Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 5 minor 65 references

Rigid object motion supplies enough lighting diversity to disentangle surface material from illumination better than a static multiview capture.

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

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

T0 review · grok-4.5

2026-07-13 03:49 UTC pith:WSXDEPEY

load-bearing objection Clean empirical result: free rigid motion under one far-field light measurably beats static multiview for material-lighting decomposition, even with estimated poses. the 2 major comments →

arxiv 2607.09329 v1 pith:WSXDEPEY submitted 2026-07-10 cs.CV cs.GR

Dynamic Inverse Rendering for Enhanced Material-Lighting Decomposition

Raza Yunus , Benjamin Ummenhofer , Jan Eric Lenssen , Eddy Ilg This is my paper
classification cs.CV cs.GR
keywords inverse renderingmaterial-lighting decomposition3D Gaussian splattingobject trackingrelightinghand-held capturephysically based rendering
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

Separating an object's intrinsic material (albedo and roughness) from the lighting that falls on it is a classic ill-posed problem in inverse rendering: many different material-lighting pairs can produce the same observed colour. The usual remedies are extra light sources, multi-environment captures, or strong learned priors. This paper argues that simply letting a rigid object move in front of a fixed camera already generates a rich set of surface-light interactions that constrain the decomposition more tightly than a static object filmed from many viewpoints. The authors build a three-stage pipeline that first tracks and reconstructs the moving object, then optimizes material parameters and a single distant environment map under physically based rendering. Controlled synthetic experiments show that hand-held-style motion yields cleaner albedo and better novel-light relighting than either a static dome or a turntable, even when the static case is given perfect ground-truth poses. Real RGB videos of hand-held household objects confirm that the same advantage survives noisy real-world tracking.

Core claim

Observing a rigidly moving object from a stationary camera produces a richer set of surface-light interactions than a moving camera around a static object; those interactions are sufficient to drive materially more accurate albedo and lighting decomposition under a single far-field illumination model.

What carries the argument

A three-stage 4D inverse-rendering pipeline: progressive NeuS pose-and-geometry estimation, SDF-regularized 3D-Gaussian refinement of geometry and poses, then deferred physically based rendering of albedo and roughness under Gaussian ray-traced visibility, all optimized against the monocular video.

Load-bearing premise

The entire lighting field can be represented by one distant environment map plus simple one-bounce occlusion; near-field lights, hand shadows, or time-varying illumination would remove the claimed advantage of motion.

What would settle it

Capture the same physical object under identical real lighting once static (many viewpoints) and once under free hand-held rotation, then measure whether the hand-held albedo still scores higher on PSNR/SSIM/LPIPS against ground-truth material maps and produces more accurate novel-light renderings.

Watch this falsifier. Get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

If this is right

  • Casual hand-held smartphone videos become a practical capture protocol for relightable assets without multi-light rigs or large training priors.
  • Inverse-rendering pipelines can trade expensive multi-environment hardware for accurate rigid pose tracking.
  • The same motion-induced constraint should improve material recovery for any object that can be rotated in place under fixed far-field lighting.
  • Turntable capture is shown to be an intermediate case: limited axial motion already helps, but full 6-DoF hand-held motion helps more.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If non-rigid deformation can be tracked as accurately as rigid motion, the same lighting-diversity argument should extend to cloth, faces, or soft objects.
  • Explicit modelling of the holding hand as a dynamic occluder would likely enlarge the real-world gap between hand-held and static capture.
  • The result suggests that view-count alone is a poor proxy for inverse-rendering quality; the diversity of incident lighting directions matters more.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

2 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper claims that rigid object motion under a fixed far-field environment provides stronger surface-light interaction constraints than static multiview capture, yielding more accurate material-lighting decomposition for inverse rendering. It introduces a three-stage pipeline (progressive NeuS pose/geometry estimation, global SDF-augmented 3D-GS refinement, then PBR material + envmap optimization with Gaussian ray tracing) for monocular hand-held RGB sequences of general rigid objects. Controlled synthetic experiments on HOT3D-derived assets compare static-dome, turntable, and hand-held trajectories that share evaluation views; hand-held (even with estimated poses) outperforms static (with GT poses) on albedo and novel-light relighting for both original and diffuse material variants (Table 1). Real hand-held captures and ablations on roughness, illumination complexity, and view count support the claim under the stated far-field model.

