Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 8 minor 58 references

High-fidelity 3D Gaussian Inpainting: preserving multi-view consistency and photorealistic details

T0 review · 4 major / 8 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read A sparse-view 3D Gaussian inpainting framework that keeps multi-view consistency and detail through mask refinement and depth-based uncertainty weighting.

desk verdict A plausible sparse-view 3DGS inpainting pipeline with a big LPIPS win on SPIn-NeRF, but the Gaussian filter's all-views occlusion rule may delete true background and the evaluation is too thin to support the SOTA claim. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.18023 v1 pith:CNUXW5OJ submitted 2025-07-24 cs.CV

Jun Zhou , Dinghao Li , Nannan Li , Mingjie Wang This is my paper
classification cs.CV
keywords 3DGaussianSplattingsceneinpaintingobjectremovalmulti-viewconsistencymaskrefinementuncertainty-guidedoptimizationsparse-viewreconstructionnovelviewsynthesis
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 tries to establish that 3D scene inpainting—erasing an object from a scene and filling the hole—can be done from just two to four inpainted views without sacrificing either multi-view consistency or fine detail. The setting is 3D Gaussian Splatting, a fast scene representation made of 3D Gaussian blobs, and the proposed fix has two parts: an automatic mask refinement that trims the coarse segmentation mask to the true hole, and an uncertainty-guided optimization that lets reliable nearby regions of the inpainted images dominate while distant regions borrow from other views. On the SPIn-NeRF benchmark the method reports a perceptual similarity score (LPIPS) of 0.22, beating the previous best Gaussian baseline score of 0.28 in about three minutes. If the claim holds, diffusion-based 2D inpainting, which is detailed but inconsistent across views, can be used to inpaint 3D scenes cheaply and coherently.

What carries the argument

The machinery is the pair (Gaussian filtering, uncertainty weighting). The filter computes $f_{\text{mask}}(g_k)=\prod_{j=1}^{K} m_j(\mu^{2D}_{k,j})$ for every Gaussian point across the $K$ key views and deletes the point if any projected center falls inside the mask. The surviving cloud is projected back, smoothed with $3\times3$ and $9\times9$ convolutions, intersected with the original mask, reduced to the largest contiguous component, and expanded by $\gamma=15$ pixels to produce the refined mask. The uncertainty map is initialized blockwise from inpainted depth, $U_j[h_r,w_r]=\lambda\cdot\mathrm{mean}(d^{in}_j)$, and converted to confidence $W_j=1/U_j$; training minimizes a masked RGB loss weighted by $W_j^2$ plus a log-sparsity regularizer on $1/W_j$. This mechanism is what lets conflicting diffusion-inpainted views be reconciled instead of averaged into blur.

What would settle it

Run the pipeline on a 360° scene with strong parallax after removing a foreground object, and compare the refined mask against a ground-truth visibility map built from the original multi-view geometry; if pixels showing valid background in at least one view are swallowed by the mask, the filtering premise is wrong. This would appear as visible inpaint artifacts along the occlusion boundary.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the conflict between detail and multi-view consistency in 3D Gaussian inpainting comes from two fixable defects rather than from the representation: the inpainting mask is too coarse, and every inpainted view is trusted equally during training. Before mask refinement, a filter deletes any Gaussian whose projected center falls inside the object mask in any selected key view, removing the floating kernels that blur the hole boundary. The surviving cloud is projected back into each key view, smoothed, intersected with the original mask, reduced to the largest connected component, and dilated by 15 pixels, producing a mask that preserves background other methods treat as hole. The uncertainty-guided stage initializes a per-region confidence from the inpainted depth map—closer regions count more—and optimizes scene and weights together, with a regularizer that keeps the uncertainty sparse. The reported numbers on SPIn-NeRF are LPIPS 0.22 and FID 55.17 (a distribution-distance score), against LPIPS 0.28 and FID 36.72 for GScream, in about three minutes.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that any 3D Gaussian point whose projected center falls inside the object mask in any key view is a floater that should be deleted, which fails for genuine background points that are merely occluded by the removed object in some wide-baseline views.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Two sparse inpainted views suffice for the SPIn-NeRF scenes, so the pipeline no longer requires inpainting every training frame.
  • Diffusion-based inpaints can be used directly: their cross-view conflicts are resolved by the uncertainty loss instead of being averaged into blur.
  • The refined mask stops the diffusion model from hallucinating content into occluded background, which is the failure mode shown in Fig. 8.
  • Total runtime is about three minutes on one GPU, against hours for NeRF baselines, with LPIPS improved over all compared methods.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Beyond the paper: the Gaussian filter's in-mask deletion rule assumes a valid point never projects inside the mask in any key view; for wide-baseline captures this will delete genuine background that is occluded by the removed object in some views, so the refinement may underestimate the visible background.
  • Beyond the paper: because uncertainty is seeded from inpainted depth, errors in the diffusion depth completion propagate into the confidence map; using the diffusion model's own per-pixel uncertainty as an additional signal would test how much of the gain is depth-specific.
  • Beyond the paper: the largest-contiguous-region step in mask refinement assumes one connected hole; scenes with several disjoint objects to remove would require a per-component selection, and the current ablation does not cover that case.
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

