Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 54 references

Text2Villa: Hierarchical Generation of 3D Indoor Environments with Physics-Aware Analysis-by-Synthesis

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-01 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Text2Villa claims a single text prompt can generate a multi-story, irregular-polygon 3D villa with furniture placed collision-free, floating-free, and containment-correct.

desk verdict A genuinely new hierarchical pipeline for multi-story villa generation, but the physical-plausibility headline is oversold given the stopping rule and the thin evaluation. read the letter →

arxiv 2607.17145 v1 pith:ITS23VTW submitted 2026-07-19 cs.GR

Xiang Tang , Ruotong Li , Xiaopeng Fan This is my paper
classification cs.GR
keywords text-to-3Dscenegenerationmulti-storyindoorenvironmentsphysics-awarelayoutoptimizationaffordancegraphanalysis-by-synthesismultimodallargelanguagemodelcollision-freeplacementhierarchical
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

Text2Villa aims to close two gaps in text-to-3D scene generation: whole-building structure (multi-story, irregular polygonal footprints) and physically grounded furniture placement. The paper claims that splitting the problem into a macro-level layout generator and a micro-level scene graph with explicit physical affordances, then solving the placement with a closed-loop optimizer, yields villa-scale scenes that are collision-free, floating-free, and semantically aligned. The reported numbers: zero collisions and zero floating across nine room types, an average 97.6% success on containment constraints (books inside shelves), and multi-story layouts with 98.9% room reachability and 97.3% valid staircase connectivity. If correct, this replaces the usual single-room, rectangular-boundary assumption with a path to full buildings directly from text.

What carries the argument

The A-PSSG is the load-bearing representation. It turns affordances into node attributes — support providers expose valid surfaces or cavities, support consumers must rest on or inside them, functional interactors reserve activity zones — and encodes edges as either semantic relations (front of, face to) or physical interactions (ontop, inside). The closed-loop solver carries the argument by repeatedly computing E(S) = λ_col E_col + λ_sup E_sup + λ_sem E_sem and choosing discrete actions (update_pose, add_entity, remove_entity, update_scale) until the energy converges, with local search dedicated to inside-constraints so that a child object sits inside a cavity without mesh intersection.

What would settle it

Construct a fixed room prompt and deliberately corrupt one A-PSSG edge — e.g., label a floor lamp as the support provider for a heavy cabinet — then run the solver. If the solver still produces a physically plausible and semantically sensible scene (it should not, since it minimizes a wrong contract), the framework is robust to label noise; if instead the scene becomes absurd, graph-construction accuracy is the critical bottleneck the paper does not measure. A second, cleaner test: generate the A-PSSG for the same prompt ten times with the same MLLM; if the graphs or the resulting containment

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that natural-language 3D scene generation must be hierarchical and physics-aware. Text2Villa consists of two coupled stages: an autoregressive layout generator that parses text into JSON floor plans with polygonal rooms, doors, windows, and staircases; and a micro-level representation called the Affordance-driven Physical-Semantic Scene Graph (A-PSSG), which upgrades ordinary scene graphs by attaching support-surface and containment-cavity affordances to object nodes and adding separate physical and semantic edge constraints. Scene instantiation is then posed as a constrained optimization that minimizes an energy with three terms — collision volume, support error

Load-bearing premise

The A-PSSG node attributes and edge constraints are produced by a multimodal LLM with no error check; if that model mislabels an object's affordance or a spatial relation, the solver will polish a scene that obeys the wrong rules, and the paper's performance numbers say nothing about the accuracy of the graph itself.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the claim holds, text-to-3D generation no longer stops at a single box-shaped room: users can request a three-story villa and receive a reachable, connected building with stairs and balconies.
  • Because the A-PSSG and energy terms are representation-level, the same closed-loop solver could be reused for other scenes (offices, shops, outdoor decks) by redefining node affordances and edge constraints.
  • The ablation in the paper implies that neither physics alone nor an MLLM alone suffices: the combination is what removes collisions while keeping semantic order, so feed-forward one-shot layout prediction is expected to remain fragile for dense scenes.
  • Generated environments are explicit meshes with zero collisions, making them usable as interactive spaces for embodied agents — a direct path from text to simulated training environments.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Editorial extension: the pipeline's trust in the MLLM-produced scene graph is testable: rerun the same prompt several times, compare the A-PSSG graphs, and check whether scene quality varies; if graphs are unstable, the reported success rates may be optimistic for unusual prompts.
  • Editorial extension: the energy weights (λ_col, λ_sup, λ_sem) are set by hand; a natural follow-up is to learn them per scene type or to measure the Pareto front of physical correctness vs semantic alignment, which the ablation only sketches.
  • Editorial extension: the authors note roughly 15 minutes per room and a per-room API cost for MLLM calls; that suggests the method currently suits offline prototyping and asset creation rather than interactive editing, and distillation or parallel per-room optimization would be needed for real-time use.
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 / 5 minor

