Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 6 minor 44 references

Boosting Multi-View Indoor 3D Object Detection via Adaptive 3D Volume Construction

T0 review · 4 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read SGCDet claims that multi-view indoor 3D object detection becomes both more accurate and cheaper when the 3D volume is built adaptively: deformable feature aggregation in a lifted 3D space, refinement of only the most occupancy-likely…

desk verdict Solid architecture for multi-view indoor 3D detection with large reported gains, but the SOTA claim is undercut by omitting recently cited baselines like GO-N3RDet from the comparisons. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.18331 v1 pith:RMGJOXOB submitted 2025-07-24 cs.CV

Runmin Zhang , Zhu Yu , Si-Yuan Cao , Lingyu Zhu , Guangyi Zhang , Xiaokai Bai , Hui-Liang Shen This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.CV
keywords multi-view3Dobjectdetectionindoorsceneunderstandingadaptivevolumeconstructionsparserefinementoccupancypredictiondeformableattentionbounding-boxpseudo-labelsScanNet
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

SGCDet is a multi-view indoor 3D object detector that tries to show that a 3D volume built from posed images can be both more accurate and far cheaper when the network is allowed to choose where to look. Its central proposal is adaptive volume construction: instead of sampling image features at fixed projected points and refining every voxel, the network aggregates features inside deformable 3D regions and refines only voxels judged likely to hold objects. The occupancy judgment is supervised by pseudo-labels derived from 3D bounding boxes, so the whole pipeline needs image labels and box labels rather than ground-truth scene geometry. On ScanNet the method reports mAP@0.25 of 61.2 and mAP@0.50 of 35.2, outperforming the previous geometry-free state of the art MVSDet by 5.0 and 3.9 points while also lowering training memory, training time, inference memory, and inference time.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing mechanism is a coarse-to-fine sparse volume construction teamed with a geometry and context aware aggregation module. At each refinement stage an occupancy head scores voxels of an upsampled coarse volume, the network keeps the top-k% voxels for feature refinement, and the aggregation module lifts image features by 3D deformable attention: each voxel is projected into a lifted 3D pixel space where its sampled feature acts as a query and deformable offsets gather context, followed by multi-view attention that re-weights the views. The occupancy head is trained with pseudo-labels obtained by filling ground-truth 3D bounding boxes, so no depth map or reconstructed mesh is needed.

What would settle it

On a validation scene, compute the occupancy ranking from the trained occupancy head and compare the top-25% voxels against a dense occupancy map built from all visible objects, including unannotated ones; if mAP under 25% selection falls well below mAP under 100% selection in scenes with heavy unannotated clutter, the box-derived pseudo-labels are not sufficient to rank object voxels.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

SGCDet claims that the two usual costs of voxel-based multi-view detection — fixed receptive fields and dense computation over empty space — can be removed together by making volume construction adaptive in both feature space and voxel space. The geometry and context aware aggregation treats each voxel's projected feature as a query in a 3D deformable attention over lifted image features, letting the network pull information from a flexible neighborhood in each view and then weight views by attention; the sparse volume construction builds a coarse volume, predicts per-voxel occupancy, and refines only the top 25% of voxels at each stage, with occupancy supervised by binary labels that mark voxels inside any ground-truth 3D box. The paper reports that this combination achieves state-of-the-art results among methods trained without ground-truth geometry on ScanNet, ScanNet200, and ARKitScenes, and that on ScanNet it exceeds MVSDet by 5.0 mAP@0.25 and 3.9 mAP@0.50 while reducing training memory, training time, inference memory, and inference time by 42.9%, 47.2%, 50%, and 40.8%.

