Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 6 minor 5 cited by

GAGS: Granularity-Aware Feature Distillation for Language Gaussian Splatting

T0 review · 4 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read GAGS makes 3D language queries consistent across views by adapting SAM prompt density to camera distance and letting training pick one feature granularity per pixel, enabling a single Gaussian field to beat three-field baselines at 2x…

desk verdict Solid empirical advance in CLIP-to-3DGS distillation, but the SOTA claim outruns the evaluation protocol. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.13654 v2 pith:26WCKIGW submitted 2024-12-18 cs.CV

Yuning Peng , Haiping Wang , Yuan Liu , Chenglu Wen , Zhen Dong , Bisheng Yang This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.CV
keywords open-vocabulary3DsceneunderstandingGaussiansplattingfeaturedistillationCLIPSAMgranularity-awarevisualgroundingsemanticsegmentation
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

GAGS is a method for attaching open-vocabulary language semantics to 3D Gaussian Splatting scenes. The paper argues that the main obstacle, per-image CLIP features that disagree across viewpoints, can be removed in two steps: make SAM's segmentation granularity depend on camera distance, and let an unsupervised granularity factor select only multiview-consistent CLIP features during distillation. If the argument is right, a single compact Gaussian feature field can do what LangSplat does with three separate fields, cutting query time by about half while improving visual grounding and semantic segmentation on the LERF and Mip-NeRF-360 datasets.

What carries the argument

Two mechanisms carry the argument. The first is a camera-distance-aware prompt density, Eq. (1), which sets the number of SAM prompt points in each image patch proportional to $D^{2}$/$MD^{2}$, the squared ratio of the pixel's depth to the minimum visible depth of the same Gaussian; this is what aligns segmentation granularity across viewpoints. The second is granularity-aware distillation: a rendered feature map is decoded into a predicted CLIP feature and a three-dimensional granularity factor, softmax turns the factor into weights α_s, α_p, α_w, and the loss Σ α_n || f_clip − f_n ||^2 trains the field to imitate only the CLIP features whose granularity the field itself finds consistent, with entropy regularization favoring one scale. A region-aware weighting and a region-internal consistency loss balance small objects against large ones.

What would settle it

On any LERF or Mip-NeRF-360 scene, compute SAM masks for the same set of objects from multiple views using uniform prompt density and using GAGS's depth-adaptive density, then measure the mean pairwise IoU of the masks that cover the same 3D object; if adaptive prompting does not increase cross-view mask IoU over uniform prompting, the first contribution's mechanism is not doing the work the paper claims.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that multiview consistency of the 2D supervision, not the capacity of the 3D field, is what limits language-embedded Gaussians, and that consistency can be manufactured. GAGS first changes how SAM is prompted: prompt point density is set per image patch by the ratio $D^{2}$/$MD^{2}$ between current depth and the minimum visible depth, so distant views receive denser prompts and segment the same objects at the same relative granularity as nearby views. A shared decoder then maps each rendered feature to a predicted CLIP feature plus a granularity factor, and the distillation loss blends sub-part, part, and whole CLIP targets with softmax weights that training is free to choose; an entropy term pushes the choice toward a single granularity. The reported result is higher localization accuracy and segmentation IoU than LangSplat, GOI, GS-Grouping, and LEGaussian, with two times faster inference because only one feature map is rendered and compared.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that depth-dependent prompt point density makes SAM produce masks of matching granularity for the same object from every viewpoint, so the CLIP features used as supervision become consistent; the paper offers qualitative support for this premise but no quantitative cross-view mask-consistency measurement.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • A single 16-dimensional feature vector per Gaussian is enough for open-vocabulary localization and segmentation, making language-embedded scenes cheaper to store than three-field designs.
  • At query time only one feature map needs to be rendered and compared, so open-vocabulary grounding runs about twice as fast as LangSplat.
  • Granularity selection during training, rather than post-training fusion against predefined phrases, avoids failures when a query's scale does not match the predefined descriptions.
  • The depth-adaptive prompting module transfers: plugging GaS into LangSplat raises its mIoU by 3.6 points and mAcc by 6.5 points on Mip-NeRF-360, so the consistency fix is independently useful.
  • Feature dimension has diminishing returns beyond d=8, so the compact field is operating near its practical quality ceiling.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Editorial extension: the depth-adaptive prompting rule is a general cure for per-image segmentation inconsistency and could be applied to any 3D feature field built on foundation-model masks, not only SAM plus CLIP in Gaussians.
  • Editorial extension: because the granularity factor is learned without labels, the same distillation could run on video or incremental reconstruction where no fully trained Gaussian field exists before features are extracted; temporal overlap could stand in for the minimum-depth map.
  • Editorial extension: the paper's stated limitation that part-level details inside complex structures can be lost suggests a concrete fix worth testing: anneal the entropy weight over training so the field first commits to object-level granularity and later refines to sub-parts, preserving the single-field speed.
  • Editorial extension: the claimed mechanism predicts a specific failure mode, queries for distant small objects should improve most when Eq. (1) is active, which could be isolated by stratifying localization accuracy by object distance in the Mip-NeRF-360 annotations.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

