Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 51 references

PixCuboid: Room Layout Estimation from Multi-view Featuremetric Alignment

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-05 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper claims that cuboid-shaped room layouts can be estimated by aligning learned dense feature maps across posed RGB images, with end-to-end training that makes the alignment landscape smooth enough for simple initialization.

desk verdict PixCuboid is a genuinely new combination—multi-view featuremetric cuboid fitting with end-to-end trained features—but the central 'large convergence basins' claim is unquantified, and the experimental sections were missing from the text I saw. read the letter →

arxiv 2508.04659 v1 pith:S7WP24UI submitted 2025-08-06 cs.CV

Gustav Hanning , Kalle {AA}ström , Viktor Larsson This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.CV
keywords roomlayoutestimationcuboidmulti-viewalignmentfeaturemetricerrorend-to-endlearningconvergencebasinvanishingpointsindoorsceneunderstanding
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

PixCuboid claims that cuboid-shaped room layouts can be estimated from two or more posed ordinary RGB images by aligning learned dense feature maps under a parametric cuboid model, instead of estimating the layout from a single panorama. The core claim is that training the feature extractor end-to-end through the unrolled alignment optimization produces featuremetric error landscapes with large convergence basins, so the optimization can start from a simple heuristic based on camera orientation and vanishing points. On two new manually verified benchmarks drawn from ScanNet++ and 2D-3D-Semantics, the authors report that this approach significantly outperforms single-view state-of-the-art methods. This matters because multi-view posed imagery is already available in many applications, and the parametric fitting avoids dense 3D reconstruction.

What carries the argument

The central object is the featuremetric alignment error. Given two or more posed RGB images and a candidate cuboid, points sampled in one view's dense feature map are warped through the cuboid into the other views, and the difference of the deep features at corresponding locations is summed. The cuboid is estimated by minimizing this error in a coarse-to-fine manner. The decisive machinery is end-to-end training with unrolled optimization: the feature extractor is trained through the optimizer itself, so the resulting loss landscape is smooth with large convergence basins. A simple cuboid initialization from camera orientation and vanishing points then lands reliably near the correct solutio

What would settle it

Measure the basin size directly: from each test room, generate initial cuboids by rotating the camera-based guess by up to 20 degrees in pitch, yaw, and roll and translating the room center up to half a meter, then optimize from each start. If the fraction of runs that converge to the manually verified cuboid is small or falls steeply with perturbation size, the claimed large convergence basins are not present at test time.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that room layout from a cuboid is fully determined by an optimization over cuboid parameters: sample points in the dense feature map of one image, warp them through the 3D cuboid into every other posed view, and minimize the featuremetric error. The authors' key move is to train the feature extractor jointly with the optimizer by unrolling the optimization steps, which shapes the features so that the alignment error is smooth and has broad convergence basins. That is what makes a cheap initialization valid: a few initial cuboid hypotheses generated from camera orientation and vanishing points fall into the basin of the correct layout. The paper also claims the fr

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that training the feature extractor through unrolled optimization produces an alignment landscape whose smoothness and convergence basins hold at test time for typical rooms, including cluttered or non-square ones; if the simple camera-based initialization falls outside the true basin, accuracy collapses to the quality of the initial guess.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Posed multi-view RGB, including standard perspective cameras, is enough; panoramic input and dense 3D reconstruction are not required.
  • The simple camera-based initialization removes the need for a learned layout prior to start the optimization, so the same optimizer can be applied in new scenes without retraining.
  • Multi-room layouts, such as apartments or offices, can be estimated by composing cuboids, even though training uses only single cuboids.
  • Since the features are not cuboid-specific, the same alignment principle should carry over to other parametric room representations made of flat surfaces.
  • The two new manually verified benchmarks give the community a common testbed for cuboid layout methods.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A direct consequence the authors leave implicit: by the same training-through-optimization logic, accuracy likely depends on camera pose accuracy; testing with noisy SLAM poses would reveal by how much.
  • The 'smooth landscape' claim is testable as a quantitative property: measure the fraction of random initial cuboids that converge to the manually verified ground truth as the initial rotation or translation offset grows.
  • Because the ground truth is manually verified cuboids, a small independent re-annotation sample would tell how much of the reported benchmark margin is annotation noise versus true layout accuracy.
  • If the features transfer reliably, the same approach could estimate non-cuboid Manhattan layouts or other parametric shapes, broadening the contribution beyond room boxes.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper proposes PixCuboid, an optimization-based method for estimating cuboid-shaped room layouts from posed multi-view RGB images. The core idea is to align dense learned feature maps across views under a cuboid warp, in a coarse-to-fine manner, and to train the feature extractor end-to-end through the unrolled optimization so that the resulting loss landscape has large convergence basins and is smooth. The authors introduce a camera-orientation and vanishing-point based initialization heuristic, and claim that the method significantly outperforms single-view state-of-the-art methods on two new manually verified benchmarks built from ScanNet++ and 2D-3D-Semantics. An extension to multi-room layouts is also claimed. The provided manuscript text, however, contains only the introduction, references, and figure captions; the method and experimental sections are not present, leaving the central claims unsupported in the visible text.