Load-bearing premise

The method assumes that filling ground-truth 3D bounding boxes marks the voxels worth refining, so if a scene contains many unannotated objects or clutter outside boxes, the top-25% occupancy selection could discard object voxels or keep empty ones.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Because supervision needs only 3D bounding boxes, the method can be applied to datasets that have image poses and box labels but no depth or reconstructed geometry.
  • The voxel-selection ratio is a direct accuracy-efficiency dial; the ablations show that 10% selection loses accuracy while 25% preserves it, so downstream systems can trade speed for recall.
  • The reported cost reductions versus MVSDet mean the accuracy gain is not bought with compute: training memory falls 42.9%, training time 47.2%, inference memory 50%, and inference time 40.8%.
  • On ScanNet200's 200-category split and ARKitScenes' oriented boxes, the method generalizes beyond the 18-class ScanNet setting; the higher-resolution SGCDet-L reaches an 80x80x32 volume and outperforms the geometry-supervised CN-RMA on ARKitScenes.

Reading between the lines

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

  • An inference: if box-derived occupancy pseudo-labels stay reliable in scenes with many unannotated objects, the same coarse-to-fine sparse selection could be dropped into other voxel-based perception tasks such as semantic occupancy prediction or scene completion that today rely on full geometry supervision; the paper does not test that transfer.
  • An inference: the top-25% selection creates a hidden coupling between annotation density and accuracy, because adding more annotated boxes changes the occupancy supervision and therefore which voxels get refined; a dataset with sparse labels could silently degrade the sparse volume before the detection head sees it.
  • An inference: because the deformable attention operates in a lifted 3D pixel space rather than on the 2D image, the same module could serve monocular or few-view settings where depth estimates are noisy, as long as the depth distribution carries enough signal; the paper only evaluates the full multi-view pipeline.
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. The paper proposes SGCDet, a multi-view indoor 3D object detector that combines a geometry- and context-aware aggregation module (3D deformable attention plus multi-view attention) with a coarse-to-fine sparse volume construction that selects top-k voxels by predicted occupancy. Occupancy supervision is derived from ground-truth 3D bounding boxes, avoiding explicit scene-geometry supervision. On ScanNet, ScanNet200, and ARKitScenes, SGCDet reports higher mAP than previous geometry-supervision-free methods, particularly MVSDet (e.g., 61.2 vs 56.2 mAP@0.25 on ScanNet), while lowering training/inference memory and time. Ablations in Tables 4–8 support the main design choices.

Significance. If the reported results hold, SGCDet would be a practical advance for image-based indoor detection: it removes the need for ground-truth geometry, improves accuracy over MVSDet by 5.0 mAP@0.25, and cuts memory/time by roughly half. The ablations are systematic and the public code promise supports reproducibility. However, the headline SOTA claim is currently under-supported because two recently cited baselines (GO-N3RDet, NeRF-Det++) are absent from all comparisons, and the absence of variance estimates makes some smaller ablative differences hard to interpret.