4 major / 6 minor

Summary. GAGS proposes a 3D Gaussian Splatting feature field for open-vocabulary localization and segmentation. To reduce multiview inconsistency in distilled CLIP features, it introduces Granularity-aware Segmentation (GaS), which sets SAM prompt-point density from rendered depth via Eq. (1), and Granularity-aware Distillation (GaD), which decodes a per-pixel granularity factor eta and uses softmax weights to blend subpart/part/whole CLIP features during training, with entropy, region-aware, and consistency losses. Evaluations on LERF and a self-annotated subset of Mip-NeRF-360 report higher mAcc/mIoU than GS-Grouping, LEGaussian, GOI, and LangSplat, with roughly 2x faster inference than LangSplat. The supplementary includes ablations for each component and feature dimension.

Significance. If the reported results hold, GAGS is a useful practical contribution: it achieves multi-granularity open-vocabulary understanding with a single feature field, avoiding LangSplat's three fields and their extra rendering cost. The idea of coupling SAM prompt density to scene depth is simple and sensible, and the ablation study in Table 4 shows that the GaD component alone (Model 2) already exceeds the re-evaluated LangSplat numbers on Mip-NeRF-360, which indicates the core distillation design is not dependent on the more speculative GaS mechanism. The paper also takes care to re-evaluate all baselines under one protocol and includes an additional N2F2-style comparison. However, the evaluation protocol weakens the headline SOTA claim: best-of-three selection without variance, a self-annotated unreleased test set, and re-evaluated baseline numbers that reportedly differ from the original publications. These issues are fixable but need to be addressed before the performance claim can be considered secure.

major comments (4)
  1. [Section 4.1 / Supplementary A, Tables 1-2] The headline claim of state-of-the-art performance rests on Tables 1 and 2, but the supplementary protocol states that each method was run three times and the best result selected. Without reporting variance or significance tests, the margins over LangSplat (4.1 mAcc on LERF, 15.5 mAcc on Mip-NeRF-360) may reflect selection bias rather than genuine improvement. Moreover, the Mip-NeRF-360 annotations are self-annotated and not released, so the numbers cannot be independently reproduced. Please report mean ± std over multiple seeds and release the annotations.
  2. [Supplementary A, last paragraph] The paper states that LangSplat's re-evaluated metrics "have some differences from the original paper" and speculates about the cause. If the comparison is against a reimplementation rather than the published system with its reported numbers, then the "state-of-the-art" claim is not established. Please present the original published numbers side-by-side with the re-evaluated numbers and verify that the baseline evaluation is faithful, for example by reporting per-scene prompts and evaluation code.
  3. [Section 3.2, Eq. (5)] The region-aware weighted distillation is described by a single scalar βr, but the text says the loss is normalized by the region size of each object so that all objects contribute equally. As written, a global multiplier cannot equalize per-region contributions, and the denominator "S(R)" is not defined. Since Table 6 attributes a 4.8 mIoU gain to RAD, the exact per-region weighting must be specified precisely.
  4. [Section 3.1, Eq. (1) and Fig. 10] The GaS contribution is motivated by improved multiview consistency of SAM masks, but support is only qualitative. Fig. 10 shows one scene; no quantitative cross-view consistency metric (e.g., projected mask IoU) is reported, and Eq. (1) depends on the rendered depth from an imperfect 3DGS geometry and on the hyperparameter n. Please add a quantitative evaluation of mask consistency across views to substantiate the claimed mechanism.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Section 3.1, after Eq. (1)] The phrase "where |P| is the pixel number in the patch" appears twice in the same paragraph; remove the duplicate.
  2. [Section 3.2, Eq. (2)] The notation "fclip, η = D(frender)" is ambiguous; write "(fclip, η) = D(frender)" for clarity.
  3. [Section 3.2] The three SAM mask levels ms, mp, and mw are not explicitly defined as binary masks before they are used in Eq. (3); please define them.
  4. [Abstract and Table 3] The abstract claims "2× faster than baseline methods," but Table 3 reports this only for LangSplat; specify the comparison to avoid overgeneralization.
  5. [References] References [15] and [16] are the same paper (Visual Language Maps for Robot Navigation); deduplicate them.
  6. [Fig. 10 caption] The caption states "only ~20% of the prompt point count used in the vanilla SAM," but the vanilla SAM prompt count is not defined; clarify what baseline prompt count is being compared.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: GAGS is an empirical distillation pipeline whose components are evaluated against external annotations; the learned granularity factor is a soft-gating module, not a fitted prediction.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is a conventional distillation pipeline: Eq. (1) derives prompt point density from rendered depth maps, SAM and CLIP produce teacher features, Eq. (2) decodes a granularity factor from rendered features, and Eq. (3) uses those weights in a distillation loss against the CLIP teacher features. Each stage consumes external supervision or fixed pretrained models, and the final claims are evaluated against held-out annotations on LERF and Mip-NeRF-360. The granularity factor is optimized with the same loss it weights, but this is a soft-attention gating mechanism rather than a fitted parameter renamed as a prediction; its interpretation as selecting multiview-consistent features is an empirical claim that could fail, not a tautology. The ablation studies in Tables 4, 6, and 7 compare variants against the full model on external metrics, so the reported improvements are falsifiable and not forced by construction. Concerns about the evaluation protocol, such as best-of-three reporting without variance, self-annotated Mip-NeRF-360 data, and re-evaluated LangSplat numbers that differ from the original paper, are threats to the reliability of the state-of-the-art claim, but they are not instances of circular reasoning. No load-bearing self-citation was found. Accordingly, no specific circular step can be exhibited, and the correct finding is no significant circularity.