Significance. If the result holds, the work supplies a practical, prior-light alternative to multi-illumination capture or heavy learned priors for material-lighting disentanglement, and it is immediately relevant to casual AR/relighting pipelines that already use hand-held video. Strengths include a clean experimental isolation of the motion effect (shared evaluation views, original vs. diffuse variants, GT vs. estimated poses), a new synthetic benchmark with ground-truth materials and relit views, and competitive static-setting numbers on TensoIR (Table 2). The pipeline also improves pose accuracy over FMOV on HO3D (Table 4). The contribution is empirical and systems-oriented rather than a new theoretical bound, but the controlled evidence is stronger than typical inverse-rendering papers that only show qualitative relights.

major comments (2)
  1. The central claim rests on a single far-field envmap + one-bounce 3DGRT visibility model (Eq. 2, Sec. 4.3). Real hand-held sequences necessarily include near-field hand occlusion and possible inter-reflections; the paper only qualitatively shows cleaner albedo (Fig. 4) and lists hand occlusion as future work. A quantitative stress test (e.g., synthetic hands or measured near-field lighting) is needed before the real-data claim can be considered fully supported.
  2. Table 1 reports that hand-held with estimated poses beats static with GT poses on albedo/relighting despite worse normals. The paper does not quantify residual pose error on the synthetic sequences themselves (only HO3D ATE/RPE in Table 4). Without that error distribution, it is hard to rule out that residual pose noise is partially absorbed into the material maps, inflating the apparent disentanglement gain.
minor comments (5)
  1. Fig. 3 caption and surrounding text claim progressive disentanglement from left to right; the figure itself would benefit from an explicit column legend (static / turntable / hand-held) rather than relying solely on the progression narrative.
  2. Sec. 4.1 virtual-camera centering removes two translational DoFs; the text should state more clearly how the subsequent RANSAC-EPnP initialization recovers full 6-DoF poses and whether any residual bias remains.
  3. Loss weights and learning rates are listed only in the appendix; a short sensitivity statement (or fixed-seed reproducibility note) would strengthen confidence that the Table 1 ranking is not brittle to these free parameters.
  4. Notation for the positive clamping function in Eq. 3 is written as ()+; a standard max(0,·) or [·]+ would improve readability.
  5. The per-object tables (Tables 5–6) are useful but lengthy; a short summary of variance across objects in the main text would help readers assess robustness without flipping to the appendix.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; the central claim is an empirical comparison of material accuracy under motion vs. static capture, evaluated against external ground-truth materials and novel lighting on a controlled synthetic dataset.

full rationale

The paper's load-bearing claim (motion yields significantly more accurate materials than static multiview) is not derived by construction from any fitted quantity or self-referential definition. It is tested by rendering HOT3D assets under three trajectories that share evaluation views (static dome / turntable / hand-held), with known GT albedo/roughness and novel-light images, then measuring PSNR/SSIM/LPIPS on recovered albedo and relights (Table 1, original and diffuse variants). Hand-held with estimated poses already beats static with GT poses; this is an external comparison, not a tautology. The rendering equation (Eq. 3) and far-field model (Eq. 2) motivate why pose diversity should add constraints, but the claim is not proved from them—it is measured. Pipeline stages (NeuS progressive tracking, SDF-Gaussians, PBR with 3DGRT) use standard losses and free hyperparameters that do not enter the reported metrics by definition. Citations (FMOV, NeuS, 3DGS, SVG-IR, etc.) supply components; none is a uniqueness theorem or ansatz from overlapping authors that forces the result. No self-definitional loop, fitted-input-as-prediction, or renaming of a known pattern appears. Score 0 is therefore the correct, non-manufactured outcome.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

5 free parameters · 4 axioms · 0 invented entities

The claim rests on standard inverse-rendering assumptions plus a small set of modeling choices (far-field light, dielectric F0, rigid SE(3) motion, progressive three-stage optimization). Free parameters are the usual training hyper-parameters; no new physical entities are postulated.

free parameters (5)
  • loss weights (eikonal, mask, match, normal, variance, rank, gamma, proj, light, material)
    Hand-chosen scalars that balance the multi-term objectives in stages 1-3; values listed in appendix.
  • learning rates for pose MLPs, materials, environment map
    Stage-specific rates (0.0005, 0.025, 0.01) chosen for convergence.
  • environment-map progressive resolution schedule (16x32 to 1024x2048)
    Prevents early over-fitting of high-frequency lighting; schedule is free.
  • number of Fibonacci samples (512) and BRDF/light importance samples
    Fixed sampling budget for PBR optimization and relighting.
  • SDF opacity temperature gamma and material sigmoid temperature
    Learnable or fixed scalars controlling opacity and material activation range.
axioms (4)
  • domain assumption Environment illumination is distant (far-field) and constant over time, representable by a single environment map.
    Stated in Sec. 3 and Eq. 2; underpins the claim that object rotation alone supplies lighting diversity.
  • domain assumption Objects are rigid (SE(3) motion only) and dielectric with fixed F0=0.04.
    Sec. 3 and Sec. 4.3; non-rigid deformation or metals would break the material model.
  • domain assumption One-bounce Gaussian ray-tracing plus split-sum approximation is sufficient for visibility and indirect illumination.
    Sec. 4.3; higher-order bounces or near-field sources are ignored.
  • ad hoc to paper Progressive sequential NeuS optimization followed by global 3D-GS refinement yields poses accurate enough for inverse rendering.
    Pipeline design choice (Sec. 4.1-4.2); tracking error is acknowledged as a risk but not quantified as a failure mode on real data.

