for dynamic scenes

    Ang Cao and Justin Johnson. Hexplane: A fast representa- tion for dynamic scenes. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition , pages 130–141, 2023

    2023

Show all 61 references
  1. [8]

    Tensorf: Tensorial radiance fields

    Anpei Chen, Zexiang Xu, Andreas Geiger, Jingyi Yu, and Hao Su. Tensorf: Tensorial radiance fields. InEuropean con- ference on computer vision, pages 333–350. Springer, 2022

    2022

  2. [9]

    Hac: Hash-grid assisted context for 3d gaussian splatting compression

    Yihang Chen, Qianyi Wu, Weiyao Lin, Mehrtash Harandi, and Jianfei Cai. Hac: Hash-grid assisted context for 3d gaussian splatting compression. In European Conference on Computer Vision, pages 422–438. Springer, 2024

    2024

  3. [11]

    4d-rotor gaussian splatting: towards efficient novel view synthesis for dynamic scenes

    Yuanxing Duan, Fangyin Wei, Qiyu Dai, Yuhang He, Wen- zheng Chen, and Baoquan Chen. 4d-rotor gaussian splatting: towards efficient novel view synthesis for dynamic scenes. In ACM SIGGRAPH 2024 Conference Papers , pages 1–11, 2024

    2024

  4. [12]

    Mini-splatting2: Building 360 scenes within minutes via aggressive gaussian densifica- tion

    Guangchi Fang and Bing Wang. Mini-splatting2: Building 360 scenes within minutes via aggressive gaussian densifica- tion. arXiv preprint arXiv:2411.12788, 2024

    2024

  5. [13]

    Fast dynamic radiance fields with time-aware neural vox- els

    Jiemin Fang, Taoran Yi, Xinggang Wang, Lingxi Xie, Xi- aopeng Zhang, Wenyu Liu, Matthias Nießner, and Qi Tian. Fast dynamic radiance fields with time-aware neural vox- els. In SIGGRAPH Asia 2022 Conference Papers, pages 1–9, 2022

    2022

  6. [14]

    Plenoxels: Radiance fields without neural networks

    Sara Fridovich-Keil, Alex Yu, Matthew Tancik, Qinhong Chen, Benjamin Recht, and Angjoo Kanazawa. Plenoxels: Radiance fields without neural networks. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pages 5501–5510, 2022

    2022

  7. [15]

    K-planes: Explicit radiance fields in space, time, and appearance

    Sara Fridovich-Keil, Giacomo Meanti, Frederik Rahbæk Warburg, Benjamin Recht, and Angjoo Kanazawa. K-planes: Explicit radiance fields in space, time, and appearance. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vi- sion and Pattern Recognition, pages 12479–12488, 2023

    2023

  8. [16]

    Hicom: Hierarchical coherent motion for dynamic streamable scenes with 3d gaussian splatting

    Qiankun Gao, Jiarui Meng, Chengxiang Wen, Jie Chen, and Jian Zhang. Hicom: Hierarchical coherent motion for dynamic streamable scenes with 3d gaussian splatting. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems , 37: 80609–80633, 2025. 9

    2025

  9. [17]

    Sc-gs: Sparse-controlled gaussian splatting for editable dynamic scenes

    Yi-Hua Huang, Yang-Tian Sun, Ziyi Yang, Xiaoyang Lyu, Yan-Pei Cao, and Xiaojuan Qi. Sc-gs: Sparse-controlled gaussian splatting for editable dynamic scenes. In Proceed- ings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pages 4220–4230, 2024

    2024

  10. [18]

    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 Trans. Graph., 42(4):139–1, 2023

    2023

  11. [19]

    3d gaussian splat- ting as markov chain monte carlo

    Shakiba Kheradmand, Daniel Rebain, Gopal Sharma, Wei- wei Sun, Yang-Che Tseng, Hossam Isack, Abhishek Kar, Andrea Tagliasacchi, and Kwang Moo Yi. 3d gaussian splat- ting as markov chain monte carlo. Advances in Neural Infor- mation Processing Systems, 37:80965–80986, 2024

    2024

  12. [20]

    Sync-nerf: Generalizing dy- namic nerfs to unsynchronized videos

    Seoha Kim, Jeongmin Bae, Youngsik Yun, Hahyun Lee, Gun Bang, and Youngjung Uh. Sync-nerf: Generalizing dy- namic nerfs to unsynchronized videos. In Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 2777– 2785, 2024

    2024

  13. [21]

    Dynmf: Neural motion factorization for real-time dynamic view synthesis with 3d gaussian splatting

    Agelos Kratimenos, Jiahui Lei, and Kostas Daniilidis. Dynmf: Neural motion factorization for real-time dynamic view synthesis with 3d gaussian splatting. In European Con- ference on Computer Vision, pages 252–269. Springer, 2024