Significance. If the claims are substantiated, the work would make a useful contribution: it leverages multi-view geometry for room layout estimation, avoids dense 3D reconstruction, and replaces single-view regression with an optimization-based approach. The proposed benchmarks could also be valuable. The qualitative figures suggest the method can converge to plausible layouts from poor initializations, which is encouraging. However, because the technical details and quantitative results are absent, the significance cannot currently be evaluated. The paper is best viewed as a promising sketch rather than a complete, verifiable contribution.

major comments (3)
  1. [Abstract and §1 (Figs. 10–11)] The central claim that end-to-end training yields 'large convergence basins and smooth loss landscapes' is unquantified. No ablation measures basin size, convergence success versus initialization perturbation, or compares features trained with and without unrolling. Figure 11 shows only selected successes, while Figure 10 shows failure cases consistent with the optimizer staying near the initialization. Because the method is purely optimization-based, if the heuristic initialization falls outside the basin, accuracy degenerates to the quality of that initialization. A quantitative convergence analysis (e.g., success rate as a function of initialization perturbation, or per-room difficulty) is required to support the central claim.
  2. [Missing method description (Fig. 1, Eq. (2))] The provided text does not include the featuremetric error definition referenced as Eq. (2), the cuboid parameterization, the coarse-to-fine schedule, the loss used for end-to-end training, or the number of unrolled iterations. These details are essential for reproducibility and for assessing whether the training objective is actually aligned with the test-time optimization. Without them, the method cannot be evaluated.
  3. [Missing quantitative evaluation and benchmark validation] The introduction claims 'significantly outperform the competition,' but no tables, metrics, or comparison protocols appear in the provided manuscript. The two new benchmarks are described as manually verified, but no annotation procedure, inter-annotator agreement, or quality control is reported. Since all quantitative claims are measured against this ground truth, the benchmark construction is load-bearing and must be documented.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Title page] The author line 'Gustav Hanning Kalle ˚Astr¨om Viktor Larsson' appears to be incorrectly formatted; affiliations and spacing should be corrected.
  2. [References] Reference [39] is cited as 'LED²-Net' in the reference list but as 'LED2-Net' in the text. Standardize the spelling.
  3. [Figure 9 caption] The caption states 'None of the methods are trained on this dataset,' but no training-details or evaluation-setup information is given. Please clarify.
  4. [Figures 10–11] The failure-case and initialization figures would benefit from brief descriptions of the room configurations and why convergence fails or succeeds, rather than only visual predictions.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circular dependency: the method's predictions are evaluated against external ground-truth cuboids and external baselines, and the co-authored citations provide borrowed machinery rather than load-bearing premises.

full rationale

The derivation chain is: define a cuboid C, sample feature points in each view, warp them through C to other views, minimize the featuremetric error (Eq. 2), train the feature extractor end-to-end through unrolled optimization, initialize from camera orientation/vanishing points, and finally evaluate against manually verified ground-truth 3D cuboids on ScanNet++ and 2D-3D-Semantics. The output cuboid is not defined in terms of the ground truth, nor is any fitted parameter renamed as a prediction: the optimization is run at test time with fixed weights, and the benchmarks are external to the training data. The only overlapping-author citations are PixLoc [30] and DeepLSD [25]; these supply off-the-shelf feature-alignment and line-detection machinery, but the paper does not invoke a uniqueness theorem or a prior claim that would force its own conclusion. The abstract's 'large convergence basins' claim and the failure cases in Fig. 10 are unquantified robustness/validity concerns, not evidence that a prediction reduces to an input by construction. Hence the paper is self-contained with respect to circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