4 major / 8 minor

Summary. The paper presents a 3D Gaussian Splatting (3DGS) framework for inpainting missing objects from sparse-view inputs. The pipeline consists of an initial masked scene reconstruction, an automatic mask refinement step that filters Gaussian points and back-projects the remaining ones to build a refined inpainting mask, and an uncertainty-guided optimization that reweights multi-view supervision using depth-initialized per-pixel uncertainty. Quantitative results on the SPIn-NeRF dataset report LPIPS 0.22 with LaMa-based inpainting, compared with 0.28 for GScream, at a runtime of about 3 minutes.

Significance. If the reported results hold, the work addresses a practical need for fast, multi-view-consistent 3D inpainting. The uncertainty weighting mechanism is a plausible extension of prior confidence-based schemes (e.g., Remove-NeRF) to 3DGS, and the runtime advantage over NeRF-based methods is notable. However, the current evaluation is too thin to substantiate the 'outperforms state-of-the-art' claim: a single dataset with aggregated numbers, no error bars, an incomplete ablation, and an unexamined filtering rule that could plausibly expand the mask into observed background texture. The central idea is defensible, but the evidence is not yet conclusive.

major comments (4)
  1. [Sec. III-C, Eq. (4)-(5)] This is the load-bearing concern from the stress-test analysis. The current manuscript does not address it, and it directly affects the claimed improvement in mask localization.
  2. [Sec. IV and Table I] This is about the strength of the empirical evidence for the central claim.
  3. [Sec. III-D and Algorithm 1] A missing method detail that directly impacts reproducibility.
  4. [Sec. IV-A and Table I] This affects the interpretability of the headline LPIPS gain.
minor comments (8)
  1. [Algorithm 1, line 12]
  2. [Eq. (1)]
  3. [Eq. (2)]
  4. [Eq. (10)]
  5. [References [18] and [55]]
  6. [Sec. III-B and throughout]
  7. [Sec. III-C, Eq. (6)]
  8. [Sec. I]

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the paper's contributions are empirical pipeline components, evaluated on held-out views against external baselines; no derived quantity is fitted to the metric it predicts.

full rationale

The paper does not derive any first-principles result that reduces to its own inputs. The mask refinement in Sec. III-C (Eqs. 4-7) uses the initial masks to filter Gaussians and then projects the surviving Gaussians back to define a refined mask; this is a preprocessing heuristic whose output can differ from the initial mask, and it is validated by downstream inpainting quality rather than by the same objective that defines it. The uncertainty-guided optimization in Sec. III-D (Eqs. 8-10) learns per-region weights initialized from diffusion-predicted depth; these weights are not predictions of the reported LPIPS/FID metrics and are not fitted to those metrics, so the SPIn-NeRF held-out evaluation closes the loop externally. There are no load-bearing self-citations: the cited priors (InFusion, Remove-NeRF, SPIn-NeRF, Gaussian Grouping, etc.) are external works, and the acknowledged similarity to Remove-NeRF's confidence-based selection is explicitly differentiated. The main weakness flagged by the skeptic--the Sec. III-C assumption that a valid Gaussian never projects inside any mask--is a soundness/correctness risk for wide-baseline occlusion, not a circularity, because the assumption is not used to define the evaluation metric or to fit a parameter that is then reported as a prediction. The quantitative improvements over GScream and other baselines are measured on unseen test views, so the central claim is empirically grounded rather than tautological.