Summary. Text2Villa proposes a hierarchical pipeline for text-to-3D villa generation. Stage 1 fine-tunes an autoregressive LLM on a 1,000-example procedural dataset to produce multi-story polygonal floor plans. Stage 2 expands each room into an Affordance-driven Physical-Semantic Scene Graph (A-PSSG), whose nodes carry support/containment/interaction affordances and whose edges impose semantic and physical constraints. Stage 3 instantiates assets through a closed-loop analysis-by-synthesis solver that alternates between a physics engine (collision/support penalties) and GPT-4o semantic feedback, minimizing a weighted energy E(S_t). Experiments report macro-layout metrics, micro-instantiation metrics across nine room types, ablations, and a 20-user preference study. The central claim is that Text2Villa outperforms Holodeck, LayoutVLM, SceneWeaver, and SceneFoundry in generating physically plausible, semantically aligned, multi-story villa-level scenes.

Significance. If the claims hold, the paper makes a useful step: it combines a macro-level autoregressive layout generator with a micro-level graph-based constrained optimization, and it introduces a representation (A-PSSG) that explicitly encodes physical affordances. The dataset construction and the closed-loop solver are practical contributions, and the human-preference study (Table 3, 600 votes) offers independent evidence that the outputs are competitive. However, the current evaluation is not strong enough to support the abstract's strong 'outperforms previous methods ... physically plausible' statement: the stopping criterion does not guarantee the reported zero collision/floating rates, the micro-metrics overlap with the optimized penalties, and the sample sizes are very small. With additional per-penalty convergence analysis, independent physical checks, and uncertainty reporting, the core method could be convincing.

major comments (4)
  1. [§3.4 and Appendix D, Eq. (1)] The stopping rule E(S_t) ≤ 1.0 does not imply the 'physical conflicts are completely eliminated' claimed in Appendix D. With λ_col = 5.0, λ_sup = 2.0, λ_sem = 1.0, a state with E_sup = E_sem = 0 can have E_col ≤ 0.2 m³ and still pass the threshold. That is a substantial residual interpenetration, not a collision-free scene. The CR=0/FR=0 entries in Table 2 therefore are not guaranteed by the formal optimization. Please report final per-penalty values (E_col, E_sup) and their convergence curves, or run an independent post-hoc geometric collision check on the output meshes.
  2. [§4.1, Table 2] The paper states that all metrics are 'the calculated average of three scenes for each architectural layout and room type' and reports no error bars or confidence intervals. With n=3 per cell, the zero collision/floating rates and the 97.6% average CSR are not statistically characterized; a single failure would move a 0.0 to 33%. Macro Table 1 similarly reports point estimates without variance. Please provide per-prompt results, error bars, or a clear statement of the total number of scenes and prompts.
  3. [§4.2, Table 2 vs. §3.4, Eq. (1)] There is a metric circularity concern. CR and FR are computed from exactly the collision and support penalties that the solver minimizes; the semantic penalty E_sem is evaluated by GPT-4o, the same MLLM that constructs the A-PSSG and proposes corrective actions. The reported numbers may therefore reflect the optimization objective rather than independent physical/semantic quality. The human-preference results provide external grounding, but the paper should also report an independent physical verification (e.g., mesh overlap measured by a separate library) and an independent semantic-judge protocol, and it should state whether the reported CR/FR values are computed on the final meshes rather than on the solver's internal bounding boxes.
  4. [§3.2, A-PSSG construction] The entire micro-level contract depends on GPT-4o's ability to assign correct physical affordances and edge relations in the A-PSSG. The paper provides no accuracy evaluation of this graph construction and no ablation of graph-label noise. If the MLLM labels a lamp as a support provider or misreads a 'face to' relation, the solver will optimize toward a wrong contract and the output will satisfy the wrong constraints. Please add a human-annotated graph accuracy study on a sample of rooms, and an ablation that perturbs or corrupts graph labels to quantify sensitivity.
minor comments (5)
  1. [§3.3] Typo: 'Text2Vill explicitly computes' should be 'Text2Villa explicitly computes'.
  2. [§4.1] The relationship between the number of text prompts, the number of room types, and the per-room-type three-scene averaging is unclear. Please clarify whether the same prompt is run three times or three different prompts are used, and list the prompts.
  3. [Table 2] The table is very dense and hard to read because many cells are merged or compressed. Splitting the table by room type or using separate panels would improve readability.
  4. [Appendix D] The safety threshold E(S_t) ≤ 1.0 is introduced in the appendix but the main text (Section 3.4) only says 'a predefined safety threshold'. Move the explicit value to the main text or mention it in the solver description.
  5. [§3.1 / Appendix A] The dataset section describes the 2:4:4 ratio and procedural generation, but does not state how the 1,000 examples are split into training/validation/test or how overlap with the evaluation prompts is avoided. Please add this information.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No circular derivation: CR/FR reflect the optimized objective rather than an independent prediction, but external human preference, Gemini-Score, and CLIP-Score anchor the central physical-plausibility claim.