This audit covers only the visible portion of the paper (abstract, introduction, references, figure captions); training hyperparameters, loss weights, and optimization details are not available. The premises are: rooms are modeled as single cuboids (explicitly stated), camera poses and intrinsics are known inputs, learned features provide a smooth featuremetric landscape traversable by simple heuristic initialization, the nonlinear least squares solvers behave as expected, and the manually verified ground truth is accurate. No new theoretical or physical entities are introduced; the new artifacts are benchmark annotations. The cuboid degrees of freedom and sampling density are modeling choices rather than hidden fitted constants that drive the result.

free parameters (4)
  • Cuboid model degrees of freedom (position, orientation, dimensions) = estimated per scene by the alignment optimization
    The 9-DOF cuboid is the output of the method, not a hidden fitted constant. Listed because the single-cuboid parameterization is an explicit modeling restriction that makes the optimization tractable.
  • Unrolled optimization iterations and coarse-to-fine levels = not stated in the visible text
    Backpropagation through unrolled optimization requires fixing these in training; if test-time optimization runs more steps than the training unroll, the learned smoothness may not transfer. Values are in the missing experimental section.
  • Feature point sampling density (points x_ik per image) = not stated in the visible text
    Controls the cost and the effective convergence basin of the featuremetric error in Eq. (2), Fig. 1. A hand-chosen detail that affects both accuracy and runtime.
  • Initialization heuristic thresholds (vanishing points, camera orientation) = not stated in the visible text
    The abstract touts 'simple heuristics' for initialization (Fig. 11); the heuristic plausibly contains hand-tuned thresholds, and the failure cases in Fig. 10 indicate sensitivity to initialization.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Rooms of interest are well approximated by a single cuboid
    Explicit in the abstract and introduction ('we focus on room shapes consisting of a single cuboid'). Multi-room extension inherits the cuboid assumption per room.
  • domain assumption Camera poses and intrinsics are known and correct
    The warp W_i->j in Eq. (2) requires posed cameras, obtained 'via SLAM or Structure-from-Motion'; pose errors are not modeled in the visible text.
  • domain assumption The featuremetric error optimum coincides with the true cuboid and the landscape is smooth near it
    The abstract claims end-to-end training yields 'large convergence basins and smooth loss landscapes', but the visible text does not demonstrate the global-optimum property; this is the paper's core premise.
  • standard math Nonlinear least squares solvers converge to the correct local minimum
    The paper cites Levenberg [17], Marquardt [23], and L-BFGS [21]; correctness assumes the smoothness assumptions of these methods hold.
  • domain assumption The manually verified cuboid ground truth is accurate and unbiased
    The benchmark annotations are authored by the method's own group; no inter-annotator agreement or validation against existing layout labels appears in the visible text.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of PixCuboid: Room Layout Estimation from Multi-view Featuremetric Alignment." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/S7WP24UI

@misc{pith2026250804659,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: PixCuboid: Room Layout Estimation from Multi-view Featuremetric Alignment},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/S7WP24UI}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2508.04659}
}
read the original abstract

Coarse room layout estimation provides important geometric cues for many downstream tasks. Current state-of-the-art methods are predominantly based on single views and often assume panoramic images. We introduce PixCuboid, an optimization-based approach for cuboid-shaped room layout estimation, which is based on multi-view alignment of dense deep features. By training with the optimization end-to-end, we learn feature maps that yield large convergence basins and smooth loss landscapes in the alignment. This allows us to initialize the room layout using simple heuristics. For the evaluation we propose two new benchmarks based on ScanNet++ and 2D-3D-Semantics, with manually verified ground truth 3D cuboids. In thorough experiments we validate our approach and significantly outperform the competition. Finally, while our network is trained with single cuboids, the flexibility of the optimization-based approach allow us to easily extend to multi-room estimation, e.g. larger apartments or offices. Code and model weights are available at https://github.com/ghanning/PixCuboid.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

51 extracted references · 48 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    PlaneFormers: From Sparse View Planes to 3D Reconstruction

    Samir Agarwala, Linyi Jin, Chris Rockwell, and David F Fouhey. PlaneFormers: From Sparse View Planes to 3D Reconstruction. In European Conference on Computer Vision (ECCV), 2022. 3

    work page 2022

  2. [2]