Assumptions & free parameters 6 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim depends on the assumed validity of the 3DGS rendering model, a strong and unvalidated assumption about which Gaussians are valid relative to object masks, and a heuristic that depth is a proxy for supervision reliability. No new physical entities are introduced. Numerous hyperparameters (gamma, lambda, loss weights, iterations) are set by hand and some are unreported.

free parameters (6)
  • Mask expansion magnitude gamma = 15
    Hand-chosen; dilates the refined mask beyond the back-projected Gaussians (Sec. III-C).
  • Uncertainty initialization scale lambda
    Scales depth when initializing U_j in Eq. 8; the value is never reported.
  • Uncertainty optimizer learning rate = 0.02
    Adam learning rate for gradient updates of uncertainty maps (Sec. III-D).
  • Loss weights lambda1, lambda2, lambda3, lambda4 = 1, 0.5, 1, 0.5
    Empirically set for reconstruction, depth, uncertainty, and LPIPS terms (Eq. 11, Eq. 14).
  • Number of key views = 2 (SPIn-NeRF), 4 (larger scenes)
    Chosen from experiments with 2/4/8 views; no formal criterion beyond qualitative inspection (Fig. 11).
  • Training iterations = 30k init, 1.5k second stage (SPIn-NeRF), 10k (large scenes)
    Fixed schedules with no sensitivity analysis.
assumptions (5)
  • standard math 3D Gaussian Splatting rendering model (Eq. 1-2) is a valid scene representation for inpainting.
    Paper builds on Kerbl et al. [4]; relies on the splatting rasterizer and alpha-blending equations.
  • domain assumption A valid 3D Gaussian never projects inside the object mask in any key view; any such Gaussian is a floating artifact.
    Stated in Sec. III-C and encoded in Eq. 4-5; used to filter Gaussians before mask refinement.
  • domain assumption Depth from the inpainted primary view is a reliable proxy for confidence (closer is more reliable).
    Used to initialize uncertainty in Eq. 8; no evidence is given that depth correlates with inpainting reliability.
  • domain assumption Two to four sparse inpainted views provide sufficient supervision to reconstruct the entire 3D scene.
    Core to the sparse-view design; validated only qualitatively in Fig. 11 for the number of views, not for view placement.
  • domain assumption SAM-Track initial masks are accurate enough that refinement by intersection and expansion is sufficient.
    Initial masks come from SAM-Track [58]; no analysis is given for cases where the initial mask is badly wrong.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of High-fidelity 3D Gaussian Inpainting: preserving multi-view consistency and photorealistic details." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/CNUXW5OJ

@misc{pith2026250718023,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: High-fidelity 3D Gaussian Inpainting: preserving multi-view consistency and photorealistic details},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/CNUXW5OJ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.18023}
}
read the original abstract