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

The method uses CLIP and SAM as pre-trained foundations and introduces no new physical or ontological entities. The free parameters are standard hyperparameters and the learned granularity factor is a network output, not an invented entity. The main unstated assumptions concern the reliability of CLIP and SAM for the claimed granularity-consistency mechanism.

free parameters (4)
  • prompt point number n = not stated
    Predefined count of SAM prompt points per patch in Eq. (1); controls segmentation granularity and is chosen by hand.
  • entropy loss weight lambda_entropy = not stated
    Hyperparameter in Eq. (7) balancing entropy regularization; tuned manually.
  • consistency loss weight lambda_cons = not stated
    Hyperparameter in Eq. (7) for feature consistency loss; tuned manually.
  • feature dimension d = 16 (default)
    Dimension of compressed CLIP features stored on Gaussians; ablated (8/16/32) and chosen for performance/VRAM tradeoff.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption CLIP features encode semantic information sufficient for open-vocabulary localization and segmentation.
    The whole method relies on CLIP as the semantic backbone; no proof is given that CLIP's feature space supports the target granularity distinctions.
  • domain assumption SAM segmentation granularity is controlled by prompt point density.
    Used in Eq. (1) to adapt prompts; the paper provides qualitative but not quantitative evidence.
  • domain assumption 3D Gaussian reconstruction provides accurate depth and geometry for Eq. (1) and feature rendering.
    Depth maps from the Gaussian field drive prompt density; if the field is inaccurate, the prompting rule fails.
  • domain assumption The learned granularity factor alpha selects multiview consistent feature scales.
    This is the central mechanism of GaD; it is unsupervised and justified only by downstream task performance, not by a direct consistency metric.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of GAGS: Granularity-Aware Feature Distillation for Language Gaussian Splatting." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/26WCKIGW

@misc{pith2026241213654,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: GAGS: Granularity-Aware Feature Distillation for Language Gaussian Splatting},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/26WCKIGW}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.13654}
}
abstract

3D open-vocabulary scene understanding, which accurately perceives complex semantic properties of objects in space, has gained significant attention in recent years. In this paper, we propose GAGS, a framework that distills 2D CLIP features into 3D Gaussian splatting, enabling open-vocabulary queries for renderings on arbitrary viewpoints. The main challenge of distilling 2D features for 3D fields lies in the multiview inconsistency of extracted 2D features, which provides unstable supervision for the 3D feature field. GAGS addresses this challenge with two novel strategies. First, GAGS associates the prompt point density of SAM with the camera distances, which significantly improves the multiview consistency of segmentation results. Second, GAGS further decodes a granularity factor to guide the distillation process and this granularity factor can be learned in a unsupervised manner to only select the multiview consistent 2D features in the distillation process. Experimental results on two datasets demonstrate significant performance and stability improvements of GAGS in visual grounding and semantic segmentation, with an inference speed 2$\times$ faster than baseline methods. The code and additional results are available at https://pz0826.github.io/GAGS-Webpage/ .