    Joint 2D-3D-Semantic Data for Indoor Scene Understanding

    Iro Armeni, Sasha Sax, Amir R Zamir, and Silvio Savarese. Joint 2D-3D-Semantic Data for Indoor Scene Understanding. arXiv preprint arXiv:1702.01105, 2017. 1, 5

    arXiv 2017

  3. [3]

    The CMU Visual Localization Data Set

    Hernan Badino, Daniel Huber, and Takeo Kanade. The CMU Visual Localization Data Set. http://3dvis.ri.cmu. edu/data-sets/localization, 2011. 6

    work page 2011

  4. [4]

    Neural Graph Map: Dense Mapping with Efficient Loop Closure Integration

    Leonard Bruns, Jun Zhang, and Patric Jensfelt. Neural Graph Mapping for Dense SLAM with Efficient Loop Closure.arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.03633, 2024. 8

    work page Pith review arXiv 2024

  5. [5]

    Floor-SP: Inverse CAD for Floorplans by Sequential Room- wise Shortest Path

    Jiacheng Chen, Chen Liu, Jiaye Wu, and Yasutaka Furukawa. Floor-SP: Inverse CAD for Floorplans by Sequential Room- wise Shortest Path. In International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV), 2019. 3

    work page 2019

  6. [6]

    Zillow Indoor Dataset: Annotated Floor Plans With 360° Panoramas and 3D Room Layouts

    Steve Cruz, Will Hutchcroft, Yuguang Li, Naji Khosravan, Ivaylo Boyadzhiev, and Sing Bing Kang. Zillow Indoor Dataset: Annotated Floor Plans With 360° Panoramas and 3D Room Layouts. In Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), 2021. 6

    work page 2021

  7. [7]

    ImageNet: A Large-Scale Hierarchical Image Database

    Jia Deng, Wei Dong, Richard Socher, Li-Jia Li, Kai Li, and Li Fei-Fei. ImageNet: A Large-Scale Hierarchical Image Database. In Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), 2009. 11

    work page 2009

  8. [8]

    PanoContext-Former: Panoramic Total Scene Under- standing with a Transformer

    Yuan Dong, Chuan Fang, Liefeng Bo, Zilong Dong, and Ping Tan. PanoContext-Former: Panoramic Total Scene Under- standing with a Transformer. In Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), 2024. 2

    work page 2024

Show all 51 references
  1. [9]

    Deep Residual Learning for Image Recognition

    Kaiming He, Xiangyu Zhang, Shaoqing Ren, and Jian Sun. Deep Residual Learning for Image Recognition. In Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), 2016. 4, 11

    2016

  2. [10]

    Recovering the Spatial Layout of Cluttered Rooms

    Varsha Hedau, Derek Hoiem, and David Forsyth. Recovering the Spatial Layout of Cluttered Rooms. In International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV), 2009. 2

    2009

  3. [11]

    MVLayoutNet: 3D Layout Reconstruction with Multi-view Panoramas

    Zhihua Hu, Bo Duan, Yanfeng Zhang, Mingwei Sun, and Jingwei Huang. MVLayoutNet: 3D Layout Reconstruction with Multi-view Panoramas. In Proceedings of the 30th ACM International Conference on Multimedia, pages 1289–1298,

  4. [12]

    UniPlane: Unified Plane Detection and Reconstruction from Posed Monocular Videos.arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.03594, 2024

    Yuzhong Huang, Chen Liu, Ji Hou, Ke Huo, Shiyu Dong, and Fred Morstatter. UniPlane: Unified Plane Detection and Reconstruction from Posed Monocular Videos.arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.03594, 2024. 3

    2024 arXiv

  5. [13]

    Planar Surface Reconstruction from Sparse Views

    Linyi Jin, Shengyi Qian, Andrew Owens, and David F Fouhey. Planar Surface Reconstruction from Sparse Views. In Inter- national Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV), 2021. 3

    2021

  6. [14]

    Adam: A method for stochastic optimization

    Diederik P Kingma and Jimmy Ba. Adam: A method for stochastic optimization. arXiv preprint arXiv:1412.6980 ,

    arXiv

  7. [15]

    RoomNet: End-to-End Room Lay- out Estimation

    Chen-Yu Lee, Vijay Badrinarayanan, Tomasz Malisiewicz, and Andrew Rabinovich. RoomNet: End-to-End Room Lay- out Estimation. In International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV), 2017. 2