Recent advancements in multi-view 3D reconstruction and novel-view synthesis, particularly through Neural Radiance Fields (NeRF) and 3D Gaussian Splatting (3DGS), have greatly enhanced the fidelity and efficiency of 3D content creation. However, inpainting 3D scenes remains a challenging task due to the inherent irregularity of 3D structures and the critical need for maintaining multi-view consistency. In this work, we propose a novel 3D Gaussian inpainting framework that reconstructs complete 3D scenes by leveraging sparse inpainted views. Our framework incorporates an automatic Mask Refinement Process and region-wise Uncertainty-guided Optimization. Specifically, we refine the inpainting mask using a series of operations, including Gaussian scene filtering and back-projection, enabling more accurate localization of occluded regions and realistic boundary restoration. Furthermore, our Uncertainty-guided Fine-grained Optimization strategy, which estimates the importance of each region across multi-view images during training, alleviates multi-view inconsistencies and enhances the fidelity of fine details in the inpainted results. Comprehensive experiments conducted on diverse datasets demonstrate that our approach outperforms existing state-of-the-art methods in both visual quality and view consistency.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2507.18023 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Comparison of Different Optimization Strategies for 3D Gaussian Inpainting: (1) The left section shows the four keyframes used for training; (2) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Overview of our 3D Gaussian inpainting pipeline with Mask Refinement Process and Uncertainty-guided Optimization. Given a set of posed input [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Visualization of the Mask Refinement Process. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (8 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Visualizing the effect of the Gaussian Filter: We compare the differences between the original Gaussian representation [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Visualization of Uncertainty Optimization Results Initialized from [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Qualitative Comparison of Object Removal and Inpainting Methods. Illustration of rendered images with object removal and inpainting, compared [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_6.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Effectiveness of Mask Refinement on Image Inpainting. Qualitative [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_8.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Scene Completion Results Using Stable Diffusion-Based Inpainting. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_7.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Visual Ablation Study on the Effectiveness of Refined Mask and [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Comparison of rendered depth and RGB images from two viewpoints, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_10.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Comparison of inpainting results using 2, 4, and 8 key views selected from eight candidate views. The results demonstrate that an appropriate number [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_11.png]

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

58 extracted references · 47 canonical work pages

  1. [53]

    3d gaus- sian inpainting with depth-guided cross-view consis- tency,

    S.-Y . Huang, Z.-T. Chou, and Y .-C. F. Wang, “3d gaus- sian inpainting with depth-guided cross-view consis- tency,” in Proceedings of the Computer Vision and Pat- tern Recognition Conference , 2025, pp. 26 704–26 713

    work page 2025

  2. [1]

    Nerf: Representing scenes as neural radiance fields for view synthesis,

    B. Mildenhall, P. P. Srinivasan, M. Tancik, J. T. Barron, R. Ramamoorthi, and R. Ng, “Nerf: Representing scenes as neural radiance fields for view synthesis,” Communi- cations of the ACM , vol. 65, no. 1, pp. 99–106, 2021. 11 Fig. 11. Comparison of inpainting results using 2, 4, and 8 key views selected from eight candidate views. The results demonstrate ...

    work page 2021

  3. [2]

    Mip-nerf: A multiscale representation for anti-aliasing neural radiance fields,

    J. T. Barron, B. Mildenhall, M. Tancik, P. Hedman, R. Martin-Brualla, and P. P. Srinivasan, “Mip-nerf: A multiscale representation for anti-aliasing neural radiance fields,” in Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF international conference on computer vision , 2021, pp. 5855–5864

    2021

  4. [3]

    Neus: Learning neural implicit surfaces by volume rendering for multi-view reconstruction,

    P. Wang, L. Liu, Y . Liu, C. Theobalt, T. Komura, and W. Wang, “Neus: Learning neural implicit surfaces by volume rendering for multi-view reconstruction,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2106.10689, 2021

    arXiv 2021

  5. [4]

    3d gaussian splatting for real-time radiance field ren- dering

    B. Kerbl, G. Kopanas, T. Leimk ¨uhler, and G. Drettakis, “3d gaussian splatting for real-time radiance field ren- dering.” ACM Trans. Graph. , vol. 42, no. 4, pp. 139–1, 2023

    work page 2023

  6. [5]

    2d gaussian splatting for geometrically accurate radiance fields,

    B. Huang, Z. Yu, A. Chen, A. Geiger, and S. Gao, “2d gaussian splatting for geometrically accurate radiance fields,” in ACM SIGGRAPH 2024 Conference Papers , 2024, pp. 1–11

    work page 2024

  7. [6]

    Sugar: Surface-aligned gaus- sian splatting for efficient 3d mesh reconstruction and high-quality mesh rendering,

    A. Gu ´edon and V . Lepetit, “Sugar: Surface-aligned gaus- sian splatting for efficient 3d mesh reconstruction and high-quality mesh rendering,” in Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2024, pp. 5354–5363

    work page 2024

  8. [7]

    Scaffold-gs: Structured 3d gaussians for view- adaptive rendering,

    T. Lu, M. Yu, L. Xu, Y . Xiangli, L. Wang, D. Lin, and B. Dai, “Scaffold-gs: Structured 3d gaussians for view- adaptive rendering,” in Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2024, pp. 20 654–20 664

    work page 2024

Show all 58 references
  1. [8]