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.13654 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Given multiview images of a scene, GAGS learns a 3D Gaussian field associated with semantic features, which enables accurate [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p001_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. A 3D point shows different semantics at different scales. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. In comparison to vanilla SAM, we associate the prompt [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (13 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Our granularity-select feature learning. Our method leverages the inherent consistency of 3D Gaussian splatting to perform granularity-aware feature distillation, enhancing the stability and accuracy of learned object features. 2. Related work 2.1. Point-based Radiance…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Pipeline of our method. Given a set of images with camera poses, our method first uses 3D Gaussian Splatting to reconstruct the scene’s geometric representation, then utilizes it for granularity-aware segmentation and CLIP feature distillation. The finally output 3D fe…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Our granularity-aware segmentation module utilizes the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Our granularity-aware language field distillation module introduces optimizable low-dimensional semantic features into the pre [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: The relevance visualization results for open-vocabulary queries. Each row from top to bottom represents Ground Truth, Gaussian Grouping, GOI, Langsplat, and our method. Below each column is the corresponding input text description. 4.2. Comparison with Baseline Methods…
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Qualitative results of the ablation study. Below each column is the corresponding input text description. Vanilla SAM Our GaS Vanilla SAM Our GaS View 1 View 3 View 5 View 1 View 2 View 3 View 4 View 5 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Visualization of prompt points and segmentation re￾sults. Our method achieves superior segmentation consistency with only ˜20% of the prompt point count used in the vanilla SAM. (a) (b) (c) (d) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_10.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Visualization of learned granularity weights α. The RGB channels correspond to αs, αp, and αw, respectively. dataset. Model 1 of Tab. 4 is the baseline model, where we use uniform prompt points for SAM segmentation. We then Setting Performance ID GaS Distill. mIoU(%) …
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Granularity-aware segmentation. For an input image, we divide it into a series of patches and calculate the number of prompt points for each patch using the depth-aware density. Next, we quantify the local Gaussian density into a discrete probability distribution to g…
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Mask fusion process in the training phase. single object, contributing equally for the distillation loss, and being regularized internally by the Feature Consistency Loss during optimization. 3D Object Localization & Segmentation. We fol￾low LERF [20] and LangSplat [3…
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: Comparison of the semantic segmentation result of N2F2-style post-training granularity-aware strategy and our granularity [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_14.png]
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: Additional relevance visualization results of open-vocabulary segmentation. 15 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_15.png]
Figure 16
Figure 16. Figure 16: Additional segmentation results of our GAGS. Our method is able to produce accurate responses to multi-granularity queries. 16 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_16.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 5 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. LEGO: Leveled Language Gaussian Splatting

    cs.CV 2026-08 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    LEGO builds view-consistent, multi-level 3D semantic hierarchies from multi-view SAM masks by clustering their physical 3D scales, and grounds them with CLIP for open-vocabulary segmentation and LLM-driven spatial grounding.

  2. ObjectGS: Object-aware Scene Reconstruction and Scene Understanding via Gaussian Splatting

    cs.GR 2025-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    ObjectGS unifies 3D Gaussian scene reconstruction with object-level segmentation by binding each object to local anchors with fixed one-hot ID encodings, improving open-vocabulary and panoptic segmentation.

  3. RoboPearls: Editable Video Simulation for Robot Manipulation

    cs.CV 2025-06 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    RoboPearls is a 3D Gaussian Splatting based framework that edits demonstration videos into varied photorealistic simulations, and training on them improves robot manipulation success rates on RLBench and COLOSSEUM.

  4. CTRL-GS: Cascaded Temporal Residue Learning for 4D Gaussian Splatting

    cs.CV 2025-05 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    CTRL-GS represents dynamic Gaussian scenes as cascaded video-segment-frame residuals, improving reconstruction quality over 4D-GS on several dynamic-view benchmarks.

  5. Disentangling concept semantics via multilingual averaging in Sparse Autoencoders

    cs.CL 2025-08 unverdicted novelty 4.0 of 10

    The abstract claims multilingual averaging of Gemma Scope activations aligns with ontology ground truth better than any single language, but the provided full text is an unrelated paper and contains no supporting evidence.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

52 extracted references · 16 canonical work pages · cited by 5 Pith papers

  1. [1]

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

    Jonathan T Barron, Ben Mildenhall, Dor Verbin, Pratul P Srinivasan, and Peter Hedman. Mip-nerf 360: Unbounded anti-aliased neural radiance fields. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pages 5470–5479, 2022. 6

    2022

  2. [2]