major comments (4)
  1. [§2, §4.3, Tables 1–3] The state-of-the-art claim is not verified against the full set of relevant baselines. Section 2 cites GO-N3RDet [17] and NeRF-Det++ [9] as recent methods that 'further enhance NeRF-Det through semantic and geometric constraints,' and nothing in the descriptions indicates they use ground-truth geometry supervision. Yet neither is included in the quantitative comparisons in Tables 1–3. Because the paper's central claim (Abstract, §4.3) is superiority over approaches that do not rely on ground-truth geometry, omitting these directly relevant baselines leaves the claim unproven; the 5.0 mAP@0.25 margin over MVSDet does not rule out a missing baseline being competitive. Please add comparisons to these methods, or explicitly demonstrate that they fall outside the 'no ground-truth geometry' class, and adjust the SOTA claim accordingly.
  2. [§4.3–4.5, Tables 1–8] All experiments are single runs without variance estimates or significance tests. The main SOTA gain (5.0 mAP@0.25 over MVSDet, Table 1) is large, but several design choices are based on much smaller differences: Table 4 (a) vs (b) is 0.2 mAP, and Table 5 (a) vs (e) is 0.2 mAP. Without repeated seeds or error bars, it is unclear whether these differences are meaningful or within run-to-run noise. Please report at least three seeds (mean±std) for the key comparisons, or otherwise justify the stability of the reported numbers.
  3. [Table 1, §4.3] The efficiency comparison is not on an equal footing. The footnote to Table 1 states that * results are directly cited from [30,40], while the text says 'The computational cost is measured on a single NVIDIA A6000 GPU.' If the baseline memory/time/FPS numbers are taken from other papers, they may reflect different hardware, software, or batch settings, so the claimed reductions (42.9% training memory, 47.2% training time, 50% inference memory, 40.8% faster inference) are not established. Please measure all baselines under identical conditions, or clearly separate reproduced numbers and add appropriate caveats.
  4. [§3.2, §4.5, Table 7] The occupancy pseudo-labels come from ground-truth bounding boxes and therefore cover only annotated object interiors. The top-25% voxel selection could in principle discard voxels belonging to unannotated objects or retain free space. Table 7's 15% label-dropout experiment is a useful robustness check, but it does not directly validate the claim in Section 4.5 that 'the top 25% selection for refinement ensures sufficient coverage of occupied regions, including areas not annotated by pseudo-labels.' Please provide direct evidence (e.g., recall of occupied voxels as a function of selection ratio, or a test with a large fraction of unannotated objects) or soften the claim.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Abstract, §5] The phrase 'state-of-the-art performance' overstates what is demonstrated, since on ScanNet200 (Table 2) only two baselines are compared; please qualify the claim to the evaluated methods.
  2. [§3.2] In Eq. (2), the notation 'top k%' uses k as both a percentage and a count; please adopt a single notation (e.g., alpha for the fraction).
  3. [§4.2] The sentence 'The models are trained on NVIDIA A6000 GPUs' should specify the number of GPUs, per-GPU batch size, and total batch size, since training time is reported as a contribution.
  4. [Table 3] The original and reproduced baseline rows are both listed; this is useful but potentially confusing. Please label them clearly, e.g., 'original' vs 'reproduced with origin recentering'.
  5. [References] Reference [7] lists the first author as 'A Waswani'; the correct spelling is 'A. Vaswani'.
  6. [Figure 4] The caption explains that the depth dimension is omitted for clarity; it would help to also mark the image boundaries in each view.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the architecture changes are evaluated on held-out benchmarks, and the occupancy pseudo-labels are auxiliary self-supervision rather than a hidden reuse of the final prediction target.

full rationale

SGCDet's claimed contributions are empirical architecture changes — deformable-attention feature lifting, sparse coarse-to-fine volume construction, and a trainable DepthNet — evaluated on held-out ScanNet/ScanNet200/ARKitScenes benchmarks. The occupancy pseudo-labels in Eq. (3) are generated from the same ground-truth 3D bounding boxes that supervise detection, so the occupancy head is an auxiliary self-supervision target, not an independent prediction that is then used to set the detection output. At inference no box labels are used, and the top-25% selection is driven by the learned occupancy predictor. The DepthNet is trained end-to-end through L_det + lambda*L_occ without ground-truth depth; Table 8's depth-supervision and ground-truth-depth rows are upper-bound probes, not claimed results. The two author-overlapping citations ([13] and [42]) appear only in the related-work survey and do not carry the argument. The absence of GO-N3RDet and NeRF-Det++ from the comparison tables is an external-validity/completeness concern about the SOTA claim, but it is not a circularity: the reported mAP values are computed on held-out test data against the listed baselines and are not derived from the paper's own inputs. No equation or fitted parameter is equivalent to a claimed prediction by construction.