    Lucid- dreamer: Domain-free generation of 3d gaussian splatting scenes,

    J. Chung, S. Lee, H. Nam, J. Lee, and K. M. Lee, “Lucid- dreamer: Domain-free generation of 3d gaussian splatting scenes,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2311.13384 , 2023

    2023 arXiv

  2. [9]

    Gaussiandreamer: Fast generation from text to 3d gaussians by bridging 2d and 3d diffusion models,

    T. Yi, J. Fang, J. Wang, G. Wu, L. Xie, X. Zhang, W. Liu, Q. Tian, and X. Wang, “Gaussiandreamer: Fast generation from text to 3d gaussians by bridging 2d and 3d diffusion models,” in Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2024, pp. ...

    2024

  3. [10]

    4d gaussian splatting for real- time dynamic scene rendering,

    G. Wu, T. Yi, J. Fang, L. Xie, X. Zhang, W. Wei, W. Liu, Q. Tian, and X. Wang, “4d gaussian splatting for real- time dynamic scene rendering,” in Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2024, pp. 20 310–20 320

    2024

  4. [11]

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

    Z. Yang, H. Yang, Z. Pan, and L. Zhang, “Real- time photorealistic dynamic scene representation and rendering with 4d gaussian splatting,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2310.10642, 2023

    2023 arXiv

  5. [12]

    Gaussian-flow: 4d reconstruction with dynamic 3d gaussian particle,

    Y . Lin, Z. Dai, S. Zhu, and Y . Yao, “Gaussian-flow: 4d reconstruction with dynamic 3d gaussian particle,” in Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2024, pp. 21 136–21 145

    2024

  6. [13]

    Physdreamer: Physics-based interaction with 3d objects via video gen- eration,

    T. Zhang, H.-X. Yu, R. Wu, B. Y . Feng, C. Zheng, N. Snavely, J. Wu, and W. T. Freeman, “Physdreamer: Physics-based interaction with 3d objects via video gen- eration,” in European Conference on Computer Vision . Springer, 2025, pp. 388–406

    2025

  7. [14]

    Physgaussian: Physics-integrated 3d gaus- sians for generative dynamics,

    T. Xie, Z. Zong, Y . Qiu, X. Li, Y . Feng, Y . Yang, and C. Jiang, “Physgaussian: Physics-integrated 3d gaus- sians for generative dynamics,” in Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2024, pp. 4389–4398

    2024

  8. [15]

    Vr-gs: A physical dynamics-aware interactive gaussian splatting system in virtual reality,

    Y . Jiang, C. Yu, T. Xie, X. Li, Y . Feng, H. Wang, M. Li, H. Lau, F. Gao, Y . Yang et al. , “Vr-gs: A physical dynamics-aware interactive gaussian splatting system in virtual reality,” in ACM SIGGRAPH 2024 Conference Papers, 2024, pp. 1–1

    2024

  9. [16]

    A comprehensive review of past and present image inpainting methods,

    J. Jam, C. Kendrick, K. Walker, V . Drouard, J. G.-S. Hsu, and M. H. Yap, “A comprehensive review of past and present image inpainting methods,” Computer vision and image understanding , vol. 203, p. 103147, 2021

    2021

  10. [17]

    Resolution-robust large mask inpaint- ing with fourier convolutions,

    R. Suvorov, E. Logacheva, A. Mashikhin, A. Remizova, A. Ashukha, A. Silvestrov, N. Kong, H. Goka, K. Park, and V . Lempitsky, “Resolution-robust large mask inpaint- ing with fourier convolutions,” in Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF winter conference on applications of com- puter v...