    2017

  8. [16]

    Geometric Reasoning for Single Image Structure Recovery

    David C Lee, Martial Hebert, and Takeo Kanade. Geometric Reasoning for Single Image Structure Recovery. InComputer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), 2009. 2

    2009

  9. [17]

    A method for the solution of certain non-linear problems in least squares

    Kenneth Levenberg. A method for the solution of certain non-linear problems in least squares. Quarterly of applied mathematics, 2(2):164–168, 1944. 4

    1944

  10. [18]

    Pixel-Perfect Structure-from-Motion with Featuremetric Refinement

    Philipp Lindenberger, Paul-Edouard Sarlin, Viktor Larsson, and Marc Pollefeys. Pixel-Perfect Structure-from-Motion with Featuremetric Refinement. In International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV), 2021. 2, 4

    2021

  11. [19]

    FloorNet: A Unified Framework for Floorplan Reconstruction from 3D Scans

    Chen Liu, Jiaye Wu, and Yasutaka Furukawa. FloorNet: A Unified Framework for Floorplan Reconstruction from 3D Scans. In European Conference on Computer Vision (ECCV),

  12. [20]

    PlaneRCNN: 3D Plane Detection and Reconstruc- tion from a Single Image

    Chen Liu, Kihwan Kim, Jinwei Gu, Yasutaka Furukawa, and Jan Kautz. PlaneRCNN: 3D Plane Detection and Reconstruc- tion from a Single Image. In Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), 2019. 3

    2019

  13. [21]

    On the limited memory BFGS method for large scale optimization

    Dong C Liu and Jorge Nocedal. On the limited memory BFGS method for large scale optimization. Mathematical programming, 45(1):503–528, 1989. 5

    1989

  14. [22]

    Learning Informative Edge Maps for Indoor Scene Layout Prediction

    Arun Mallya and Svetlana Lazebnik. Learning Informative Edge Maps for Indoor Scene Layout Prediction. In Interna- tional Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV), 2015. 2

    2015

  15. [23]

    An algorithm for least-squares esti- mation of nonlinear parameters

    Donald W Marquardt. An algorithm for least-squares esti- mation of nonlinear parameters. Journal of the society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics, 11(2):431–441, 1963. 4

    1963

  16. [24]

    Total3DUnderstanding: Joint Layout, Object Pose and Mesh Reconstruction for Indoor Scenes from a Single Image

    Yinyu Nie, Xiaoguang Han, Shihui Guo, Yujian Zheng, Jian Chang, and Jian Jun Zhang. Total3DUnderstanding: Joint Layout, Object Pose and Mesh Reconstruction for Indoor Scenes from a Single Image. In Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), 2020. 2, 5, 6

    2020

  17. [25]

    DeepLSD: Line Segment Detection and Refinement with Deep Image Gradients

    R´emi Pautrat, Daniel Barath, Viktor Larsson, Martin R Os- wald, and Marc Pollefeys. DeepLSD: Line Segment Detection and Refinement with Deep Image Gradients. In Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), 2023. 2, 4

    2023

  18. [26]

    3d floor plan recovery from overlapping spherical images

    Giovanni Pintore, Fabio Ganovelli, Ruggero Pintus, Roberto Scopigno, and Enrico Gobbetti. 3d floor plan recovery from overlapping spherical images. Computational visual media, 4:367–383, 2018. 2, 6

    2018

  19. [27]

    State- of-the-art in Automatic 3D Reconstruction of Structured In- door Environments

    Giovanni Pintore, Claudio Mura, Fabio Ganovelli, Lizeth Fuentes-Perez, Renato Pajarola, and Enrico Gobbetti. State- of-the-art in Automatic 3D Reconstruction of Structured In- door Environments. In Computer Graphics Forum, pages 667–699. Wiley Online Library, 2020. 3

    2020

  20. [28]

    Deep3DLayout: 3D Reconstruction of an Indoor Layout from a Spherical Panoramic Image

    Giovanni Pintore, Eva Almansa, Marco Agus, and Enrico Gobbetti. Deep3DLayout: 3D Reconstruction of an Indoor Layout from a Spherical Panoramic Image. ACM Transac- tions on Graphics (TOG), 40(6):1–12, 2021. 2, 5, 6

    2021

  21. [29]