pith-pipeline@v1.1.0-grok45 · 25340 in / 2598 out tokens · 22621 ms · 2026-07-13T03:49:48.354191+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

Decomposing outgoing surface radiance into material and illumination during inverse rendering is essential for applications such as relighting and augmented reality, yet it is severely ill-posed since multiple combinations can result in the same observed colour. Capturing an object under multiple lighting conditions usually helps resolve this ambiguity as it constrains the optimization towards correct solutions. In this work, we explore the potential of reconstructing rigidly moving objects -- which provides observations of diverse light-surface interactions -- to resolve the material-lighting ambiguity in inverse rendering. For this purpose, we introduce a relightable approach that marries object tracking and reconstruction with inverse rendering for general rigidly moving objects. Our experimental analysis on synthetic data demonstrates that motion can be an advantage for disentangling material and lighting: the reconstructed material is significantly more accurate when the object is observed under rigid motion than when it is static. Moreover, results on RGB videos of real hand-held objects show that our pipeline preserves this advantage even under noisy real-world conditions.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.09329 by Benjamin Ummenhofer, Eddy Ilg, Jan Eric Lenssen, Raza Yunus.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: In contrast to the static multiview setting, where albedo and the corresponding lighting often become entangled, we use the hand-held object capture setting in which diverse surface-light interactions impose strong constraints on the optimization and enable proper material-lighting disentanglement. Abstract. Decomposing outgoing surface radiance into material and il￾lumination during inverse rendering is e… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Overview of our three-stage method. We first perform progressive online opti￾mization with a NeuS representation to estimate initial object poses and geometry. We then refine them with an SDF-based 3D Gaussian representation to capture fine-grained geometry. Finally, we add surface materials to the Gaussians and jointly optimize them with environment illumination to obtain accurate material-lighting decomp… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Qualitative results for different capture configurations on our proposed syn￾thetic dataset for the diffuse variant. The improved disentanglement of albedo and lighting (note the progression of disentanglement from left to right) induced by the hand-held setting results in better relighting consistently across a diverse set of ob￾jects. – Hand-held Rotations : This is our proposed setting, where the user h… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Real captures under static multiview (top) and hand-held (bottom) settings. Despite similar render quality, hand-held capture yields cleaner albedo and more plau￾sible relighting. Despite similar rendering quality across the full sequences, the decomposition is qualitatively better in the hand-held setting. The static setting bakes shadows from the render into the albedo and tints the white regions, while … view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Environment reconstruction under varying roughness. The hand-held setting re￾covers sharper illumination structure even for diffuse objects, while the gap to the static setting narrows for more specular objects, where sharper highlights provide stronger lighting constraints. The ground truth environment map is shown in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Effect of illumination complexity on decomposition. The hand-held setting maintains high albedo quality under increasingly complex lighting, while the static setting degrades. 5.2 Benchmarking Relighting Performance In our work, we introduce the new hand-held setting that requires object track￾ing. We validate our design choices in two ways: (1) performance in the static setting on a standard benchmark and… view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Effect of view sampling on decomposition. A small number of hand-held views outperforms many more static views, showing that the gain comes from motion-induced surface–light interactions rather than view count alone [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Effect of diversity in hand-held rotations on decomposition. Increasing the diversity of rotated lighting observations improves disentanglement under complex il￾lumination, while uniform white lighting provides no additional constraints. iterations) for a further 150,000 iterations to let the model fully converge. The geometry is optimized with the learning rate settings from SVG-IR [45]. The learning rate… view at source ↗

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

65 extracted references · 6 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    In: IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR)

    Alzayer, H., Henzler, P., Barron, J.T., Huang, J.B., Srinivasan, P.P., Verbin, D.: Generative multiview relighting for 3d reconstruction under extreme illumination variation. In: IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR). pp. 10933–10942 (June 2025)

    2025

  2. [2]

    In: IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR)

    Banerjee, P., Shkodrani, S., Moulon, P., Hampali, S., Han, S., Zhang, F., Zhang, L., Fountain, J., Miller, E., Basol, S., Newcombe, R., Wang, R., Engel, J.J., Hodan, T.: Hot3d: Hand and object tracking in 3d from egocentric multi-view videos. In: IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR). pp. 7061–7071 (June 2025)