Assumptions & free parameters 8 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The framework is empirical: reported gains come from benchmark evaluations, and the main design choices are hand-set hyperparameters selected on ScanNet or by convention rather than derived from theory. No new physical or mathematical entities are introduced; the voxel grid, occupancy probabilities, and attention modules are standard constructs.

free parameters (8)
  • top-k selection ratio = 25%
    Chosen via ablation on ScanNet (Table 5); directly controls the trade-off between accuracy and computation in sparse volume construction.
  • occupancy loss weight lambda = 0.5
    Set in Eq. (10) without a sensitivity study; balances detection loss and occupancy loss.
  • number of refinement stages L = 2
    Number of coarse-to-fine stages in sparse volume construction; no ablation over L is reported.
  • deformable sampling points M = 4
    Number of sampled points in the 3D deformable attention, Eq. (6); no ablation is shown for this value.
  • depth bins D = 12
    Discretization of the depth range in DepthNet and for lifted 3D features; chosen for efficiency and not ablated.
  • nearest views K for cost volume = 2
    Number of views used in plane sweeping to build the cost volume in DepthNet; fixed without ablation.
  • voxel grid resolution = 40x40x16 (SGCDet), 80x80x32 (SGCDet-L)
    Grid dimensions chosen to match prior work and GPU memory; higher resolution gives better results on ARKitScenes.
  • learning rate and schedule = 0.0002, cosine decay, 12 or 30 epochs
    Standard optimization hyperparameters; they affect the reported numbers but are not part of the method's conceptual contribution.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Camera intrinsics and extrinsics are known and accurate for all input images.
    Voxel-to-image projection (Eq. 5) and plane sweeping (Eq. 8) require calibrated poses; pose errors would propagate to voxel features.
  • domain assumption The fixed depth range [0.2m, 5m] with 12 depth bins covers all relevant object depths in ScanNet, ScanNet200, and ARKitScenes.
    DepthNet and feature lifting are restricted to this range; objects outside it cannot be represented in the 3D volume.
  • domain assumption Occupancy pseudo-labels derived from 3D bounding boxes are a sufficient training signal for selecting object-relevant voxels.
    Eq. (3) labels every voxel inside a ground-truth box as occupied and everything else as free; if box interiors do not correlate with object locations, the top-k selection may drop or retain the wrong voxels.
  • ad hoc to paper The coarse 3D volume is informative enough to rank voxels by occupancy before full-resolution refinement.
    The coarse-to-fine pipeline relies on the occupancy head applied to the upsampled coarse volume to select the top 25% of voxels; no theoretical guarantee is given, though Table 5 supports this empirically.
  • standard math Standard backpropagation and attention operations are reliable training machinery.
    The method uses conventional attention and gradient-based optimization without formal verification or convergence guarantees.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Boosting Multi-View Indoor 3D Object Detection via Adaptive 3D Volume Construction." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/RMGJOXOB

@misc{pith2026250718331,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Boosting Multi-View Indoor 3D Object Detection via Adaptive 3D Volume Construction},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/RMGJOXOB}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.18331}
}
read the original abstract

This work presents SGCDet, a novel multi-view indoor 3D object detection framework based on adaptive 3D volume construction. Unlike previous approaches that restrict the receptive field of voxels to fixed locations on images, we introduce a geometry and context aware aggregation module to integrate geometric and contextual information within adaptive regions in each image and dynamically adjust the contributions from different views, enhancing the representation capability of voxel features. Furthermore, we propose a sparse volume construction strategy that adaptively identifies and selects voxels with high occupancy probabilities for feature refinement, minimizing redundant computation in free space. Benefiting from the above designs, our framework achieves effective and efficient volume construction in an adaptive way. Better still, our network can be supervised using only 3D bounding boxes, eliminating the dependence on ground-truth scene geometry. Experimental results demonstrate that SGCDet achieves state-of-the-art performance on the ScanNet, ScanNet200 and ARKitScenes datasets. The source code is available at https://github.com/RM-Zhang/SGCDet.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2507.18331 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Comparison of feature lifting and volume construction [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p001_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Schematics and detailed architectures of SGCDet. (a) Overview of SGCDet, which consists of an image backbone to extract [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Visualization of our sparse volume construction. (a) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (2 more)
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Detailed architecture of the DepthNet. tion weights to each view’s contribution, resulting in more consistent and robust scene-level voxel representations. 3.4. DepthNet The depth distributions provide geometric information for the 2D-to-3D projection process, whose ac…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Qualitative comparison of different methods on the ScanNet dataset. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_6.png]