    U-Net: Convolutional Networks for Biomedical Image Segmenta- tion

    Olaf Ronneberger, Philipp Fischer, and Thomas Brox. U-Net: Convolutional Networks for Biomedical Image Segmenta- tion. In Medical Image Computing and Computer-assisted Intervention (MICCAI), 2015. 4

    2015

  22. [30]

    Back to the Feature: Learning Robust Camera Localization from 9 Pixels to Pose

    Paul-Edouard Sarlin, Ajaykumar Unagar, Mans Larsson, Hugo Germain, Carl Toft, Viktor Larsson, Marc Pollefeys, Vincent Lepetit, Lars Hammarstrand, Fredrik Kahl, et al. Back to the Feature: Learning Robust Camera Localization from 9 Pixels to Pose. In Computer Vision and Pattern...

    2021

  23. [31]

    Benchmarking 6DOF Outdoor Visual Localization in Changing Conditions

    Torsten Sattler, Will Maddern, Carl Toft, Akihiko Torii, Lars Hammarstrand, Erik Stenborg, Daniel Safari, Masatoshi Oku- tomi, Marc Pollefeys, Josef Sivic, Fredrik Kahl, and Tomas Pajdla. Benchmarking 6DOF Outdoor Visual Localization in Changing Conditions. In Computer Vision ...

    2018

  24. [32]

    Feature-metric Loss for Self-supervised Learning of Depth and Egomotion

    Chang Shu, Kun Yu, Zhixiang Duan, and Kuiyuan Yang. Feature-metric Loss for Self-supervised Learning of Depth and Egomotion. In European Conference on Computer Vision (ECCV), 2020. 2

    2020

  25. [33]

    SUN RGB-D: A RGB-D Scene Understanding Benchmark Suite

    Shuran Song, Samuel P Lichtenberg, and Jianxiong Xiao. SUN RGB-D: A RGB-D Scene Understanding Benchmark Suite. In Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR),

  26. [34]

    Julian Straub, Thomas Whelan, Lingni Ma, Yufan Chen, Erik Wijmans, Simon Green, Jakob J. Engel, Raul Mur-Artal, Carl Ren, Shobhit Verma, Anton Clarkson, Mingfei Yan, Brian Budge, Yajie Yan, Xiaqing Pan, June Yon, Yuyang Zou, Kim- berly Leon, Nigel Carter, Jesus Briales, Tyler ...

    1906 arXiv

  27. [35]

    GPR-Net: Multi-view Layout Estimation via a Geometry-aware Panorama Registration Network

    Jheng-Wei Su, Chi-Han Peng, Peter Wonka, and Hung- Kuo Chu. GPR-Net: Multi-view Layout Estimation via a Geometry-aware Panorama Registration Network. In Com- puter Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), 2023. 2, 6

    2023

  28. [36]

    HorizonNet: Learning Room Layout with 1D Repre- sentation and Pano Stretch Data Augmentation

    Cheng Sun, Chi-Wei Hsiao, Min Sun, and Hwann-Tzong Chen. HorizonNet: Learning Room Layout with 1D Repre- sentation and Pano Stretch Data Augmentation. In Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), 2019. 2

    2019

  29. [37]

    Pix3D: Dataset and Methods for Single- Image 3D Shape Modeling

    Xingyuan Sun, Jiajun Wu, Xiuming Zhang, Zhoutong Zhang, Chengkai Zhang, Tianfan Xue, Joshua B Tenenbaum, and William T Freeman. Pix3D: Dataset and Methods for Single- Image 3D Shape Modeling. In Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), 2018. 6

    2018

  30. [38]

    Non-Iterative Approach for Fast and Accurate Vanishing Point Detection

    Jean-Philippe Tardif. Non-Iterative Approach for Fast and Accurate Vanishing Point Detection. In International Confer- ence on Computer Vision (ICCV), 2009. 4

    2009

  31. [39]

    LED²-Net: Monocular 360° Layout Estima- tion via Differentiable Depth Rendering

    Fu-En Wang, Yu-Hsuan Yeh, Min Sun, Wei-Chen Chiu, and Yi-Hsuan Tsai. LED²-Net: Monocular 360° Layout Estima- tion via Differentiable Depth Rendering. In Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), 2021. 2, 5, 6

    2021

  32. [40]