    2025

  3. [3]

    In: IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV)

    Boss, M., Braun, R., Jampani, V., Barron, J.T., Liu, C., Lensch, H.: Nerd: Neu- ral reflectance decomposition from image collections. In: IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV). pp. 12684–12694 (2021)

    2021

  4. [4]

    Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS)35, 26389–26403 (2022)

    Boss, M., Engelhardt, A., Kar, A., Li, Y., Sun, D., Barron, J., Lensch, H., Jampani, V.: Samurai: Shape and material from unconstrained real-world arbitrary image collections. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS)35, 26389–26403 (2022)

    2022

  5. [5]

    In: International Conference on Learning Representations (ICLR) (2026),https://openreview

    Carion, N., Gustafson, L., Hu, Y.T., Debnath, S., Hu, R., Coll-Vinent, D.S., Ryali, C., Alwala, K.V., Khedr, H., Huang, A., Lei, J., Ma, T., Guo, B., Kalla, A., Marks, M., Greer, J., Wang, M., Sun, P., Rädle, R., Afouras, T., Mavroudi, E., Xu, K., Wu, T.H., Zhou, Y., Momeni, L., HAZRA, R., Ding, S., Vaze, S., Porcher, F., Li, F., Li, S., Kamath, A., Cheng...

    2026

  6. [6]

    In: European Conference on Computer Vision (ECCV) (2022)

    Chen, A., Xu, Z., Geiger, A., Yu, J., Su, H.: Tensorf: Tensorial radiance fields. In: European Conference on Computer Vision (ECCV) (2022)

    2022

  7. [7]

    In: European Conference on Computer Vision (ECCV)

    Chen, X., Peng, S., Yang, D., Liu, Y., Pan, B., Lv, C., Zhou, X.: Intrinsicanything: Learning diffusion priors for inverse rendering under unknown illumination. In: European Conference on Computer Vision (ECCV). p. 450–467. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg (2024).https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-73027-6_26, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-73027-6_26

    work page doi:10.1007/978-3-031-73027-6_26 2024

  8. [8]

    In: IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV) (2025)

    Chen, Z., Potamias, R.A., Chen, S., Schmid, C.: HORT: Monocular hand-held objects reconstruction with transformers. In: IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV) (2025)

    2025

  9. [9]

    Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS)37, 121765–121789 (2024)

    Dihlmann, J.N., Majumdar, A., Engelhardt, A., Braun, R., Lensch, H.: Subsur- face scattering for gaussian splatting. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS)37, 121765–121789 (2024)

    2024

  10. [10]

    Edstedt, J., Nordström, D., Zhang, Y., Bökman, G., Astermark, J., Larsson, V., Heyden, A., Kahl, F., Wadenbäck, M., Felsberg, M.: Roma v2: Harder better faster denser feature matching (2025),https://arxiv.org/abs/2511.15706

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  11. [11]

    In: IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR)

    Engelhardt, A., Raj, A., Boss, M., Zhang, Y., Kar, A., Li, Y., Sun, D., Brualla, R.M., Barron, J.T., Lensch, H., et al.: Shinobi: Shape and illumination using neural object decomposition via brdf optimization in-the-wild. In: IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR). pp. 19636–19646 (2024)

    2024

  12. [12]

    In: IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recogni- tion (CVPR)

    Fan, Z., Parelli, M., Kadoglou, M.E., Chen, X., Kocabas, M., Black, M.J., Hilliges, O.: Hold: Category-agnostic 3d reconstruction of interacting hands and objects from video. In: IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recogni- tion (CVPR). pp. 494–504 (2024) Dynamic Inverse Rendering for Enhanced Material-Lighting Decomposition 17

    2024

  13. [13]

    In: IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR)

    Fei, F., Tang, J., Tan, P., Shi, B.: Vminer: Versatile multi-view inverse rendering with near- and far-field light sources. In: IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR). pp. 11800–11809 (June 2024)

    2024

  14. [14]

    In: IEEE/CVF International Con- ference on Computer Vision (ICCV)

    Fischer, T., Zhang, X., Ilg, E.: Unified category-level object detection and pose es- timation from rgb images using 3d prototypes. In: IEEE/CVF International Con- ference on Computer Vision (ICCV). pp. 9790–9800 (2025)

    2025

  15. [15]

    In: CVPR

    Fu, Y., Wang, X., Liu, S., Kulkarni, A., Kautz, J., Efros, A.A.: Colmap-free 3d gaussian splatting. In: CVPR. pp. 20796–20805. IEEE (2024)