full rationale

Walking the claimed derivation chain, no load-bearing step reduces a stated prediction to its input by construction. The macro-level layout generator is fine-tuned on an independently constructed procedural dataset (Appendix A) and is evaluated by reachability/valid-connection checks plus Gemini 3.1 Pro, not by its training objective alone. At the micro level, the solver explicitly minimizes Eq. (1)-(2), so reporting low CR/FR/CSR in Table 2 is partly restating the optimized penalties; that is a reporting choice rather than a circular prediction, because the central physical-plausibility claim is also supported by independent human preference (Table 3), CLIP-Score, and an external Gemini judge. The A-PSSG is constructed by GPT-4o from text (Sec. 3.2), and E_sem is also evaluated by the same MLLM (Sec. 3.4); this makes the semantic evaluation self-consistent, but it is an intermediate interpretation step, and the input text plus external judges prevent a definitional loop. The self-citations ([36], [37], [9]) support peripheral components such as texture editing and related layout optimization, not the core derivation. Appendix D's claim that E(S_t) <= 1.0 means physical conflicts are 'completely eliminated' is an internal-consistency/correctness concern because the weighted sum permits residual E_col; it is not a circularity. Overall, the paper is self-contained against external benchmarks, so no significant circularity is found.

Assumptions & free parameters 5 free parameters · 7 assumptions · 2 invented entities

The central claim rests on a chain of domain assumptions: MLLM graph construction is correct, physics penalties capture realism, the synthetic dataset represents real layouts, and finite asset databases are sufficient. No new physical entities are introduced; A-PSSG and interaction reservation zones are representational abstractions without independent falsifiable evidence.

free parameters (5)
  • Energy weights λ_col, λ_sup, λ_sem = 5.0, 2.0, 1.0
    Set empirically in §4.1 Implementation Details. They control how much collisions, support failures, and semantic misalignment contribute; final scenes depend on them and no sensitivity analysis is provided.
  • Energy safety threshold ε = 1.0
    Stopping criterion for the closed-loop solver (Appendix D). Directly determines whether final scenes have zero collisions; user-tunable per Appendix D.
  • Max iterations = ~20 (implicit)
    Appendix D states E(S_t) typically converges within 20 iterations; the iteration cap trades quality versus latency.
  • Retrieval similarity threshold τ and candidate size K = unspecified
    Algorithm 1 (Appendix B) uses τ and K to filter Top-K assets; values are not reported, so asset selection is under-specified.
  • Dataset priors (4×4 staircase, max 3 floors, max 6 rooms, floor height 2.8m) = fixed
    Procedural dataset design choices in Appendix A define what layouts the generator can produce; not derived from data.
assumptions (7)
  • domain assumption GPT-4o can construct a correct A-PSSG from text and rendered images, including physical affordances and semantic edges.
    §3.2 says the A-PSSG is constructed via 'hierarchical instructions' with an MLLM; no accuracy/error analysis of graph labeling is provided. If labels are wrong, the solver optimizes the wrong constraints.
  • domain assumption The sum of pairwise intersection volumes and support projection error (Eq. 2) sufficiently captures physical plausibility for rigid furniture in indoor scenes.
    §3.4 Eq. (1)-(2). The penalties ignore deformation, non-rigid objects, dynamics, and human ergonomics beyond functional orientation.
  • domain assumption The 1,000 procedurally generated, human-annotated layouts are representative of real multi-story villa text descriptions.
    Appendix A: layouts are synthesized by BSP partitioning with fixed priors (2.8m height, 4×4 stairs). Test prompts are not shown to come from a different distribution; generalization is assumed.
  • domain assumption Autoregressive fine-tuning of Qwen3.5-9B on 1,000 pairs is sufficient to learn arbitrary polygonal multi-story layout syntax.
    §3.1; FSR 98.2% is reported on an apparently small test set; zero-shot FSR drops to 26.8%, showing task difficulty.
  • domain assumption Retrieved 3D assets from Objaverse and 3D-FUTURE, plus Infinigen-generated procedural objects, cover the categories needed for open-vocabulary prompts.
    §3.3; open-vocabulary richness is claimed but retrieval is limited to finite databases; stylized results in Fig. 4 are only qualitative.
  • domain assumption MLLM evaluations (Gemini-Score, GPT-4o semantic penalty) measure scene quality approximately like humans.
    §4.1 uses Gemini 3.1 Pro as a judge; §3.4 uses GPT-4o for Esem. No calibration against human labels is shown except the small user study.
  • standard math shapely/BSP partitioning can represent all desired room shapes with no gaps.
    Appendix A; 2D Boolean operations and BSP partition guarantee polygon tiling by construction.
invented entities (2)
  • A-PSSG (Affordance-driven Physical-Semantic Scene Graph)
    purpose: Data structure encoding physical affordances (support surfaces, containment cavities) and dual physical-semantic edge constraints.
    Representational abstraction introduced by the paper; not independently measured or falsifiable, though it is a useful internal encoding.
  • Interaction reservation zone
    purpose: Reserve space along an object's functional orientation (sofas, wardrobes) for human activity or part movement.
    Defined in §3.2 for V_int nodes; a geometric abstraction with no biomechanical or ergonomic validation.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Text2Villa: Hierarchical Generation of 3D Indoor Environments with Physics-Aware Analysis-by-Synthesis." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/ITS23VTW