    2024

  14. [22]

    Fully explicit dynamic gaussian splat- ting

    Junoh Lee, Changyeon Won, Hyunjun Jung, Inhwan Bae, and Hae-Gon Jeon. Fully explicit dynamic gaussian splat- ting. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems , 37:5384–5409, 2025

    2025

  15. [23]

    Compact 3d gaussian representation for radiance field

    Joo Chan Lee, Daniel Rho, Xiangyu Sun, Jong Hwan Ko, and Eunbyung Park. Compact 3d gaussian representation for radiance field. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 21719– 21728, 2024

    2024

  16. [24]

    Compression of 3d gaussian splatting with optimized feature planes and standard video codecs

    Soonbin Lee, Fangwen Shu, Yago Sanchez, Thomas Schierl, and Cornelius Hellge. Compression of 3d gaussian splatting with optimized feature planes and standard video codecs. arXiv preprint arXiv:2501.03399, 2025

    2025 arXiv

  17. [25]

    Neural 3d video synthesis from multi-view video

    Tianye Li, Mira Slavcheva, Michael Zollhoefer, Simon Green, Christoph Lassner, Changil Kim, Tanner Schmidt, Steven Lovegrove, Michael Goesele, Richard Newcombe, et al. Neural 3d video synthesis from multi-view video. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vi- si...

    2022

  18. [26]

    Spacetime gaus- sian feature splatting for real-time dynamic view synthesis

    Zhan Li, Zhang Chen, Zhong Li, and Yi Xu. Spacetime gaus- sian feature splatting for real-time dynamic view synthesis. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 8508–8520, 2024

    2024

  19. [27]

    Efficient neural radiance fields for interactive free-viewpoint video

    Haotong Lin, Sida Peng, Zhen Xu, Yunzhi Yan, Qing Shuai, Hujun Bao, and Xiaowei Zhou. Efficient neural radiance fields for interactive free-viewpoint video. In SIGGRAPH Asia Conference Proceedings, 2022

    2022

  20. [28]

    Dynamics-aware gaussian splat- ting streaming towards fast on-the-fly training for 4d recon- struction

    Zhening Liu, Yingdong Hu, Xinjie Zhang, Jiawei Shao, Ze- hong Lin, and Jun Zhang. Dynamics-aware gaussian splat- ting streaming towards fast on-the-fly training for 4d recon- struction. arXiv preprint arXiv:2411.14847, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  21. [29]

    Neural vol- umes: Learning dynamic renderable volumes from images

    Stephen Lombardi, Tomas Simon, Jason Saragih, Gabriel Schwartz, Andreas Lehrmann, and Yaser Sheikh. Neural vol- umes: Learning dynamic renderable volumes from images. arXiv preprint arXiv:1906.07751, 2019

    1906 arXiv

  22. [30]

    Dn-4dgs: Denoised de- formable network with temporal-spatial aggregation for dy- namic scene rendering

    Jiahao Lu, Jiacheng Deng, Ruijie Zhu, Yanzhe Liang, Wenfei Yang, Tianzhu Zhang, and Xu Zhou. Dn-4dgs: Denoised de- formable network with temporal-spatial aggregation for dy- namic scene rendering. arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.13607 , 2024

    arXiv

  23. [31]

    Turbo-gs: Accelerating 3d gaussian fitting for high- quality radiance fields

    Tao Lu, Ankit Dhiman, R Srinath, Emre Arslan, Angela Xing, Yuanbo Xiangli, R Venkatesh Babu, and Srinath Srid- har. Turbo-gs: Accelerating 3d gaussian fitting for high- quality radiance fields. arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.13547 , 2024

    2024 arXiv

  24. [32]

    Dynamic 3d gaussians: Tracking by per- sistent dynamic view synthesis

    Jonathon Luiten, Georgios Kopanas, Bastian Leibe, and Deva Ramanan. Dynamic 3d gaussians: Tracking by per- sistent dynamic view synthesis. In 3DV, 2024

    2024

  25. [33]

    Taming 3dgs: High-quality radiance fields with limited resources

    Saswat Subhajyoti Mallick, Rahul Goel, Bernhard Kerbl, Markus Steinberger, Francisco Vicente Carrasco, and Fer- nando De La Torre. Taming 3dgs: High-quality radiance fields with limited resources. In SIGGRAPH Asia 2024 Con- ference Papers, pages 1–11, 2024

    2024

  26. [34]

    Resfields: Residual neural fields for spatiotem- poral signals

    Marko Mihajlovic, Sergey Prokudin, Marc Pollefeys, and Siyu Tang. Resfields: Residual neural fields for spatiotem- poral signals. arXiv preprint arXiv:2309.03160, 2023

    2023 arXiv

  27. [35]