    2024

  16. [16]

    In: Leonardis, A., Ricci, E., Roth, S., Russakovsky, O., Sattler, T., Varol, G

    Gao, J., Gu, C., Lin, Y., Li, Z., Zhu, H., Cao, X., Zhang, L., Yao, Y.: Relightable 3d gaussians: Realistic point cloud relighting with brdf decomposition and ray tracing. In: Leonardis, A., Ricci, E., Roth, S., Russakovsky, O., Sattler, T., Varol, G. (eds.) European Conference on Computer Vision (ECCV). pp. 73–89. Springer Nature Switzerland, Cham (2025)

    2025

  17. [17]

    In: IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR)

    Gu, C., Wei, X., Zeng, Z., Yao, Y., Zhang, L.: Irgs: Inter-reflective gaussian splat- ting with 2d gaussian ray tracing. In: IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR). pp. 10943–10952 (2025)

    2025

  18. [18]

    In: IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR)

    Gu, C., Wei, X., Zhang, L., Zhu, X.: Tensoflow: Tensorial flow-based sampler for inverse rendering. In: IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR). pp. 495–504 (2025)

    2025

  19. [19]

    In: IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) (2020)

    Hampali, S., Rad, M., Oberweger, M., Lepetit, V.: Honnotate: A method for 3d annotation of hand and object poses. In: IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) (2020)

    2020

  20. [20]

    In: Koyejo, S., Mohamed, S., Agarwal, A., Belgrave, D., Cho, K., Oh, A

    Hasselgren, J., Hofmann, N., Munkberg, J.: Shape, light, and material decom- position from images using monte carlo rendering and denoising. In: Koyejo, S., Mohamed, S., Agarwal, A., Belgrave, D., Cho, K., Oh, A. (eds.) Advances in Neu- ral Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS). vol. 35, pp. 22856–22869. Curran Associates, Inc. (2022),https://proceedin...

    2022

  21. [21]

    In: ACM SIGGRAPH

    Huang,B.,Yu,Z.,Chen,A.,Geiger,A.,Gao,S.:2dgaussiansplattingforgeometri- cally accurate radiance fields. In: ACM SIGGRAPH. SIGGRAPH ’24, Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA (2024).https://doi.org/10. 1145/3641519.3657428,https://doi.org/10.1145/3641519.3657428

    doi:10.1145/3641519.3657428 2024

  22. [22]

    In: Advances in Neural In- formation Processing Systems (NeurIPS) (2025)

    Huang, M.H., Foo, L.G., Theobalt, C., Sun, Y., Soh, D.W.: Onlinesplatter: Pose- free online 3d reconstruction for free-moving objects. In: Advances in Neural In- formation Processing Systems (NeurIPS) (2025)

    2025

  23. [23]

    In: NeurIPS (2024)

    Hyung, J., Hong, S., Hwang, S., Lee, J., Choo, J., Kim, J.: Effective rank analysis and regularization for enhanced 3d gaussian splatting. In: NeurIPS (2024)

    2024

  24. [24]

    In: IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR)

    Jiang, Y., Tu, J., Liu, Y., Gao, X., Long, X., Wang, W., Ma, Y.: Gaussianshader: 3d gaussian splatting with shading functions for reflective surfaces. In: IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR). pp. 5322–5332 (2024)

    2024

  25. [25]

    In: Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR)

    Jin, H., Liu, I., Xu, P., Zhang, X., Han, S., Bi, S., Zhou, X., Xu, Z., Su, H.: Tensoir: Tensorial inverse rendering. In: Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR). pp. 165–174 (June 2023)

    2023

  26. [26]

    In: IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV)

    Jin, Y., Prasad, V., Jauhri, S., Franzius, M., Chalvatzaki, G.: 6dope-gs: Online 6d object pose estimation using gaussian splatting. In: IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV). pp. 8032–8043 (2025)

    2025

  27. [27]

    ACM SIGGRAPH Computer Graphics 20(4), 143–150 (1986).https://doi.org/10.1145/15886.15902

    Kajiya, J.T.: The rendering equation. ACM SIGGRAPH Computer Graphics 20(4), 143–150 (1986).https://doi.org/10.1145/15886.15902

    doi:10.1145/15886.15902 1986

  28. [28]

    Karis, B., Games, E.: Real shading in unreal engine 4. Proc. Physically Based Shading Theory Practice4(3), 1 (2013) 18 R. Yunus et al

    2013

  29. [29]

    ACM Transactions on Graphics (ToG)42(4), 1–14 (2023)

    Kerbl, B., Kopanas, G., Leimkühler, T., Drettakis, G.: 3d gaussian splatting for real-time radiance field rendering. ACM Transactions on Graphics (ToG)42(4), 1–14 (2023)