@misc{pith2026260717145,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Text2Villa: Hierarchical Generation of 3D Indoor Environments with Physics-Aware Analysis-by-Synthesis},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/ITS23VTW}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2607.17145}
}
read the original abstract

Generating 3D indoor scenes from natural language holds tremendous potential, yet existing methods predominantly fail to generate multi-room structures with vertical connectivity and arbitrary polygonal boundaries. Furthermore, they lack a deep grounding in continuous 3D physical laws, leading to severe geometric penetrations and floating artifacts. In this work, we propose Text2Villa, a novel hierarchical generative framework. At the macro level, we construct a multi-story dataset to fine-tune an autoregressive layout generator, ensuring the direct parsing of text into 3D building foundations featuring polygonal boundaries and multi-story connectivity. To enforce physical laws during micro-level asset arrangement, we introduce the Affordance-driven Physical-Semantic Scene Graph (A-PSSG) to explicitly abstract physical affordances (such as support surfaces and containment cavities) into node attributes, establishing strict geometric and semantic edge constraints. Guided by the A-PSSG, we formulate scene instantiation as a constrained closed-loop optimization problem following the analysis-by-synthesis paradigm. By integrating an underlying geometric collision detection engine with the high-level semantic reasoning of multimodal large language models (MLLMs), our heuristic solver dynamically executes physics-aware actions under the observation-evaluation-modification mechanism to effectively resolve mesh collisions, floating artifacts, and fine-grained cavity containment failures. Extensive experiments demonstrate that Text2Villa outperforms previous methods across various metrics, robustly generating high-fidelity and physically plausible villa-level 3D environments from text, thereby providing a reliable and interactive 3D content foundation for downstream applications.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.17145 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Text2Villa generates villa-scale 3D indoor environments from text. At the macro-level, our method produces diverse building [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p001_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Pipeline bridging macro building generation and micro object planning. Stage 1: A fine-tuned autoregressive layout generator [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Nested graph representation for scenes. Text2Villa mod [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (8 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Qualitative results of stylized scene generation. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Fine-grained resolving process for inside constraints in the A-PSSG. The red bounding box indicates the solid mesh intersection [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Qualitative comparison of macro-level architectural layout generation. Because baselines lack multi-story generation capabilities, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Qualitative comparison of micro-level asset instantiation across different room types. We compare against baselines to evaluate [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Qualitative ablation on macro-level architectural layout [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Visualization of diverse architectural layouts generated by Text2Villa. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_10.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: User interface for the human preference study. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_11.png]
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Downstream applications of Text2Villa. The four multi-story buildings with distinct shapes in the left figure are generated by [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_12.png]

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

54 extracted references · 4 linked inside Pith

  1. [1]

    Gen3dsr: Generalizable 3d scene reconstruction via divide and conquer from a single view

    Andreea Ardelean, Mert ¨Ozer, and Bernhard Egger. Gen3dsr: Generalizable 3d scene reconstruction via divide and conquer from a single view. In2025 International Con- ference on 3D Vision (3DV), pages 616–626. IEEE, 2025. 3

    2025

  2. [2]

    Scenefactor: Factored latent 3d diffusion for controllable 3d scene generation

    Aleksey Bokhovkin, Quan Meng, Shubham Tulsiani, and Angela Dai. Scenefactor: Factored latent 3d diffusion for controllable 3d scene generation. InProceedings of the Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition Conference, pages 628–639, 2025. 2

    2025

  3. [3]

    I-design: Personal- ized llm interior designer

    Ata C ¸ elen, Guo Han, Konrad Schindler, Luc Van Gool, Iro 10 Armeni, Anton Obukhov, and Xi Wang. I-design: Personal- ized llm interior designer. InEuropean Conference on Com- puter Vision, pages 217–234. Springer, 2024. 2

    2024

  4. [4]

    Scenefoundry: Generating interactive infinite 3d worlds

    ChunTeng Chen, YiChen Hsu, YiWen Liu, WeiFang Sun, TsaiChing Ni, ChunYi Lee, Min Sun, and YuanFu Yang. Scenefoundry: Generating interactive infinite 3d worlds. arXiv preprint arXiv:2601.05810, 2026. 7

    arXiv 2026

  5. [5]