    PSM- Net: Position-aware Stereo Merging Network for Room Lay- out Estimation

    Haiyan Wang, Will Hutchcroft, Yuguang Li, Zhiqiang Wan, Ivaylo Boyadzhiev, Yingli Tian, and Sing Bing Kang. PSM- Net: Position-aware Stereo Merging Network for Room Lay- out Estimation. In Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), 2022. 2, 5, 6

    2022

  33. [41]

    AirPlanes: Accurate Plane Estimation via 3D-Consistent Embeddings

    Jamie Watson, Filippo Aleotti, Mohamed Sayed, Zawar Qureshi, Oisin Mac Aodha, Gabriel Brostow, Michael Fir- man, and Sara Vicente. AirPlanes: Accurate Plane Estimation via 3D-Consistent Embeddings. In Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), 2024. 3

    2024

  34. [42]

    Reconstructing the World’s Museums

    Jianxiong Xiao and Yasutaka Furukawa. Reconstructing the World’s Museums. International Journal of Computer Vision (IJCV), 110:243–258, 2014. 2

    2014

  35. [43]

    PlanarRecon: Real-time 3D Plane Detec- tion and Reconstruction from Posed Monocular Videos

    Yiming Xie, Matheus Gadelha, Fengting Yang, Xiaowei Zhou, and Huaizu Jiang. PlanarRecon: Real-time 3D Plane Detec- tion and Reconstruction from Posed Monocular Videos. In Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), 2022. 3

    2022

  36. [44]

    Deep Probabilistic Feature-metric Tracking

    Binbin Xu, Andrew J Davison, and Stefan Leutenegger. Deep Probabilistic Feature-metric Tracking. IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters (RA-L), 6(1):223–230, 2020. 2

    2020

  37. [45]

    DuLa-Net: A Dual-Projection Network for Estimating Room Layouts from a Single RGB Panorama

    Shang-Ta Yang, Fu-En Wang, Chi-Han Peng, Peter Wonka, Min Sun, and Hung-Kuo Chu. DuLa-Net: A Dual-Projection Network for Estimating Room Layouts from a Single RGB Panorama. In Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), 2019. 6

    2019

  38. [46]

    ScanNet++: A High-Fidelity Dataset of 3D Indoor Scenes

    Chandan Yeshwanth, Yueh-Cheng Liu, Matthias Nießner, and Angela Dai. ScanNet++: A High-Fidelity Dataset of 3D Indoor Scenes. In International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV), 2023. 1, 5, 6

    2023

  39. [47]

    Single-Image Piece-wise Planar 3D Recon- struction via Associative Embedding

    Zehao Yu, Jia Zheng, Dongze Lian, Zihan Zhou, and Shenghua Gao. Single-Image Piece-wise Planar 3D Recon- struction via Associative Embedding. In Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), 2019. 3

    2019

  40. [48]

    Connecting the Dots: Floorplan Recon- struction Using Two-Level Queries

    Yuanwen Yue, Theodora Kontogianni, Konrad Schindler, and Francis Engelmann. Connecting the Dots: Floorplan Recon- struction Using Two-Level Queries. In Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), 2023. 3

    2023

  41. [49]

    Holistic 3D Scene Under- standing from a Single Image with Implicit Representation

    Cheng Zhang, Zhaopeng Cui, Yinda Zhang, Bing Zeng, Marc Pollefeys, and Shuaicheng Liu. Holistic 3D Scene Under- standing from a Single Image with Implicit Representation. In Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), 2021. 2, 5, 6

    2021

  42. [50]

    LayoutNet: Reconstructing the 3D Room Layout from a Sin- gle RGB Image

    Chuhang Zou, Alex Colburn, Qi Shan, and Derek Hoiem. LayoutNet: Reconstructing the 3D Room Layout from a Sin- gle RGB Image. In Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), 2018. 2

    2018

  43. [51]

    Manhattan Room Layout Reconstruction from a Single 360° Image: A Comparative Study of State-of-the-Art Methods

    Chuhang Zou, Jheng-Wei Su, Chi-Han Peng, Alex Colburn, Qi Shan, Peter Wonka, Hung-Kuo Chu, and Derek Hoiem. Manhattan Room Layout Reconstruction from a Single 360° Image: A Comparative Study of State-of-the-Art Methods. International Journal of Computer Vision (IJCV), 129:1410...

    2021

Pith tools

Reviewed August 5, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.