    N2f2: Hierarchical scene under- standing with nested neural feature fields

    Yash Bhalgat, Iro Laina, Jo ˜ao F Henriques, Andrew Zisser- man, and Andrea Vedaldi. N2f2: Hierarchical scene under- standing with nested neural feature fields. arXiv preprint arXiv:2403.10997, 2024. 2, 13, 14

    arXiv 2024

  3. [3]

    Emerg- ing properties in self-supervised vision transformers

    Mathilde Caron, Hugo Touvron, Ishan Misra, Herv ´e J´egou, Julien Mairal, Piotr Bojanowski, and Armand Joulin. Emerg- ing properties in self-supervised vision transformers. In Pro- ceedings of the IEEE/CVF international conference on com- puter vision, pages 9650–9660, 2021. 3

    2021

  4. [4]

    Matterport3d: Learning from rgb-d data in indoor environments

    Angel Chang, Angela Dai, Thomas Funkhouser, Maciej Halber, Matthias Niessner, Manolis Savva, Shuran Song, Andy Zeng, and Yinda Zhang. Matterport3d: Learning from rgb-d data in indoor environments. arXiv preprint arXiv:1709.06158, 2017. 3

    arXiv 2017

  5. [5]

    Scanrefer: 3d object localization in rgb-d scans using natural language

    Dave Zhenyu Chen, Angel X Chang, and Matthias Nießner. Scanrefer: 3d object localization in rgb-d scans using natural language. In European conference on computer vision, pages 202–221. Springer, 2020. 3

    work page 2020

  6. [6]

    Clip2scene: Towards label-efficient 3d scene understanding by clip

    Runnan Chen, Youquan Liu, Lingdong Kong, Xinge Zhu, Yuexin Ma, Yikang Li, Yuenan Hou, Yu Qiao, and Wen- ping Wang. Clip2scene: Towards label-efficient 3d scene understanding by clip. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Con- ference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 7020–7030, 2023. 3

    2023

  7. [7]

    Masked-attention mask transformer for universal image segmentation

    Bowen Cheng, Ishan Misra, Alexander G Schwing, Alexan- der Kirillov, and Rohit Girdhar. Masked-attention mask transformer for universal image segmentation. In Proceed- ings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pages 1290–1299, 2022. 3

    2022

  8. [8]

    Reproducible scal- ing laws for contrastive language-image learning

    Mehdi Cherti, Romain Beaumont, Ross Wightman, Mitchell Wortsman, Gabriel Ilharco, Cade Gordon, Christoph Schuh- mann, Ludwig Schmidt, and Jenia Jitsev. Reproducible scal- ing laws for contrastive language-image learning. In Pro- ceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 2818–2829, 2023. 6

    2023

Show all 52 references
  1. [9]

    Maskclip: Masked self- distillation advances contrastive language-image pretraining

    Xiaoyi Dong, Jianmin Bao, Yinglin Zheng, Ting Zhang, Dongdong Chen, Hao Yang, Ming Zeng, Weiming Zhang, Lu Yuan, Dong Chen, et al. Maskclip: Masked self- distillation advances contrastive language-image pretraining. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision ...

    2023

  2. [10]

    An image is worth 16x16 words: Transformers for image recognition at scale

    Alexey Dosovitskiy. An image is worth 16x16 words: Transformers for image recognition at scale. arXiv preprint arXiv:2010.11929, 2020. 6

    2010 arXiv

  3. [11]

    Plenoxels: Radiance fields without neural networks

    Sara Fridovich-Keil, Alex Yu, Matthew Tancik, Qinhong Chen, Benjamin Recht, and Angjoo Kanazawa. Plenoxels: Radiance fields without neural networks. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pages 5501–5510, 2022. 3

    2022

  4. [12]

    Gortler, Radek Grzeszczuk, Richard Szeliski, and Michael F

    Steven J. Gortler, Radek Grzeszczuk, Richard Szeliski, and Michael F. Cohen. The lumigraph. In Proceedings of the 23rd Annual Conference on Computer Graphics and Inter- active Techniques, page 43–54, New York, NY , USA, 1996. Association for Computing Machinery. 3

    1996

  5. [13]

    Semantic gaussians: Open-vocabulary scene understanding with 3d gaussian splatting.arXiv preprint arXiv:2403.15624,

    Jun Guo, Xiaojian Ma, Yue Fan, Huaping Liu, and Qing Li. Semantic gaussians: Open-vocabulary scene understanding with 3d gaussian splatting.arXiv preprint arXiv:2403.15624,

    arXiv

  6. [14]

    3d-llm: In- jecting the 3d world into large language models

    Yining Hong, Haoyu Zhen, Peihao Chen, Shuhong Zheng, Yilun Du, Zhenfang Chen, and Chuang Gan. 3d-llm: In- jecting the 3d world into large language models. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 36:20482–20494,