    Comboverse: Compositional 3d as- sets creation using spatially-aware diffusion guidance

    Yongwei Chen, Tengfei Wang, Tong Wu, Xingang Pan, Kui Jia, and Ziwei Liu. Comboverse: Compositional 3d as- sets creation using spatially-aware diffusion guidance. In European Conference on Computer Vision, pages 128–146. Springer, 2024. 3

    2024

  6. [6]

    3d- affordancellm: Harnessing large language models for open- vocabulary affordance detection in 3d worlds

    Hengshuo Chu, Xiang Deng, Qi Lv, Xiaoyang Chen, Yinchuan Li, Jianye Hao, and Liqiang Nie. 3d- affordancellm: Harnessing large language models for open- vocabulary affordance detection in 3d worlds. InThe four- teenth International Conference on Learning Representa- tions, 2026. 3

    2026

  7. [7]

    Objaverse-xl: A universe of 10m+ 3d objects.Advances in Neural Informa- tion Processing Systems, 36:35799–35813, 2023

    Matt Deitke, Ruoshi Liu, Matthew Wallingford, Huong Ngo, Oscar Michel, Aditya Kusupati, Alan Fan, Christian Laforte, Vikram V oleti, Samir Yitzhak Gadre, et al. Objaverse-xl: A universe of 10m+ 3d objects.Advances in Neural Informa- tion Processing Systems, 36:35799–35813, 2023. 7

    2023

  8. [8]

    Layoutgpt: Compositional visual plan- ning and generation with large language models.Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 36:18225–18250,

    Weixi Feng, Wanrong Zhu, Tsu-jui Fu, Varun Jampani, Ar- jun Akula, Xuehai He, Sugato Basu, Xin Eric Wang, and William Yang Wang. Layoutgpt: Compositional visual plan- ning and generation with large language models.Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 36:18225–18250,

Show all 54 references
  1. [9]

    Text-guided editable 3d city scene gener- ation

    Yuchuan Feng, Jihang Jiang, Jie Ren, Wenrui Li, Ruotong Li, and Xiaopeng Fan. Text-guided editable 3d city scene gener- ation. InICASSP 2025-2025 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP), pages 1–5. IEEE, 2025. 2

    2025

  2. [10]

    3d-future: 3d fur- niture shape with texture.International Journal of Computer Vision, 129(12):3313–3337, 2021

    Huan Fu, Rongfei Jia, Lin Gao, Mingming Gong, Binqiang Zhao, Steve Maybank, and Dacheng Tao. 3d-future: 3d fur- niture shape with texture.International Journal of Computer Vision, 129(12):3313–3337, 2021. 7

    2021

  3. [11]

    Graphdreamer: Compositional 3d scene synthesis from scene graphs

    Gege Gao, Weiyang Liu, Anpei Chen, Andreas Geiger, and Bernhard Sch ¨olkopf. Graphdreamer: Compositional 3d scene synthesis from scene graphs. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 21295–21304, 2024. 3

    2024

  4. [12]

    Artiscene: Language-driven artistic 3d scene generation through image intermediary

    Zeqi Gu, Yin Cui, Zhaoshuo Li, Fangyin Wei, Yunhao Ge, Jinwei Gu, Ming-Yu Liu, Abe Davis, and Yifan Ding. Artiscene: Language-driven artistic 3d scene generation through image intermediary. InProceedings of the Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition Conference, pages 2891– 29...

    2025

  5. [13]

    Procedural scene pro- grams for open-universe scene generation: Llm-free error correction via program search

    Maxim Gumin, Do Heon Han, Seung Jean Yoo, Aditya Ganeshan, R Kenny Jones, Kailiang Fu, Rio Aguina-Kang, Stewart Morris, and Daniel Ritchie. Procedural scene pro- grams for open-universe scene generation: Llm-free error correction via program search. InProceedings of the SIG- G...

    2025

  6. [14]

    Reparo: Compositional 3d assets generation with differen- tiable 3d layout alignment

    Haonan Han, Rui Yang, Huan Liao, Jiankai Xing, Zunnan Xu, Xiaoming Yu, Junwei Zha, Xiu Li, and Wanhua Li. Reparo: Compositional 3d assets generation with differen- tiable 3d layout alignment. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision, pages 2536...