Review history (2 revisions) →

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

44 extracted references · 34 canonical work pages

  1. [17]

    GO-N3RDet: Geometry opti- mized nerf-enhanced 3d object detector

    Zechuan Li, Hongshan Yu, Yihao Ding, Jinhao Qiao, Basim Azam, and Naveed Akhtar. GO-N3RDet: Geometry opti- mized nerf-enhanced 3d object detector. In Proceedings of the Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition Conference , pages 27211–27221, 2025. 2

    work page 2025

  2. [9]

    NeRF-Det++: Incorporat- ing semantic cues and perspective-aware depth supervision for indoor multi-view 3d detection

    Chenxi Huang, Yuenan Hou, Weicai Ye, Di Huang, Xiaoshui Huang, Binbin Lin, and Deng Cai. NeRF-Det++: Incorporat- ing semantic cues and perspective-aware depth supervision for indoor multi-view 3d detection. IEEE Transactions on Image Processing, 2025. 2

    work page 2025

  3. [1]

    Objectron: A large scale dataset of object-centric videos in the wild with pose annotations

    Adel Ahmadyan, Liangkai Zhang, Artsiom Ablavatski, Jian- ing Wei, and Matthias Grundmann. Objectron: A large scale dataset of object-centric videos in the wild with pose annotations. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition , pages 7822– 7831, 2021. 2, 4

    work page 2021

  4. [2]

    ARKitScenes: A diverse real-world dataset for 3d indoor scene understanding using mobile rgb-d data

    Gilad Baruch, Zhuoyuan Chen, Afshin Dehghan, Tal Dimry, Yuri Feigin, Peter Fu, Thomas Gebauer, Brandon Joffe, Daniel Kurz, Arik Schwartz, et al. ARKitScenes: A diverse real-world dataset for 3d indoor scene understanding using mobile rgb-d data. arXiv preprint arXiv:2111.08897, 2021. 2, 6

    arXiv 2021

  5. [3]

    End-to- end object detection with transformers

    Nicolas Carion, Francisco Massa, Gabriel Synnaeve, Nicolas Usunier, Alexander Kirillov, and Sergey Zagoruyko. End-to- end object detection with transformers. In European Confer- ence on Computer Vision, pages 213–229, 2020. 3

    work page 2020

  6. [4]

    MVSplat: Efficient 3d gaussian splatting from sparse multi-view images

    Yuedong Chen, Haofei Xu, Chuanxia Zheng, Bohan Zhuang, Marc Pollefeys, Andreas Geiger, Tat-Jen Cham, and Jianfei Cai. MVSplat: Efficient 3d gaussian splatting from sparse multi-view images. In European Conference on Computer Vision, pages 370–386, 2024. 2

    work page 2024

  7. [5]

    A space-sweep approach to true multi- image matching

    Robert T Collins. A space-sweep approach to true multi- image matching. In Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition , pages 358–363,

    work page

  8. [6]

    ScanNet: Richly-annotated 3d reconstructions of indoor scenes

    Angela Dai, Angel X Chang, Manolis Savva, Maciej Hal- ber, Thomas Funkhouser, and Matthias Nießner. ScanNet: Richly-annotated 3d reconstructions of indoor scenes. In Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 5828–5839, 2017. 2, 6

    work page 2017

Show all 44 references
  1. [7]

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

    Alexey Dosovitskiy, Lucas Beyer, Alexander Kolesnikov, Dirk Weissenborn, Xiaohua Zhai, Thomas Unterthiner, Mostafa Dehghani, Matthias Minderer, Georg Heigold, Syl- vain Gelly, Jakob Uszkoreit, and Neil Houlsby. An image is worth 16x16 words: Transformers for image recognition ...