    2023

  30. [30]

    ACM Transactions on Graphics (ToG)41(4), 1–12 (2022)

    Kuang, Z., Olszewski, K., Chai, M., Huang, Z., Achlioptas, P., Tulyakov, S.: Neroic: Neural rendering of objects from online image collections. ACM Transactions on Graphics (ToG)41(4), 1–12 (2022)

    2022

  31. [31]

    In: European Conference on Computer Vision (ECCV)

    Leroy, V., Cabon, Y., Revaud, J.: Grounding image matching in 3d with mast3r. In: European Conference on Computer Vision (ECCV). p. 71–91. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg (2024).https://doi.org/10.1007/978- 3- 031- 73220- 1_5, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-73220-1_5

    doi:10.1007/978- 2024

  32. [32]

    ACM Transac- tions on Graphics (ToG)43(4) (Jul 2024).https://doi.org/10.1145/3658211, https://doi.org/10.1145/3658211

    Li, J., Wang, L., Zhang, L., Wang, B.: Tensosdf: Roughness-aware tensorial representation for robust geometry and material reconstruction. ACM Transac- tions on Graphics (ToG)43(4) (Jul 2024).https://doi.org/10.1145/3658211, https://doi.org/10.1145/3658211

    work page doi:10.1145/3658211 2024

  33. [33]

    In: IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR)

    Li, J., Wu, Z., Zamfir, E., Timofte, R.: Recap: Better gaussian relighting with cross-environment captures. In: IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR). pp. 21307–21316 (June 2025)

    2025

  34. [34]

    In: IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR)

    Liang, Z., Zhang, Q., Feng, Y., Shan, Y., Jia, K.: Gs-ir: 3d gaussian splatting for inverse rendering. In: IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR). pp. 21644–21653 (2024)

    2024

  35. [35]

    ACM Transactions on Graphics (ToG)42(4), 1–22 (2023)

    Liu, Y., Wang, P., Lin, C., Long, X., Wang, J., Liu, L., Komura, T., Wang, W.: Nero: Neural geometry and brdf reconstruction of reflective objects from multiview images. ACM Transactions on Graphics (ToG)42(4), 1–22 (2023)

    2023

  36. [36]

    ACM Transactions on Graphics (ToG)42(6) (Dec 2023).https://doi.org/ 10.1145/3618357,https://doi.org/10.1145/3618357

    Lyu, L., Tewari, A., Habermann, M., Saito, S., Zollhöfer, M., Leimkühler, T., Theobalt, C.: Diffusion posterior illumination for ambiguity-aware inverse render- ing. ACM Transactions on Graphics (ToG)42(6) (Dec 2023).https://doi.org/ 10.1145/3618357,https://doi.org/10.1145/3618357

    work page doi:10.1145/3618357 2023

  37. [37]

    In: Eu- ropean Conference on Computer Vision (ECCV) (2020)

    Mildenhall, B., Srinivasan, P.P., Tancik, M., Barron, J.T., Ramamoorthi, R., Ng, R.: Nerf: Representing scenes as neural radiance fields for view synthesis. In: Eu- ropean Conference on Computer Vision (ECCV) (2020)

    2020

  38. [38]

    ACM Transactions on Graphics (ToG)43(6) (Nov 2024).https://doi

    Moenne-Loccoz, N., Mirzaei, A., Perel, O., de Lutio, R., Martinez Esturo, J., State, G., Fidler, S., Sharp, N., Gojcic, Z.: 3d gaussian ray tracing: Fast tracing of particle scenes. ACM Transactions on Graphics (ToG)43(6) (Nov 2024).https://doi. org/10.1145/3687934,https://doi.org/10.1145/3687934

    doi:10.1145/3687934 2024

  39. [39]

    ACM Transactions on Graphics (ToG)41(4) (Jul 2022).https://doi.org/10.1145/3528223.3530127,https://doi.org/10.1145/ 3528223.3530127

    Müller,T.,Evans,A.,Schied,C.,Keller,A.:Instantneuralgraphicsprimitiveswith a multiresolution hash encoding. ACM Transactions on Graphics (ToG)41(4) (Jul 2022).https://doi.org/10.1145/3528223.3530127,https://doi.org/10.1145/ 3528223.3530127

    doi:10.1145/3528223.3530127 2022

  40. [40]

    MIT Press (2023)

    Pharr, M., Jakob, W., Humphreys, G.: Physically based rendering: From theory to implementation. MIT Press (2023)

    2023

  41. [41]

    Computer Graphics Forum43(4), e15147 (2024).https://doi.org/https: //doi.org/10.1111/cgf.15147,https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/ 10.1111/cgf.15147