    2025

  7. [15]

    Mesatask: Towards task-driven table- top scene generation via 3d spatial reasoning.Advances in neural information processing systems, 2025

    Jinkun Hao, Naifu Liang, Zhen Luo, Xudong Xu, Weipeng Zhong, Ran Yi, Yichen Jin, Zhaoyang Lyu, Feng Zheng, Lizhuang Ma, et al. Mesatask: Towards task-driven table- top scene generation via 3d spatial reasoning.Advances in neural information processing systems, 2025. 3

    2025

  8. [16]

    Scenecraft: An llm agent for synthesizing 3d scenes as blender code

    Ziniu Hu, Ahmet Iscen, Aashi Jain, Thomas Kipf, Yisong Yue, David A Ross, Cordelia Schmid, and Alireza Fathi. Scenecraft: An llm agent for synthesizing 3d scenes as blender code. InForty-first International Conference on Ma- chine Learning, 2024. 2

    2024

  9. [17]

    Midi: Multi-instance diffusion for single image to 3d scene generation

    Zehuan Huang, Yuan-Chen Guo, Xingqiao An, Yunhan Yang, Yangguang Li, Zi-Xin Zou, Ding Liang, Xihui Liu, Yan-Pei Cao, and Lu Sheng. Midi: Multi-instance diffusion for single image to 3d scene generation. InProceedings of the Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition Conference, p...

    2025

  10. [18]

    Gpt-4o system card

    Aaron Hurst, Adam Lerer, Adam P Goucher, Adam Perel- man, Aditya Ramesh, Aidan Clark, AJ Ostrow, Akila Weli- hinda, Alan Hayes, Alec Radford, et al. Gpt-4o system card. arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.21276, 2024. 5, 7

    2024 arXiv

  11. [19]

    Af- fordance maintenance-based 3d scene synthesis for immer- sive mixed reality

    Haiyan Jiang, Dongdong Weng, and Xiaonuo Dongye. Af- fordance maintenance-based 3d scene synthesis for immer- sive mixed reality. In2024 IEEE Conference on Virtual Real- ity and 3D User Interfaces Abstracts and Workshops (VRW), pages 805–806. IEEE, 2024. 3

    2024

  12. [20]

    Dreamscene: 3d gaussian-based text-to-3d scene generation via formation pattern sampling

    Haoran Li, Haolin Shi, Wenli Zhang, Wenjun Wu, Yong Liao, Lin Wang, Lik-hang Lee, and Peng Yuan Zhou. Dreamscene: 3d gaussian-based text-to-3d scene generation via formation pattern sampling. InEuropean Conference on Computer Vision, pages 214–230. Springer, 2024. 3

    2024

  13. [21]

    Phip-g: Physics-guided text-to-3d compositional scene generation

    Qixuan Li, Chao Wang, Zongjin He, and Yan Peng. Phip-g: Physics-guided text-to-3d compositional scene generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:2502.00708, 2025. 2

    2025 arXiv

  14. [22]

    Worldgrow: Generating infinite 3d world

    Sikuang Li, Chen Yang, Jiemin Fang, Taoran Yi, Jia Lu, Ji- azhong Cen, Lingxi Xie, Wei Shen, and Qi Tian. Worldgrow: Generating infinite 3d world. InProceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 2026. 2

    2026

  15. [23]

    Instructscene: Instruction- driven 3d indoor scene synthesis with semantic graph prior

    Chenguo Lin and Yadong Mu. Instructscene: Instruction- driven 3d indoor scene synthesis with semantic graph prior. InThe Twelfth International Conference on Learning Repre- sentations, 2024. 2

    2024

  16. [24]

    Scenethesis: A language and vision agentic framework for 3d scene generation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2505.02836, 2025

    Lu Ling, Chen-Hsuan Lin, Tsung-Yi Lin, Yifan Ding, Yu Zeng, Yichen Sheng, Yunhao Ge, Ming-Yu Liu, Aniket Bera, and Zhaoshuo Li. Scenethesis: A language and vision agentic framework for 3d scene generation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2505.02836, 2025. 2

    2025 arXiv

  17. [25]

    Openshape: Scaling up 3d shape representation towards open-world understanding.Advances in neural information processing systems, 36:44860–44879, 2023

    Minghua Liu, Ruoxi Shi, Kaiming Kuang, Yinhao Zhu, Xu- anlin Li, Shizhong Han, Hong Cai, Fatih Porikli, and Hao Su. Openshape: Scaling up 3d shape representation towards open-world understanding.Advances in neural information processing systems, 36:44860–44879, 2023. 5

    2023

  18. [26]

    Scene- assistant: A visual feedback agent for open-vocabulary 3d scene generation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2603.12238, 2026

    Jun Luo, Jiaxiang Tang, Ruijie Lu, and Gang Zeng. Scene- assistant: A visual feedback agent for open-vocabulary 3d scene generation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2603.12238, 2026. 2 11

    2026

  19. [27]

    Lt3sd: Latent trees for 3d scene diffusion

    Quan Meng, Lei Li, Matthias Nießner, and Angela Dai. Lt3sd: Latent trees for 3d scene diffusion. InProceedings of the Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition Conference, pages 650–660, 2025. 2

    2025

  20. [28]

    Sce- negen: Single-image 3d scene generation in one feedforward pass

    Yanxu Meng, Haoning Wu, Ya Zhang, and Weidi Xie. Sce- negen: Single-image 3d scene generation in one feedforward pass. In2026 International Conference on 3D Vision (3DV),

  21. [29]