    Splatfields: Neural gaussian splats for sparse 3d and 4d re- construction

    Marko Mihajlovic, Sergey Prokudin, Siyu Tang, Robert Maier, Federica Bogo, Tony Tung, and Edmond Boyer. Splatfields: Neural gaussian splats for sparse 3d and 4d re- construction. In European Conference on Computer Vision, pages 313–332. Springer, 2024

    2024

  28. [36]

    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

    2021

  29. [37]

    Compact 3d scene representation via self- organizing gaussian grids

    Wieland Morgenstern, Florian Barthel, Anna Hilsmann, and Peter Eisert. Compact 3d scene representation via self- organizing gaussian grids. In European Conference on Com- puter Vision, pages 18–34. Springer, 2024

    2024

  30. [38]

    Instant neural graphics primitives with a mul- tiresolution hash encoding

    Thomas M ¨uller, Alex Evans, Christoph Schied, and Alexan- der Keller. Instant neural graphics primitives with a mul- tiresolution hash encoding. ACM transactions on graphics (TOG), 41(4):1–15, 2022

    2022

  31. [39]

    Mip-grid: Anti-aliased grid representations for neural radiance fields

    Seungtae Nam, Daniel Rho, Jong Hwan Ko, and Eunbyung Park. Mip-grid: Anti-aliased grid representations for neural radiance fields. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 36:2837–2849, 2023

    2023

  32. [40]

    Compact3d: Com- pressing gaussian splat radiance field models with vector quantization

    K Navaneet, Kossar Pourahmadi Meibodi, Soroush Abbasi Koohpayegani, and Hamed Pirsiavash. Compact3d: Com- pressing gaussian splat radiance field models with vector quantization. arXiv preprint arXiv:2311.18159, 4, 2023

    2023 arXiv

  33. [41]

    Compressed 3d gaussian splatting for accelerated novel view synthesis

    Simon Niedermayr, Josef Stumpfegger, and R ¨udiger West- ermann. Compressed 3d gaussian splatting for accelerated novel view synthesis. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Con- ference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 10349–10358, 2024

    2024

  34. [42]

    Reducing the memory footprint of 3d gaussian splatting

    Panagiotis Papantonakis, Georgios Kopanas, Bernhard Kerbl, Alexandre Lanvin, and George Drettakis. Reducing the memory footprint of 3d gaussian splatting. Proceedings of the ACM on Computer Graphics and Interactive Tech- niques, 7(1):1–17, 2024

    2024

  35. [43]

    Nerfies: Deformable neural radiance fields

    Keunhong Park, Utkarsh Sinha, Jonathan T Barron, Sofien Bouaziz, Dan B Goldman, Steven M Seitz, and Ricardo 10 Martin-Brualla. Nerfies: Deformable neural radiance fields. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF international conference on computer vision, pages 5865–5874, 2021

    2021

  36. [44]

    Hypernerf: A higher- dimensional representation for topologically varying neural radiance fields

    Keunhong Park, Utkarsh Sinha, Peter Hedman, Jonathan T Barron, Sofien Bouaziz, Dan B Goldman, Ricardo Martin- Brualla, and Steven M Seitz. Hypernerf: A higher- dimensional representation for topologically varying neural radiance fields. arXiv preprint arXiv:2106.13228, 2021

    2021 arXiv

  37. [45]

    D-nerf: Neural radiance fields for dynamic scenes

    Albert Pumarola, Enric Corona, Gerard Pons-Moll, and Francesc Moreno-Noguer. D-nerf: Neural radiance fields for dynamic scenes. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF con- ference on computer vision and pattern recognition , pages 10318–10327, 2021

    2021

  38. [46]

    Revising densification in gaussian splatting

    Samuel Rota Bul `o, Lorenzo Porzi, and Peter Kontschieder. Revising densification in gaussian splatting. In European Conference on Computer Vision , pages 347–362. Springer, 2024

    2024

  39. [47]

    Dataset and pipeline for multi-view light-field video

    Neus Sabater, Guillaume Boisson, Benoit Vandame, Paul Kerbiriou, Frederic Babon, Matthieu Hog, Remy Gendrot, Tristan Langlois, Olivier Bureller, Arno Schubert, et al. Dataset and pipeline for multi-view light-field video. InPro- ceedings of the IEEE conference on computer visi...

    2017

  40. [48]

    Tensor4d: Efficient neural 4d decomposition for high-fidelity dynamic reconstruction and rendering

    Ruizhi Shao, Zerong Zheng, Hanzhang Tu, Boning Liu, Hongwen Zhang, and Yebin Liu. Tensor4d: Efficient neural 4d decomposition for high-fidelity dynamic reconstruction and rendering. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 166...