    2022

  11. [18]

    High-resolution image synthesis with la- tent diffusion models,

    R. Rombach, A. Blattmann, D. Lorenz, P. Esser, and B. Ommer, “High-resolution image synthesis with la- tent diffusion models,” in Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition , 12 2022, pp. 10 684–10 695

    2022

  12. [19]

    Infusion: Inpainting 3d gaussians via learning depth completion from diffusion prior,

    Z. Liu, H. Ouyang, Q. Wang, K. L. Cheng, J. Xiao, K. Zhu, N. Xue, Y . Liu, Y . Shen, and Y . Cao, “Infusion: Inpainting 3d gaussians via learning depth completion from diffusion prior,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.11613 , 2024

    2024 arXiv

  13. [20]

    Remov- ing objects from neural radiance fields,

    S. Weder, G. Garcia-Hernando, A. Monszpart, M. Polle- feys, G. J. Brostow, M. Firman, and S. Vicente, “Remov- ing objects from neural radiance fields,” in Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2023, pp. 16 528–16 538

    2023

  14. [21]

    Spin-nerf: Multiview segmentation and perceptual inpainting with neural radiance fields,

    A. Mirzaei, T. Aumentado-Armstrong, K. G. Derpa- nis, J. Kelly, M. A. Brubaker, I. Gilitschenski, and A. Levinshtein, “Spin-nerf: Multiview segmentation and perceptual inpainting with neural radiance fields,” in Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pat...

    2023

  15. [22]

    Gaussianeditor: Editing 3d gaussians delicately with text instructions,

    J. Wang, J. Fang, X. Zhang, L. Xie, and Q. Tian, “Gaussianeditor: Editing 3d gaussians delicately with text instructions,” in Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Confer- ence on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2024, pp. 20 902–20 911

    2024

  16. [23]

    Gaussianeditor: Swift and controllable 3d editing with gaussian splat- ting,

    Y . Chen, Z. Chen, C. Zhang, F. Wang, X. Yang, Y . Wang, Z. Cai, L. Yang, H. Liu, and G. Lin, “Gaussianeditor: Swift and controllable 3d editing with gaussian splat- ting,” in Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition , 2024, pp. 21 476–21 485

    2024

  17. [24]

    Gaussian grouping: Segment and edit anything in 3d scenes,

    M. Ye, M. Danelljan, F. Yu, and L. Ke, “Gaussian grouping: Segment and edit anything in 3d scenes,” in European Conference on Computer Vision . Springer, 2025, pp. 162–179

    2025

  18. [25]

    Point’n move: Interactive scene object manipulation on gaussian splatting radiance fields,

    J. Huang, H. Yu, J. Zhang, and H. Nait-Charif, “Point’n move: Interactive scene object manipulation on gaussian splatting radiance fields,” IET Image Processing , 2024

    2024

  19. [26]

    Deep learning-based image and video inpainting: A survey,

    W. Quan, J. Chen, Y . Liu, D.-M. Yan, and P. Wonka, “Deep learning-based image and video inpainting: A survey,” International Journal of Computer Vision , vol. 132, no. 7, pp. 2367–2400, 2024

    2024

  20. [27]

    Image inpainting: A review,

    O. Elharrouss, N. Almaadeed, S. Al-Maadeed, and Y . Ak- bari, “Image inpainting: A review,” Neural Processing Letters, vol. 51, pp. 2007–2028, 2020

    2007

  21. [28]

    Filling-in by joint interpolation of vector fields and gray levels,

    C. Ballester, M. Bertalmio, V . Caselles, G. Sapiro, and J. Verdera, “Filling-in by joint interpolation of vector fields and gray levels,” IEEE transactions on image processing, vol. 10, no. 8, pp. 1200–1211, 2001

    2001

  22. [29]

    Vector-valued image regularization with pdes: A common framework for different applications,

    D. Tschumperl ´e and R. Deriche, “Vector-valued image regularization with pdes: A common framework for different applications,” IEEE transactions on pattern analysis and machine intelligence , vol. 27, no. 4, pp. 506–517, 2005

    2005

  23. [30]

    Texture synthesis by non-parametric sampling,

    A. A. Efros and T. K. Leung, “Texture synthesis by non-parametric sampling,” in Proceedings of the seventh IEEE international conference on computer vision, vol. 2. IEEE, 1999, pp. 1033–1038

    1999

  24. [31]

    Patchmatch: a randomized correspondence algorithm for structural image editing,

    C. Barnes, E. Shechtman, A. Finkelstein, and D. B. Goldman, “Patchmatch: a randomized correspondence algorithm for structural image editing,” ACM Trans. Graph., vol. 28, no. 3, 2009