    Sceneteller: Language-to-3d scene generation

    Bas ¸ak Melis¨Ocal, Maxim Tatarchenko, Sezer Karao˘glu, and Theo Gevers. Sceneteller: Language-to-3d scene generation. InEuropean Conference on Computer Vision, pages 362–

  22. [30]

    Atiss: Autoregres- sive transformers for indoor scene synthesis.Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 34:12013–12026,

    Despoina Paschalidou, Amlan Kar, Maria Shugrina, Karsten Kreis, Andreas Geiger, and Sanja Fidler. Atiss: Autoregres- sive transformers for indoor scene synthesis.Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 34:12013–12026,

  23. [31]

    Qwen3.5: Towards native multimodal agents,

    Qwen Team. Qwen3.5: Towards native multimodal agents,

  24. [32]

    In- finigen indoors: Photorealistic indoor scenes using procedu- ral generation

    Alexander Raistrick, Lingjie Mei, Karhan Kayan, David Yan, Yiming Zuo, Beining Han, Hongyu Wen, Meenal Parakh, Stamatis Alexandropoulos, Lahav Lipson, et al. In- finigen indoors: Photorealistic indoor scenes using procedu- ral generation. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conferen...

    2024

  25. [33]

    Layoutvlm: Differentiable optimization of 3d layout via vision-language models

    Fan-Yun Sun, Weiyu Liu, Siyi Gu, Dylan Lim, Goutam Bhat, Federico Tombari, Manling Li, Nick Haber, and Jia- jun Wu. Layoutvlm: Differentiable optimization of 3d layout via vision-language models. InProceedings of the Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition Conference, pages 29...

    2025

  26. [34]

    Hierarchically-structured open-vocabulary indoor scene synthesis with pre-trained large language model

    Weilin Sun, Xinran Li, Manyi Li, Kai Xu, Xiangxu Meng, and Lei Meng. Hierarchically-structured open-vocabulary indoor scene synthesis with pre-trained large language model. InProceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 7122–7130, 2025. 3

    2025

  27. [35]

    Diffuscene: Denoising diffu- sion models for generative indoor scene synthesis

    Jiapeng Tang, Yinyu Nie, Lev Markhasin, Angela Dai, Justus Thies, and Matthias Nießner. Diffuscene: Denoising diffu- sion models for generative indoor scene synthesis. InPro- ceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pages 20507–20518, 2024. 2

    2024

  28. [36]

    Zeroscene: A zero-shot framework for 3d scene generation from a single image and controllable texture editing

    Xiang Tang, Ruotong Li, and Xiaopeng Fan. Zeroscene: A zero-shot framework for 3d scene generation from a single image and controllable texture editing. InComputer Graph- ics Forum, page e70419. Wiley Online Library, 2025. 3, 5

    2025

  29. [37]

    Towards geo- metric and textural consistency 3d scene generation via sin- gle image-guided model generation and layout optimization

    Xiang Tang, Ruotong Li, and Xiaopeng Fan. Towards geo- metric and textural consistency 3d scene generation via sin- gle image-guided model generation and layout optimization. Computational Visual Media, 2026. 3

    2026

  30. [38]

    Gemini: a family of highly capable multimodal models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2312.11805, 2023

    Gemini Team, Rohan Anil, Sebastian Borgeaud, Jean- Baptiste Alayrac, Jiahui Yu, Radu Soricut, Johan Schalkwyk, Andrew M Dai, Anja Hauth, Katie Millican, et al. Gemini: a family of highly capable multimodal models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2312.11805, 2023. 8

    2023 arXiv

  31. [39]

    Deep convolutional priors for indoor scene syn- thesis.ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG), 37(4):1–14,

    Kai Wang, Manolis Savva, Angel X Chang, and Daniel Ritchie. Deep convolutional priors for indoor scene syn- thesis.ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG), 37(4):1–14,

  32. [40]

    Diorama: Unleashing zero-shot single-view 3d indoor scene modeling

    Qirui Wu, Denys Iliash, Daniel Ritchie, Manolis Savva, and Angel X Chang. Diorama: Unleashing zero-shot single-view 3d indoor scene modeling. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision, pages 8896– 8907, 2025. 3

    2025

  33. [41]

    Physcene: Physically interactable 3d scene synthe- sis for embodied ai

    Yandan Yang, Baoxiong Jia, Peiyuan Zhi, and Siyuan Huang. Physcene: Physically interactable 3d scene synthe- sis for embodied ai. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Con- ference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 16262–16272, 2024. 2

    2024

  34. [42]

    Holodeck: Language guided gen- eration of 3d embodied ai environments

    Yue Yang, Fan-Yun Sun, Luca Weihs, Eli VanderBilt, Al- varo Herrasti, Winson Han, Jiajun Wu, Nick Haber, Ranjay Krishna, Lingjie Liu, et al. Holodeck: Language guided gen- eration of 3d embodied ai environments. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and P...