  7. [15]

    Visual language maps for robot navigation

    Chenguang Huang, Oier Mees, Andy Zeng, and Wolfram Burgard. Visual language maps for robot navigation. In2023 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), pages 10608–10615. IEEE, 2023. 1

    2023

  8. [16]

    Visual language maps for robot navigation

    Chenguang Huang, Oier Mees, Andy Zeng, and Wolfram Burgard. Visual language maps for robot navigation. In2023 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), pages 10608–10615. IEEE, 2023. 3

    2023

  9. [17]

    Conceptfusion: Open-set multimodal 3d mapping

    Krishna Murthy Jatavallabhula, Alihusein Kuwajerwala, Qiao Gu, Mohd Omama, Tao Chen, Alaa Maalouf, Shuang Li, Ganesh Iyer, Soroush Saryazdi, Nikhil Keetha, et al. Conceptfusion: Open-set multimodal 3d mapping. arXiv preprint arXiv:2302.07241, 2023. 2

    2023 arXiv

  10. [18]

    Fastlgs: Speeding up lan- guage embedded gaussians with feature grid mapping

    Yuzhou Ji, He Zhu, Junshu Tang, Wuyi Liu, Zhizhong Zhang, Xin Tan, and Yuan Xie. Fastlgs: Speeding up lan- guage embedded gaussians with feature grid mapping. arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.01916, 2024. 2

    2024 arXiv

  11. [19]

    3d gaussian splatting for real-time radiance field rendering

    Bernhard Kerbl, Georgios Kopanas, Thomas Leimk ¨uhler, and George Drettakis. 3d gaussian splatting for real-time radiance field rendering. ACM Trans. Graph., 42(4):139–1,

  12. [20]

    Lerf: Language embedded radiance fields

    Justin Kerr, Chung Min Kim, Ken Goldberg, Angjoo Kanazawa, and Matthew Tancik. Lerf: Language embedded radiance fields. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Interna- tional Conference on Computer Vision, pages 19729–19739,

  13. [21]

    Garfield: Group anything with radiance fields

    Chung Min Kim, Mingxuan Wu, Justin Kerr, Ken Gold- berg, Matthew Tancik, and Angjoo Kanazawa. Garfield: Group anything with radiance fields. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 21530–21539, 2024. 3

    2024

  14. [22]

    Segment any- thing

    Alexander Kirillov, Eric Mintun, Nikhila Ravi, Hanzi Mao, Chloe Rolland, Laura Gustafson, Tete Xiao, Spencer White- head, Alexander C Berg, Wan-Yen Lo, et al. Segment any- thing. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Con- ference on Computer Vision, pages 4015–4026, 2023. 2, 3

    2023

  15. [23]

    Decomposing nerf for editing via feature field distil- lation

    Sosuke Kobayashi, Eiichi Matsumoto, and Vincent Sitz- mann. Decomposing nerf for editing via feature field distil- lation. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 35:23311–23330, 2022. 3

    2022

  16. [24]

    Light field rendering

    Marc Levoy and Pat Hanrahan. Light field rendering. In Proceedings of the 23rd Annual Conference on Computer Graphics and Interactive Techniques , page 31–42, New York, NY , USA, 1996. Association for Computing Machin- ery. 3

    1996

  17. [25]

    Language-driven semantic seg- mentation

    Boyi Li, Kilian Q Weinberger, Serge Belongie, Vladlen Koltun, and Ren ´e Ranftl. Language-driven semantic seg- mentation. arXiv preprint arXiv:2201.03546, 2022. 3

    2022 arXiv

  18. [26]

    Su- pergseg: Open-vocabulary 3d segmentation with structured super-gaussians

    Siyun Liang, Sen Wang, Kunyi Li, Michael Niemeyer, Ste- fano Gasperini, Nassir Navab, and Federico Tombari. Su- pergseg: Open-vocabulary 3d segmentation with structured super-gaussians. arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.10231, 2024. 3

    2024

  19. [27]

    Part123: Part-aware 3d reconstruction from a single-view image

    Anran Liu, Cheng Lin, Yuan Liu, Xiaoxiao Long, Zhiyang Dou, Hao-Xiang Guo, Ping Luo, and Wenping Wang. Part123: Part-aware 3d reconstruction from a single-view image. In ACM SIGGRAPH 2024 Conference Papers, pages 1–12, 2024. 3

    2024

  20. [28]