    2021

  2. [8]

    Deep residual learning for image recognition

    Kaiming He, Xiangyu Zhang, Shaoqing Ren, and Jian Sun. Deep residual learning for image recognition. In Proceed- ings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 770–778, 2016. 6

    2016

  3. [10]

    BEVDet: High-performance multi-camera 3d object de- tection in bird-eye-view

    Junjie Huang, Guan Huang, Zheng Zhu, Yun Ye, and Dalong Du. BEVDet: High-performance multi-camera 3d object de- tection in bird-eye-view. arXiv preprint arXiv:2112.11790,

    arXiv

  4. [11]

    UniDet3D: Multi-dataset indoor 3d object detection

    Maksim Kolodiazhnyi, Anna V orontsova, Matvey Skrip- kin, Danila Rukhovich, and Anton Konushin. UniDet3D: Multi-dataset indoor 3d object detection. arXiv preprint arXiv:2409.04234, 2024. 1

    2024 arXiv

  5. [12]

    DFA3D: 3d deformable attention for 2d-to-3d feature lifting

    Hongyang Li, Hao Zhang, Zhaoyang Zeng, Shilong Liu, Feng Li, Tianhe Ren, and Lei Zhang. DFA3D: 3d deformable attention for 2d-to-3d feature lifting. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision , pages 6684–6693, 2023. 2, 4, 5

    2023

  6. [13]

    V oxDet: Re- thinking 3d semantic occupancy prediction as dense object detection

    Wuyang Li, Zhu Yu, and Alexandre Alahi. V oxDet: Re- thinking 3d semantic occupancy prediction as dense object detection. arXiv preprint arXiv:2506.04623, 2025. 3

    2025 arXiv

  7. [14]

    BEVDepth: Acquisition of reliable depth for multi-view 3d object detec- tion

    Yinhao Li, Zheng Ge, Guanyi Yu, Jinrong Yang, Zengran Wang, Yukang Shi, Jianjian Sun, and Zeming Li. BEVDepth: Acquisition of reliable depth for multi-view 3d object detec- tion. In Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 1477–1485, 2023. 2

    2023

  8. [15]

    V oxFormer: Sparse voxel transformer for camera- based 3d semantic scene completion

    Yiming Li, Zhiding Yu, Christopher Choy, Chaowei Xiao, Jose M Alvarez, Sanja Fidler, Chen Feng, and Anima Anand- kumar. V oxFormer: Sparse voxel transformer for camera- based 3d semantic scene completion. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern...

    2023

  9. [16]

    BEVFormer: Learning bird’s-eye-view representation from lidar-camera via spatiotemporal transformers

    Zhiqi Li, Wenhai Wang, Hongyang Li, Enze Xie, Chong- hao Sima, Tong Lu, Qiao Yu, and Jifeng Dai. BEVFormer: Learning bird’s-eye-view representation from lidar-camera via spatiotemporal transformers. IEEE Transactions on Pat- tern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 2024. 2

    2024

  10. [18]

    CascadeV-Det: Cascade point voting for 3d object detection

    Yingping Liang and Ying Fu. CascadeV-Det: Cascade point voting for 3d object detection. arXiv preprint arXiv:2401.07477, 2024. 1

    2024 arXiv

  11. [19]

    Feature pyramid networks for object detection

    Tsung-Yi Lin, Piotr Doll ´ar, Ross Girshick, Kaiming He, Bharath Hariharan, and Serge Belongie. Feature pyramid networks for object detection. In Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition , pages 2117–2125, 2017. 6

    2017

  12. [20]

    SparseBEV: High-performance sparse 3d object de- tection from multi-camera videos

    Haisong Liu, Yao Teng, Tao Lu, Haiguang Wang, and Limin Wang. SparseBEV: High-performance sparse 3d object de- tection from multi-camera videos. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision , pages 18580–18590, 2023. 3

    2023

  13. [21]