    2009

  25. [32]

    Image melding: Combining inconsistent images using patch-based synthesis,

    S. Darabi, E. Shechtman, C. Barnes, D. B. Goldman, and P. Sen, “Image melding: Combining inconsistent images using patch-based synthesis,” ACM Transactions on graphics (TOG) , vol. 31, no. 4, pp. 1–10, 2012

    2012

  26. [33]

    Im- age completion using planar structure guidance,

    J.-B. Huang, S. B. Kang, N. Ahuja, and J. Kopf, “Im- age completion using planar structure guidance,” ACM Transactions on graphics (TOG) , vol. 33, no. 4, pp. 1– 10, 2014

    2014

  27. [34]

    High-quality real-time video inpaintingwith pixmix,

    J. Herling and W. Broll, “High-quality real-time video inpaintingwith pixmix,” IEEE Transactions on Visualiza- tion and Computer Graphics, vol. 20, no. 6, pp. 866–879, 2014

    2014

  28. [35]

    Patch-based image inpainting via two-stage low rank approximation,

    Q. Guo, S. Gao, X. Zhang, Y . Yin, and C. Zhang, “Patch-based image inpainting via two-stage low rank approximation,” IEEE transactions on visualization and computer graphics, vol. 24, no. 6, pp. 2023–2036, 2017

    2023

  29. [36]

    Space-time completion of video,

    Y . Wexler, E. Shechtman, and M. Irani, “Space-time completion of video,” IEEE Transactions on pattern analysis and machine intelligence , vol. 29, no. 3, pp. 463–476, 2007

    2007

  30. [37]

    Background inpainting for videos with dynamic objects and a free-moving camera,

    M. Granados, K. I. Kim, J. Tompkin, J. Kautz, and C. Theobalt, “Background inpainting for videos with dynamic objects and a free-moving camera,” in Com- puter Vision–ECCV 2012: 12th European Conference on Computer Vision, Florence, Italy, October 7-13, 2012, Proceedings, Part ...

    2012

  31. [38]

    Video inpainting of complex scenes,

    A. Newson, A. Almansa, M. Fradet, Y . Gousseau, and P. P ´erez, “Video inpainting of complex scenes,” Siam journal on imaging sciences , vol. 7, no. 4, pp. 1993– 2019, 2014

    1993

  32. [39]

    Tem- porally coherent completion of dynamic video,

    J.-B. Huang, S. B. Kang, N. Ahuja, and J. Kopf, “Tem- porally coherent completion of dynamic video,” ACM Transactions on Graphics (ToG), vol. 35, no. 6, pp. 1–11, 2016

    2016

  33. [40]

    Bungeenerf: Progressive neural radiance field for extreme multi-scale scene rendering,

    Y . Xiangli, L. Xu, X. Pan, N. Zhao, A. Rao, C. Theobalt, B. Dai, and D. Lin, “Bungeenerf: Progressive neural radiance field for extreme multi-scale scene rendering,” in European conference on computer vision . Springer, 2022, pp. 106–122

    2022

  34. [41]

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

    S. Fridovich-Keil, G. Meanti, F. R. Warburg, B. Recht, and A. Kanazawa, “K-planes: Explicit radiance fields in space, time, and appearance,” in Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2023, pp. 12 479–12 488

    2023

  35. [42]

    Instant neural graphics primitives with a multiresolution hash en- coding,

    T. M ¨uller, A. Evans, C. Schied, and A. Keller, “Instant neural graphics primitives with a multiresolution hash en- coding,” ACM transactions on graphics (TOG) , vol. 41, no. 4, pp. 1–15, 2022

    2022

  36. [43]

    2d gaussian splatting for geometrically accurate radiance fields,

    B. Huang, Z. Yu, A. Chen, A. Geiger, and S. Gao, “2d gaussian splatting for geometrically accurate radiance fields,” in SIGGRAPH 2024 Conference Papers . As- sociation for Computing Machinery, 2024

    2024

  37. [44]