    Weakly supervised 3d open- vocabulary segmentation

    Kunhao Liu, Fangneng Zhan, Jiahui Zhang, Muyu Xu, Yingchen Yu, Abdulmotaleb El Saddik, Christian Theobalt, Eric Xing, and Shijian Lu. Weakly supervised 3d open- vocabulary segmentation. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 36:53433–53456, 2023. 3

    2023

  21. [29]

    Grounding dino: Marrying dino with grounded pre-training for open-set object detection

    Shilong Liu, Zhaoyang Zeng, Tianhe Ren, Feng Li, Hao Zhang, Jie Yang, Chunyuan Li, Jianwei Yang, Hang Su, Jun Zhu, et al. Grounding dino: Marrying dino with grounded pre-training for open-set object detection. arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.05499, 2023. 7

    2023 arXiv

  22. [30]

    Nerf: Representing scenes as neural radiance fields for view syn- thesis

    Ben Mildenhall, Pratul P Srinivasan, Matthew Tancik, Jonathan T Barron, Ravi Ramamoorthi, and Ren Ng. Nerf: Representing scenes as neural radiance fields for view syn- thesis. Communications of the ACM, 65(1):99–106, 2021. 2, 3

    2021

  23. [31]

    Instant neural graphics primitives with a mul- tiresolution hash encoding

    Thomas M ¨uller, Alex Evans, Christoph Schied, and Alexan- der Keller. Instant neural graphics primitives with a mul- tiresolution hash encoding. ACM transactions on graphics (TOG), 41(4):1–15, 2022. 3

    2022

  24. [32]

    Openscene: 3d scene understanding with open vocabularies

    Songyou Peng, Kyle Genova, Chiyu Jiang, Andrea Tagliasacchi, Marc Pollefeys, Thomas Funkhouser, et al. Openscene: 3d scene understanding with open vocabularies. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vi- sion and pattern recognition, pages 815–824, 2023. 2, 3

    2023

  25. [33]

    Langsplat: 3d language gaussian splatting

    Minghan Qin, Wanhua Li, Jiawei Zhou, Haoqian Wang, and Hanspeter Pfister. Langsplat: 3d language gaussian splatting. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 20051–20060, 2024. 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 12

    2024

  26. [34]

    Goi: Find 3d gaussians of interest with an optimizable open- vocabulary semantic-space hyperplane

    Yansong Qu, Shaohui Dai, Xinyang Li, Jianghang Lin, Li- ujuan Cao, Shengchuan Zhang, and Rongrong Ji. Goi: Find 3d gaussians of interest with an optimizable open- vocabulary semantic-space hyperplane. arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.17596, 2024. 6, 7, 12

    2024 arXiv

  27. [35]

    Learning transferable visual models from natural language supervi- sion

    Alec Radford, Jong Wook Kim, Chris Hallacy, Aditya Ramesh, Gabriel Goh, Sandhini Agarwal, Girish Sastry, Amanda Askell, Pamela Mishkin, Jack Clark, et al. Learning transferable visual models from natural language supervi- sion. In International conference on machine learning, ...

    2021

  28. [36]

    Grounded sam: Assembling open-world models for diverse visual tasks,

    Tianhe Ren, Shilong Liu, Ailing Zeng, Jing Lin, Kun- chang Li, He Cao, Jiayu Chen, Xinyu Huang, Yukang Chen, Feng Yan, Zhaoyang Zeng, Hao Zhang, Feng Li, Jie Yang, Hongyang Li, Qing Jiang, and Lei Zhang. Grounded sam: Assembling open-world models for diverse visual tasks,

  29. [37]

    Anything- 3d: Towards single-view anything reconstruction in the wild

    Qiuhong Shen, Xingyi Yang, and Xinchao Wang. Anything- 3d: Towards single-view anything reconstruction in the wild. arXiv preprint arXiv:2304.10261, 2023. 3

    2023 arXiv

  30. [38]

    Distilled feature fields en- able few-shot language-guided manipulation

    William Shen, Ge Yang, Alan Yu, Jansen Wong, Leslie Pack Kaelbling, and Phillip Isola. Distilled feature fields en- able few-shot language-guided manipulation. arXiv preprint arXiv:2308.07931, 2023. 1

    2023 arXiv

  31. [39]

    Language embedded 3d gaussians for open- vocabulary scene understanding

    Jin-Chuan Shi, Miao Wang, Hao-Bin Duan, and Shao- Hua Guan. Language embedded 3d gaussians for open- vocabulary scene understanding. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 5333–5343, 2024. 3, 6, 12

    2024

  32. [40]

    Synthesizing long-term 3d human motion and in- teraction in 3d scenes

    Jiashun Wang, Huazhe Xu, Jingwei Xu, Sifei Liu, and Xiao- long Wang. Synthesizing long-term 3d human motion and in- teraction in 3d scenes. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Con- ference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 9401–9411, 2021. 3