    Poirier-Ginter, Y., Gauthier, A., Phillip, J., Lalonde, J.F., Drettakis, G.: A diffusion approach to radiance field relighting using multi-illumination synthe- sis. Computer Graphics Forum43(4), e15147 (2024).https://doi.org/https: //doi.org/10.1111/cgf.15147,https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/ 10.1111/cgf.15147

    doi:10.1111/cgf.15147 2024

  42. [42]

    Perception35(10), 1331–1350 (2006).https://doi.org/10.1068/ p5440,https://doi.org/10.1068/p5440, pMID: 17214380

    Pont, S.C., te Pas, S.F.: Material — illumination ambiguities and the perception of solid objects. Perception35(10), 1331–1350 (2006).https://doi.org/10.1068/ p5440,https://doi.org/10.1068/p5440, pMID: 17214380

    work page doi:10.1068/p5440 2006

  43. [43]

    In: Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition

    Ren, S., Wen, T., Fang, Y., Lu, B.: Fastgs: Training 3d gaussian splatting in 100 seconds. In: Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition. pp. 26094–26103 (2026) Dynamic Inverse Rendering for Enhanced Material-Lighting Decomposition 19

    2026

  44. [44]

    AAAI Confer- ence on Artificial Intelligence39(7), 6860–6868 (Apr 2025).https://doi.org/ 10.1609/aaai.v39i7.32736,https://ojs.aaai.org/index.php/AAAI/article/ view/32736

    Shi, H., Hu, Y., Koguciuk, D., Lin, J.T., Salzmann, M., Ferstl, D.: Free-moving object reconstruction and pose estimation with virtual camera. AAAI Confer- ence on Artificial Intelligence39(7), 6860–6868 (Apr 2025).https://doi.org/ 10.1609/aaai.v39i7.32736,https://ojs.aaai.org/index.php/AAAI/article/ view/32736

    work page doi:10.1609/aaai.v39i7.32736 2025

  45. [45]

    In: IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR)

    Sun, H., Gao, Y., Xie, J., Yang, J., Wang, B.: Svg-ir: Spatially-varying gaussian splatting for inverse rendering. In: IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR). pp. 16143–16152 (2025)

    2025

  46. [46]

    In: IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR)

    Sun, J., Shen, Z., Wang, Y., Bao, H., Zhou, X.: Loftr: Detector-free local feature matching with transformers. In: IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR). pp. 8922–8931 (2021)

    2021

  47. [47]

    In: Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS) (2025)

    Tang, J., Levine, M., Verbin, D., Garbin, S.J., Niessner, M., Martin-Brualla, R., Srinivasan, P.P., Henzler, P.: ROGR: Relightable 3D Objects using Generative Re- lighting. In: Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS) (2025)

    2025

  48. [48]

    In: European Conference on Computer Vision (ECCV)

    Tian, X., Lin, X., Zhong, F., Qin, X.: Large-displacement 3d object tracking with hybrid non-local optimization. In: European Conference on Computer Vision (ECCV). pp. 627–643. Springer (2022)

    2022

  49. [49]

    In: IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR)

    Verbin, D., Mildenhall, B., Hedman, P., Barron, J.T., Zickler, T., Srinivasan, P.P.: Eclipse: Disambiguating illumination and materials using unintended shadows. In: IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR). pp. 77–86 (June 2024)

    2024

  50. [50]

    Rendering techniques2007, 18th (2007)

    Walter, B., Marschner, S.R., Li, H., Torrance, K.E.: Microfacet models for refrac- tion through rough surfaces. Rendering techniques2007, 18th (2007)

    2007

  51. [51]

    In: IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA)

    Wang, C., Martín-Martín, R., Xu, D., Lv, J., Lu, C., Fei-Fei, L., Savarese, S., Zhu, Y.: 6-pack: Category-level 6d pose tracker with anchor-based keypoints. In: IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA). pp. 10059–10066. IEEE (2020)

    2020

  52. [52]

    In: IEEE/CVF International Confer- ence on Computer Vision (ICCV)

    Wang, L., Yan, S., Zhen, J., Liu, Y., Zhang, M., Zhang, G., Zhou, X.: Deep active contours for real-time 6-dof object tracking. In: IEEE/CVF International Confer- ence on Computer Vision (ICCV). pp. 14034–14044 (2023)

    2023

  53. [53]

    In: Ranzato, M., Beygelzimer, A., Dauphin, Y.N., Liang, P., Vaughan, J.W

    Wang, P., Liu, L., Liu, Y., Theobalt, C., Komura, T., Wang, W.: Neus: Learning neural implicit surfaces by volume rendering for multi-view reconstruction. In: Ranzato, M., Beygelzimer, A., Dauphin, Y.N., Liang, P., Vaughan, J.W. (eds.) Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS). pp. 27171–27183 (2021)