    2023

  41. [49]

    Nerf- player: A streamable dynamic scene representation with de- composed neural radiance fields.IEEE Transactions on Visu- alization and Computer Graphics, 29(5):2732–2742, 2023

    Liangchen Song, Anpei Chen, Zhong Li, Zhang Chen, Lele Chen, Junsong Yuan, Yi Xu, and Andreas Geiger. Nerf- player: A streamable dynamic scene representation with de- composed neural radiance fields.IEEE Transactions on Visu- alization and Computer Graphics, 29(5):2732–2742, 2023

    2023

  42. [50]

    Direct voxel grid optimization: Super-fast convergence for radiance fields reconstruction

    Cheng Sun, Min Sun, and Hwann-Tzong Chen. Direct voxel grid optimization: Super-fast convergence for radiance fields reconstruction. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition , pages 5459– 5469, 2022

    2022

  43. [51]

    Improved direct voxel grid optimization for radiance fields reconstruc- tion

    Cheng Sun, Min Sun, and Hwann-Tzong Chen. Improved direct voxel grid optimization for radiance fields reconstruc- tion. arXiv preprint arXiv:2206.05085, 2022

    2022 arXiv

  44. [52]

    3dgstream: On-the-fly training of 3d gaussians for efficient streaming of photo-realistic free- viewpoint videos

    Jiakai Sun, Han Jiao, Guangyuan Li, Zhanjie Zhang, Lei Zhao, and Wei Xing. 3dgstream: On-the-fly training of 3d gaussians for efficient streaming of photo-realistic free- viewpoint videos. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Con- ference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, ...

    2024

  45. [53]

    Faster and better 3d splatting via group training

    Chengbo Wang, Guozheng Ma, Yifei Xue, and Yizhen Lao. Faster and better 3d splatting via group training. arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.07608, 2024

    2024

  46. [54]

    Mixed neural voxels for fast multi- view video synthesis

    Feng Wang, Sinan Tan, Xinghang Li, Zeyue Tian, Yafei Song, and Huaping Liu. Mixed neural voxels for fast multi- view video synthesis. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF In- ternational Conference on Computer Vision , pages 19706– 19716, 2023

    2023

  47. [55]

    End-to-end rate- distortion optimized 3d gaussian representation

    Henan Wang, Hanxin Zhu, Tianyu He, Runsen Feng, Jia- jun Deng, Jiang Bian, and Zhibo Chen. End-to-end rate- distortion optimized 3d gaussian representation. InEuropean Conference on Computer Vision , pages 76–92. Springer, 2024

    2024

  48. [56]

    4d gaussian splatting for real-time dynamic scene rendering

    Guanjun Wu, Taoran Yi, Jiemin Fang, Lingxi Xie, Xiaopeng Zhang, Wei Wei, Wenyu Liu, Qi Tian, and Xinggang Wang. 4d gaussian splatting for real-time dynamic scene rendering. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vi- sion and pattern recognition, pages 20310–20320, 2024

    2024

  49. [57]

    4k4d: Real-time 4d view synthesis at 4k resolution

    Zhen Xu, Sida Peng, Haotong Lin, Guangzhao He, Jiaming Sun, Yujun Shen, Hujun Bao, and Xiaowei Zhou. 4k4d: Real-time 4d view synthesis at 4k resolution. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pages 20029–20040, 2024

    2024

  50. [58]

    Representing long volumet- ric video with temporal gaussian hierarchy

    Zhen Xu, Yinghao Xu, Zhiyuan Yu, Sida Peng, Jiaming Sun, Hujun Bao, and Xiaowei Zhou. Representing long volumet- ric video with temporal gaussian hierarchy. ACM Transac- tions on Graphics (TOG), 43(6):1–18, 2024

    2024

  51. [59]

    Deformable 3d gaussians for high-fidelity monocular dynamic scene reconstruction.arXiv preprint arXiv:2309.13101, 2023

    Ziyi Yang, Xinyu Gao, Wen Zhou, Shaohui Jiao, Yuqing Zhang, and Xiaogang Jin. Deformable 3d gaussians for high-fidelity monocular dynamic scene reconstruction.arXiv preprint arXiv:2309.13101, 2023

    2023 arXiv

  52. [60]

    Real-time photorealistic dynamic scene representation and rendering with 4d gaussian splatting

    Zeyu Yang, Hongye Yang, Zijie Pan, and Li Zhang. Real-time photorealistic dynamic scene representation and rendering with 4d gaussian splatting. arXiv preprint arXiv:2310.10642, 2023

    2023 arXiv

  53. [61]

    Motiongs: Exploring explicit motion guidance for deformable 3d gaussian splatting

    Ruijie Zhu, Yanzhe Liang, Hanzhi Chang, Jiacheng Deng, Jiahao Lu, Wenfei Yang, Tianzhu Zhang, and Yongdong Zhang. Motiongs: Exploring explicit motion guidance for deformable 3d gaussian splatting. arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.07707, 2024. 11 Hybrid 3D-4D Gaussian Splatting for Fa...

    arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 15, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.