    2021

  33. [41]

    Query-based semantic gaussian field for scene representation in reinforce- ment learning

    Jiaxu Wang, Ziyi Zhang, Qiang Zhang, Jia Li, Jingkai Sun, Mingyuan Sun, Junhao He, and Renjing Xu. Query-based semantic gaussian field for scene representation in reinforce- ment learning. arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.02370, 2024. 2

    2024 arXiv

  34. [42]

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

    Peng Wang, Lingjie Liu, Yuan Liu, Christian Theobalt, Taku Komura, and Wenping Wang. Neus: Learning neural implicit surfaces by volume rendering for multi-view reconstruction. arXiv preprint arXiv:2106.10689, 2021. 3

    2021 arXiv

  35. [43]

    Opengaussian: Towards point-level 3d gaussian-based open vocabulary understanding

    Yanmin Wu, Jiarui Meng, Haijie Li, Chenming Wu, Yahao Shi, Xinhua Cheng, Chen Zhao, Haocheng Feng, Errui Ding, Jingdong Wang, et al. Opengaussian: Towards point-level 3d gaussian-based open vocabulary understanding. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 37:19114–19138,

  36. [44]

    3d shapenets: A deep representation for volumetric shapes

    Zhirong Wu, Shuran Song, Aditya Khosla, Fisher Yu, Lin- guang Zhang, Xiaoou Tang, and Jianxiong Xiao. 3d shapenets: A deep representation for volumetric shapes. In Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pages 1912–1920, 2015. 3 10

    1912

  37. [45]

    V ol- ume rendering of neural implicit surfaces

    Lior Yariv, Jiatao Gu, Yoni Kasten, and Yaron Lipman. V ol- ume rendering of neural implicit surfaces. Advances in Neu- ral Information Processing Systems, 34:4805–4815, 2021. 3

    2021

  38. [46]

    Gaussian grouping: Segment and edit anything in 3d scenes

    Mingqiao Ye, Martin Danelljan, Fisher Yu, and Lei Ke. Gaussian grouping: Segment and edit anything in 3d scenes. arXiv preprint arXiv:2312.00732, 2023. 3, 6, 7, 12

    2023 arXiv

  39. [47]

    gsplat: An open-source library for gaussian splatting

    Vickie Ye, Ruilong Li, Justin Kerr, Matias Turkulainen, Brent Yi, Zhuoyang Pan, Otto Seiskari, Jianbo Ye, Jeffrey Hu, Matthew Tancik, et al. gsplat: An open-source library for gaussian splatting. arXiv preprint arXiv:2409.06765, 2024. 6

    2024 arXiv

  40. [48]

    Omniseg3d: Omniversal 3d segmentation via hierarchical contrastive learning

    Haiyang Ying, Yixuan Yin, Jinzhi Zhang, Fan Wang, Tao Yu, Ruqi Huang, and Lu Fang. Omniseg3d: Omniversal 3d segmentation via hierarchical contrastive learning. In Pro- ceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 20612–20622, 2024. 3

    2024

  41. [49]

    Clip-fo3d: Learning free open-world 3d scene representations from 2d dense clip

    Junbo Zhang, Runpei Dong, and Kaisheng Ma. Clip-fo3d: Learning free open-world 3d scene representations from 2d dense clip. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision, pages 2048–2059, 2023. 3

    2023

  42. [50]

    Genad: Generative end-to-end autonomous driving

    Wenzhao Zheng, Ruiqi Song, Xianda Guo, and Long Chen. Genad: Generative end-to-end autonomous driving. arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.11502, 2024. 2

    2024 arXiv

  43. [51]

    Feature 3dgs: Supercharging 3d gaussian splatting to enable distilled feature fields

    Shijie Zhou, Haoran Chang, Sicheng Jiang, Zhiwen Fan, Ze- hao Zhu, Dejia Xu, Pradyumna Chari, Suya You, Zhangyang Wang, and Achuta Kadambi. Feature 3dgs: Supercharging 3d gaussian splatting to enable distilled feature fields. InPro- ceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Compu...

    2024

  44. [52]

    red Nintendo Switch joy-con controller

    Xingxing Zuo, Pouya Samangouei, Yunwen Zhou, Yan Di, and Mingyang Li. Fmgs: Foundation model embedded 3d gaussian splatting for holistic 3d scene understanding. In- ternational Journal of Computer Vision , pages 1–17, 2024. 3 11 Figure 12. Granularity-aware segmentation. For a...

    2024

Pith tools

Reviewed August 11, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.