    2021

  54. [54]

    In: IEEE/RSJ Inter- national Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS)

    Wen, B., Mitash, C., Ren, B., Bekris, K.E.: se (3)-tracknet: Data-driven 6d pose tracking by calibrating image residuals in synthetic domains. In: IEEE/RSJ Inter- national Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS). pp. 10367–10373. IEEE (2020)

    2020

  55. [55]

    In: IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recog- nition (CVPR)

    Wen, B., Tremblay, J., Blukis, V., Tyree, S., Müller, T., Evans, A., Fox, D., Kautz, J., Birchfield, S.: Bundlesdf: Neural 6-dof tracking and 3d reconstruction of un- known objects. In: IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recog- nition (CVPR). pp. 606–617 (2023)

    2023

  56. [56]

    In: IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR)

    Wen, B., Yang, W., Kautz, J., Birchfield, S.: Foundationpose: Unified 6d pose estimation and tracking of novel objects. In: IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR). pp. 17868–17879 (2024)

    2024

  57. [57]

    In: IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR)

    Wu, H., Hu, Z., Li, L., Zhang, Y., Fan, C., Yu, X.: Nefii: Inverse rendering for reflectance decomposition with near-field indirect illumination. In: IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR). pp. 4295–4304 (2023) 20 R. Yunus et al

    2023

  58. [58]

    In: European Conference on Computer Vision (ECCV)

    Yao, Y., Zhang, J., Liu, J., Qu, Y., Fang, T., McKinnon, D., Tsin, Y., Quan, L.: Neilf: Neural incident light field for physically-based material estimation. In: European Conference on Computer Vision (ECCV). pp. 700–716. Springer (2022)

    2022

  59. [59]

    In: Ranzato, M., Beygelzimer, A., Dauphin, Y., Liang, P., Vaughan, J.W

    Yariv, L., Gu, J., Kasten, Y., Lipman, Y.: Volume rendering of neural implicit surfaces. In: Ranzato, M., Beygelzimer, A., Dauphin, Y., Liang, P., Vaughan, J.W. (eds.) Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS). vol. 34, pp. 4805–4815. Curran Associates, Inc. (2021),https://proceedings.neurips.cc/ paper _ files / paper / 2021 / file / 25e...

    2021

  60. [60]

    Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS)37, 129507–129530 (2024)

    Yu, M., Lu, T., Xu, L., Jiang, L., Xiangli, Y., Dai, B.: Gsdf: 3dgs meets sdf for improved neural rendering and reconstruction. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS)37, 129507–129530 (2024)

    2024

  61. [61]

    CoRRabs/2406.01467(2024)

    Zhang, B., Fang, C., Shrestha, R., Liang, Y., Long, X., Tan, P.: Rade-gs: Raster- izing depth in gaussian splatting. CoRRabs/2406.01467(2024)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  62. [62]

    In: IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV)

    Zhang, J., Yao, Y., Li, S., Liu, J., Fang, T., McKinnon, D., Tsin, Y., Quan, L.: Neilf++: Inter-reflectable light fields for geometry and material estimation. In: IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV). pp. 3601–3610 (2023)

    2023

  63. [63]

    ACM Transactions on Graphics (ToG)40(6), 1–18 (2021)

    Zhang, X., Srinivasan, P.P., Deng, B., Debevec, P., Freeman, W.T., Barron, J.T.: Nerfactor: Neural factorization of shape and reflectance under an unknown illumi- nation. ACM Transactions on Graphics (ToG)40(6), 1–18 (2021)

    2021

  64. [64]

    In: Globerson, A., Mackey, L., Belgrave, D., Fan, A., Paquet, U., Tomczak, J., Zhang, C

    Zhao, X., Srinivasan, P.P., Verbin, D., Park, K., Martin-Brualla, R., Henzler, P.: Illuminerf: 3d relighting without inverse rendering. In: Globerson, A., Mackey, L., Belgrave, D., Fan, A., Paquet, U., Tomczak, J., Zhang, C. (eds.) Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS). vol. 37, pp. 42593–42617. Curran Associates, Inc. (2024).https:/...

    work page doi:10.52202/079017-1349 2024

  65. [65]

    In: IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV)

    Zhu, Z.L., Yang, J., Wang, B.: Gaussian splatting with discretized sdf for re- lightable assets. In: IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV). pp. 25155–25164 (2025) A Implementation Details Stage 1.We mostly follow the settings from FMOV [44] for this stage. The geometry is initially warmed up for 100 iterations from the first frame an...

    2025