    Gaussian frosting: Editable complex radiance fields with real-time rendering,

    A. Gu ´edon and V . Lepetit, “Gaussian frosting: Editable complex radiance fields with real-time rendering,” in European Conference on Computer Vision . Springer, 2025, pp. 413–430

    2025

  38. [45]

    Tiger: Text-instructed 3d gaussian retrieval and coherent editing,

    T. Xu, J. Chen, P. Chen, Y . Zhang, J. Yu, and W. Yang, 13 “Tiger: Text-instructed 3d gaussian retrieval and coherent editing,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.14455 , 2024

    2024 arXiv

  39. [46]

    3ditscene: Editing any scene via language-guided disentangled gaussian splatting,

    Q. Zhang, Y . Xu, C. Wang, H.-Y . Lee, G. Wetzstein, B. Zhou, and C. Yang, “3ditscene: Editing any scene via language-guided disentangled gaussian splatting,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.18424, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  40. [47]

    Nerf-in: Free- form nerf inpainting with rgb-d priors,

    H.-K. Liu, I. Shen, B.-Y . Chen et al. , “Nerf-in: Free- form nerf inpainting with rgb-d priors,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2206.04901, 2022

    2022 arXiv

  41. [48]

    Reference-guided controllable inpaint- ing of neural radiance fields,

    A. Mirzaei, T. Aumentado-Armstrong, M. A. Brubaker, J. Kelly, A. Levinshtein, K. G. Derpanis, and I. Gilitschenski, “Reference-guided controllable inpaint- ing of neural radiance fields,” in Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vi- sion, 2023, pp. 1...

    2023

  42. [49]

    Or-nerf: Object removing from 3d scenes guided by multiview seg- mentation with neural radiance fields,

    Y . Yin, Z. Fu, F. Yang, and G. Lin, “Or-nerf: Object removing from 3d scenes guided by multiview seg- mentation with neural radiance fields,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2305.10503, 2023

    2023 arXiv

  43. [50]

    View-consistent object re- moval in radiance fields,

    Y . Lu, J. Ma, and Y . Yin, “View-consistent object re- moval in radiance fields,” in Proceedings of the 32nd ACM International Conference on Multimedia, 2024, pp. 3597–3606

    2024

  44. [51]

    Learning 3d geometry and feature consistent gaussian splatting for object removal,

    Y . Wang, Q. Wu, G. Zhang, and D. Xu, “Learning 3d geometry and feature consistent gaussian splatting for object removal,” in European Conference on Computer Vision. Springer, 2025, pp. 1–17

    2025

  45. [52]

    Point’n move: Interactive scene object manipulation on gaussian splatting radiance fields,

    J. Huang, H. Yu, J. Zhang, and H. Nait-Charif, “Point’n move: Interactive scene object manipulation on gaussian splatting radiance fields,” IET Image Processing , 2023

    2023

  46. [54]

    Gscream: Learning 3d geometry and feature consistent gaussian splatting for object removal,

    Y . Wang, Q. Wu, G. Zhang, and D. Xu, “Gscream: Learning 3d geometry and feature consistent gaussian splatting for object removal,” in ECCV, 2024

    2024

  47. [55]

    High-resolution image synthesis with latent diffusion models,

    R. Rombach, A. Blattmann, D. Lorenz, P. Esser, and B. Ommer, “High-resolution image synthesis with latent diffusion models,” 2021

    2021

  48. [56]

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

    J. T. Barron, B. Mildenhall, D. Verbin, P. P. Srinivasan, and P. Hedman, “Mip-nerf 360: Unbounded anti-aliased neural radiance fields,” in Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition , 2022, pp. 5470–5479

    2022

  49. [57]

    Innerf360: Text-guided 3d-consistent object inpainting on 360-degree neural radiance fields,

    D. Wang, T. Zhang, A. Abboud, and S. S ¨usstrunk, “Innerf360: Text-guided 3d-consistent object inpainting on 360-degree neural radiance fields,” in Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2024, pp. 12 677–12 686

    2024

  50. [58]

    Segment and track anything,

    Y . Cheng, L. Li, Y . Xu, X. Li, Z. Yang, W. Wang, and Y . Yang, “Segment and track anything,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2305.06558, 2023

    2023 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.