    Fully sparse 3d occupancy prediction

    Haisong Liu, Yang Chen, Haiguang Wang, Zetong Yang, Tianyu Li, Jia Zeng, Li Chen, Hongyang Li, and Limin Wang. Fully sparse 3d occupancy prediction. In European Conference on Computer Vision, pages 54–71, 2024. 3

    2024

  14. [22]

    PETR: Position embedding transformation for multi-view 3d object detection

    Yingfei Liu, Tiancai Wang, Xiangyu Zhang, and Jian Sun. PETR: Position embedding transformation for multi-view 3d object detection. In European Conference on Computer Vi- sion, pages 531–548, 2022. 3

    2022

  15. [23]

    SGDR: Stochas- tic gradient descent with warm restarts

    Ilya Loshchilov and Frank Hutter. SGDR: Stochas- tic gradient descent with warm restarts. arXiv preprint arXiv:1608.03983, 2016. 6

    2016 arXiv

  16. [24]

    Decoupled weight decay regularization

    Ilya Loshchilov and Frank Hutter. Decoupled weight decay regularization. arXiv preprint arXiv:1711.05101, 2017. 6

    2017 arXiv

  17. [25]

    Oc- treeOcc: Efficient and multi-granularity occupancy predic- tion using octree queries

    Yuhang Lu, Xinge Zhu, Tai Wang, and Yuexin Ma. Oc- treeOcc: Efficient and multi-granularity occupancy predic- tion using octree queries. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 2024. 3

    2024

  18. [26]

    Deep hough voting for 3d object detection in point clouds

    Charles R Qi, Or Litany, Kaiming He, and Leonidas J Guibas. Deep hough voting for 3d object detection in point clouds. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Con- ference on Computer Vision, pages 9277–9286, 2019. 1

    2019

  19. [27]

    Language- grounded indoor 3d semantic segmentation in the wild

    David Rozenberszki, Or Litany, and Angela Dai. Language- grounded indoor 3d semantic segmentation in the wild. In European Conference on Computer Vision, pages 125–141,

  20. [28]

    FCAF3D: Fully convolutional anchor-free 3d object detec- tion

    Danila Rukhovich, Anna V orontsova, and Anton Konushin. FCAF3D: Fully convolutional anchor-free 3d object detec- tion. In European Conference on Computer Vision , pages 477–493, 2022. 1

    2022

  21. [29]

    ImV oxelNet: Image to voxels projection for monocular and multi-view general-purpose 3d object detection

    Danila Rukhovich, Anna V orontsova, and Anton Konushin. ImV oxelNet: Image to voxels projection for monocular and multi-view general-purpose 3d object detection. In Proceed- ings of the IEEE/CVF Winter Conference on Applications of Computer Vision, pages 2397–2406, 2022. 1, 2,...

    2022

  22. [30]

    CN-RMA: Combined network with ray marching aggrega- tion for 3d indoor object detection from multi-view images

    Guanlin Shen, Jingwei Huang, Zhihua Hu, and Bin Wang. CN-RMA: Combined network with ray marching aggrega- tion for 3d indoor object detection from multi-view images. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 21326–21335, 2024. ...

    2024

  23. [31]

    Im- GeoNet: Image-induced geometry-aware voxel representa- tion for multi-view 3d object detection

    Tao Tu, Shun-Po Chuang, Yu-Lun Liu, Cheng Sun, Ke Zhang, Donna Roy, Cheng-Hao Kuo, and Min Sun. Im- GeoNet: Image-induced geometry-aware voxel representa- tion for multi-view 3d object detection. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vi- sion, pag...