    2024

  35. [43]

    Sceneweaver: All-in-one 3d scene synthesis with an extensible and self-reflective agent.Advances in neural information processing systems, 2025

    Yandan Yang, Baoxiong Jia, Shujie Zhang, and Siyuan Huang. Sceneweaver: All-in-one 3d scene synthesis with an extensible and self-reflective agent.Advances in neural information processing systems, 2025. 2, 3, 8

    2025

  36. [44]

    Mmgdreamer: Mixed-modality graph for geometry-controllable 3d indoor scene generation

    Zhifei Yang, Keyang Lu, Chao Zhang, Jiaxing Qi, Hanqi Jiang, Ruifei Ma, Shenglin Yin, Yifan Xu, Mingzhe Xing, Zhen Xiao, et al. Mmgdreamer: Mixed-modality graph for geometry-controllable 3d indoor scene generation. InPro- ceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intellige...

    2025

  37. [45]

    Cast: Component-aligned 3d scene reconstruction from an rgb image.ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG), 44(4): 1–19, 2025

    Kaixin Yao, Longwen Zhang, Xinhao Yan, Yan Zeng, Qix- uan Zhang, Lan Xu, Wei Yang, Jiayuan Gu, and Jingyi Yu. Cast: Component-aligned 3d scene reconstruction from an rgb image.ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG), 44(4): 1–19, 2025. 3

    2025

  38. [46]

    Roomdesigner: Encoding anchor-latents for style- consistent and shape-compatible indoor scene generation

    Yiqun Zhao, Zibo Zhao, Jing Li, Sixun Dong, and Shenghua Gao. Roomdesigner: Encoding anchor-latents for style- consistent and shape-compatible indoor scene generation. In 2024 International Conference on 3D Vision (3DV), pages 1413–1423. IEEE, 2024. 2

    2024

  39. [47]

    Zero-shot scene reconstruction from single images with deep prior as- sembly.Advances in Neural Information Processing Sys- tems, 37:39104–39127, 2024

    Junsheng Zhou, Yu-Shen Liu, and Zhizhong Han. Zero-shot scene reconstruction from single images with deep prior as- sembly.Advances in Neural Information Processing Sys- tems, 37:39104–39127, 2024. 3

    2024

  40. [48]

    Gala3d: Towards text-to-3d complex scene generation via layout-guided generative gaussian splatting

    Xiaoyu Zhou, Xingjian Ran, Yajiao Xiong, Jinlin He, Zhi- wei Lin, Yongtao Wang, Deqing Sun, and Ming-Hsuan Yang. Gala3d: Towards text-to-3d complex scene generation via layout-guided generative gaussian splatting. InForty-first In- ternational Conference on Machine Learning, 2024. 2

    2024

  41. [49]

    Lay- outdreamer: Physics-guided layout for text-to-3d composi- tional scene generation.Pattern Recognition, page 113427,

    Yang Zhou, Zongjin He, Qixuan Li, and Chao Wang. Lay- outdreamer: Physics-guided layout for text-to-3d composi- tional scene generation.Pattern Recognition, page 113427,

  42. [50]

    Imaginarium: Vision-guided high- quality 3d scene layout generation.ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG), 44(6):1–24, 2025

    Xiaoming Zhu, Xu Huang, Qinghongbing Xie, Zhi Deng, Junsheng Yu, Yirui Guan, Zhongyuan Liu, Lin Zhu, Qijun Zhao, Ligang Liu, et al. Imaginarium: Vision-guided high- quality 3d scene layout generation.ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG), 44(6):1–24, 2025. 3 12 A. Dataset Constru...

    2025

  43. [51]

    Exterior Contour Initialization: We start with a rectan- gular bounding box. To create diverse architectural foot- prints (e.g., L-shape, U-shape, T-shape, H-shape, and ir- regular polygons), we subtract randomized rectangular chunks from the corners or edges using Boolean dif...

  44. [52]

    Splitting hyperplanes are randomly selected along theX orYaxes, terminating when the target number of rooms is reached or the area falls below a usability threshold

    Internal BSP Partitioning: The remaining polygon on each floor is recursively subdivided using a BSP tree. Splitting hyperplanes are randomly selected along theX orYaxes, terminating when the target number of rooms is reached or the area falls below a usability threshold

  45. [53]

    Layout Connectivity and 1D Elements: Based on the partitioned 2D rooms, we extract shared line segments between adjacent rooms as interior walls, and segments without neighbors as exterior walls.Doorsandopens (represented as 1DLineString) are placed on inte- rior walls to esta...

  46. [54]

    rooms": {

    Vertical Alignment: For multi-story buildings, a fixed 4×4staircase is rigidly anchored in the identical room across all floors, thereby guaranteeing valid vertical multi-story connectivity. Human-in-the-loop AnnotationThe raw outputs gener- ated by the spatial partitioner are...

Pith tools

Reviewed August 1, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.