    2023

  24. [32]

    CA- Group3D: Class-aware grouping for 3d object detection on point clouds

    Haiyang Wang, Lihe Ding, Shaocong Dong, Shaoshuai Shi, Aoxue Li, Jianan Li, Zhenguo Li, and Liwei Wang. CA- Group3D: Class-aware grouping for 3d object detection on point clouds. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, pages 29975–29988, 2022. 1

    2022

  25. [33]

    OPUS: Occupancy prediction using a sparse set

    Jiabao Wang, Zhaojiang Liu, Qiang Meng, Liujiang Yan, Ke Wang, Jie Yang, Wei Liu, Qibin Hou, and Ming-Ming Cheng. OPUS: Occupancy prediction using a sparse set. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems , 2024. 3

    2024

  26. [34]

    EmbodiedScan: A holistic multi- modal 3d perception suite towards embodied AI

    Tai Wang, Xiaohan Mao, Chenming Zhu, Runsen Xu, Ruiyuan Lyu, Peisen Li, Xiao Chen, Wenwei Zhang, Kai Chen, Tianfan Xue, et al. EmbodiedScan: A holistic multi- modal 3d perception suite towards embodied AI. InProceed- ings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Patte...

    2024

  27. [35]

    DETR3D: 3d object detection from multi-view images via 3d-to-2d queries

    Yue Wang, Vitor Campagnolo Guizilini, Tianyuan Zhang, Yilun Wang, Hang Zhao, and Justin Solomon. DETR3D: 3d object detection from multi-view images via 3d-to-2d queries. In Conference on Robot Learning, pages 180–191,

  28. [36]

    Attention is all you need

    A Waswani, N Shazeer, N Parmar, J Uszkoreit, L Jones, A Gomez, L Kaiser, and I Polosukhin. Attention is all you need. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Sys- tems, 2017. 5

    2017

  29. [37]

    Pixel-aligned recurrent queries for multi-view 3d object detection

    Yiming Xie, Huaizu Jiang, Georgia Gkioxari, and Julian Straub. Pixel-aligned recurrent queries for multi-view 3d object detection. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Interna- tional Conference on Computer Vision, pages 18370–18380,

  30. [38]

    NeRF-Det: Learning geometry-aware volumetric representation for multi-view 3d object detection

    Chenfeng Xu, Bichen Wu, Ji Hou, Sam Tsai, Ruilong Li, Jialiang Wang, Wei Zhan, Zijian He, Peter Vajda, Kurt Keutzer, and Masayoshi Tomizuka. NeRF-Det: Learning geometry-aware volumetric representation for multi-view 3d object detection. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Interna- ...

  31. [39]

    Unifying flow, stereo and depth estimation

    Haofei Xu, Jing Zhang, Jianfei Cai, Hamid Rezatofighi, Fisher Yu, Dacheng Tao, and Andreas Geiger. Unifying flow, stereo and depth estimation. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 2023. 5

    2023

  32. [40]

    MVSDet: Multi- view indoor 3d object detection via efficient plane sweeps

    Yating Xu, Chen Li, and Gim Hee Lee. MVSDet: Multi- view indoor 3d object detection via efficient plane sweeps. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems , 2024. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8

    2024

  33. [41]

    MVSNet: Depth inference for unstructured multi- view stereo

    Yao Yao, Zixin Luo, Shiwei Li, Tian Fang, and Long Quan. MVSNet: Depth inference for unstructured multi- view stereo. In Proceedings of the European Conference on Computer Vision, pages 767–783, 2018. 5

    2018

  34. [42]

    Context and geometry aware voxel transformer for semantic scene completion

    Zhu Yu, Runmin Zhang, Jiacheng Ying, Junchen Yu, Xiaohai Hu, Lun Luo, Si-Yuan Cao, and Hui-Liang Shen. Context and geometry aware voxel transformer for semantic scene completion. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 2024. 3

    2024

  35. [43]

    H3DNet: 3d object detection using hybrid geometric prim- itives

    Zaiwei Zhang, Bo Sun, Haitao Yang, and Qixing Huang. H3DNet: 3d object detection using hybrid geometric prim- itives. In European Conference on Computer Vision, pages 311–329, 2020. 1

    2020

  36. [2023]

    1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8

Pith tools

Reviewed August 15, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.