Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 6 minor 49 references

Symmetry Strikes Back: From Single-Image Symmetry Detection to 3D Generation

T0 review · 4 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-12 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Reflect3D detects an object's 3D mirror planes from a single photo, and the detected planes measurably sharpen single-image 3D generation.

desk verdict Reflect3D is a legit step forward in single-image symmetry detection, but the auto-labeling protocol needs a sharper look before the absolute numbers should be trusted. read the letter →

arxiv 2411.17763 v1 pith:SYFKJE6Y submitted 2024-11-26 cs.CV

Xiang Li , Zixuan Huang , Anh Thai , James M. Rehg This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.CV
keywords 3Dreflectionsymmetrysingle-imagedetectionzero-shotlearningmulti-viewdiffusiongenerationscoredistillationsamplingGaussiansplattingObjaverse
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

The paper claims that 3D reflection symmetry — the set of mirror planes through an object — can be recovered from a single RGB image by a transformer trained at scale, without category-specific priors or explicit 3D input at test time. It introduces Reflect3D, a zero-shot detector whose feed-forward pass alone already beats prior single-image symmetry methods on real scanned-object benchmarks, and whose multi-view variant (aggregating predictions from several diffusion-generated views) roughly doubles the top accuracy. The same predicted planes are then injected into a diffusion-based single-image 3D generator, improving both appearance (CLIP similarity) and geometry (Chamfer distance and F-scores) on the same test objects. If correct, symmetry becomes a cheap, reusable structural prior for making single-image 3D reconstruction and generation more faithful, especially for the unseen back side of objects.

What carries the argument

The mechanism that carries the argument is a discrete set of symmetry hypotheses serving as query tokens. The detector enforces a hemisphere of $N=31$ fixed unit normals; each hypothesis is a small neighborhood of possible plane normals. A shallow MLP embeds these hypotheses into query features, cross-attention reads the DINOv2 image features per query, and one MLP head classifies whether each neighborhood contains a ground-truth plane while another regresses an exact normal as a quaternion residual. Multi-view aggregation is the second half: a multi-view diffusion model yields eight surrounding views, CLIP similarity filters inconsistent ones, predictions are rotated back to the input frame, and K-Means clustering with a $30^\circ$ threshold outputs the final normals. For generation, symmetry enters DreamGaussian in three interventions—aligning the plane to a coarse Gaussian cloud via ICP, sampling SDS losses on mirrored views, and periodically reflecting 50% of Gaussians to densify symmetrically—plus a symmetric texture refinement stage that uses the mirrored image for back-side UVs.

What would settle it

Take symmetric CAD models with known, explicit mirror planes, render single images, and run both the automatic labeling protocol and Reflect3D on them. If the labeling protocol's planes disagree with the CAD-defined planes by more than a few degrees, or if the detector's error against the CAD-defined planes is much larger than the reported average geodesic distance (about $13^\circ$ on GSO), then the benchmark labels — not the detector — are carrying the reported accuracy.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the central discovery is that symmetry detection from a single image is no longer a category-restricted special case: a feed-forward transformer with a frozen self-supervised encoder and a cross-attention decoder over discrete normal hypotheses can predict mirror planes zero-shot, and a generative multi-view step removes the single-view ambiguity that previously forced methods onto narrower domains. Quantitatively, Reflect3D-FF lifts $F@5^\circ$ from $0.040$ (NeRD) to $0.191$ on GSO, and with multi-view aggregation the same metric reaches $0.390$ while average geodesic error drops from $36.2^\circ$ to $13.3^\circ$. When the detected symmetry is used to guide DreamGaussian's SDS optimization — via plane alignment, symmetric SDS, densification, and symmetric texture refinement — CLIP-Sim rises by $0.037$ and Chamfer distance falls by $0.028$ on GSO, evidence that the symmetry prior transfers from detection into generation.

Load-bearing premise

The automatic ground-truth symmetry labels, produced by sampling candidate planes, reflecting point clouds, thresholding Chamfer distance, and refining with ICP, are accurate and perceptually aligned for both the training and evaluation objects.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Symmetry detection transfers zero-shot from synthetic training to scanned real objects (GSO, OmniObject3D), so the method does not need category-specific retraining for new objects.
  • Single-view ambiguity is mitigated by generative multi-view synthesis and clustering, suggesting that ambiguous 3D cues can be resolved by leveraging diffusion priors rather than stronger 3D supervision.
  • A predicted symmetry plane is accurate enough to improve SDS-based 3D generation in both 2D appearance and 3D geometry, measured by CLIP-Sim, Chamfer distance, and F-scores.
  • The symmetric densification and mirrored SDS allow the pipeline to tolerate asymmetric details, so approximately symmetric real objects still benefit from the prior.
  • Freezing the DINOv2 encoder is critical: fine-tuning it degrades detection drastically, implying the pretrained self-supervised features already carry the geometric information needed for symmetry.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Because the detector only outputs the plane normal (not the plane distance), integrating it into a different 3D representation — e.g., a NeRF or a mesh from a feed-forward model — would require the same alignment trick used here, so the method's benefit in generation is likely tied to optimization-based pipelines that can afford an ICP alignment step.
  • The 31-hypothesis discretization could be made adaptive: a learned set of queries, or a coarse-to-fine cascade over normals, might remove the need for the multi-view diffusion stage entirely on objects with strong symmetry evidence.
  • If the automatic ground-truth protocol is perceptually aligned, the resulting dataset of ~85k objects with labeled symmetry planes could serve as pretraining data for other symmetry-aware tasks, such as symmetry-constrained pose estimation or shape completion; the paper only demonstrates detection and generation.
  • The success of a frozen DINOv2 suggests that symmetry planes are implicitly encoded in self-supervised visual features; probing which attention heads encode mirror relations could lead to a cheaper detector or to inserting symmetry biases into other vision transformers.
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 / 6 minor

Summary. Reflect3D proposes a transformer-based feed-forward detector for 3D reflection symmetry from a single RGB image, trained on a newly curated large-scale dataset (Objaverse+ShapeNet) with automatic Chamfer/ICP-derived symmetry labels. The detector uses a frozen DINOv2 encoder and cross-attention over 31 symmetry hypotheses. To resolve single-view ambiguity, the paper generates multiple views with a multi-view diffusion model, filters them by CLIP similarity, and aggregates per-view normal predictions via K-means clustering. The method is evaluated on GSO and OmniObject3D, reporting large improvements over NeRD and other baselines, and is integrated into DreamGaussian through symmetry alignment, symmetric SDS, symmetric densification, and symmetric texture refinement, yielding better CLIP-Sim and Chamfer distance. The paper positions the work as a scalable, zero-shot detector and demonstrates downstream utility in single-image 3D generation.

Significance. If the reported results hold, Reflect3D is a substantial advance in single-image 3D symmetry detection, showing that a scaled transformer trained on diverse synthetic data can generalize to real-world scans, and that the detected symmetry genuinely improves optimization-based 3D generation. The curated dataset with many more categories and symmetry planes than prior work is a valuable contribution. The paper also makes a good methodological point about using generative multi-view priors to reduce single-view ambiguity. The main risk lies in the automatic labeling protocol, which is the foundation for both training and evaluation; if that protocol has a systematic bias, the reported margins over baselines could be partly an artifact of shared label generation.

major comments (4)
  1. [Appendix 9.1] The ground-truth generation protocol centers each mesh by its "bounding sphere center" and then restricts all candidate symmetry planes to pass through the origin, claiming this "ensures the center of any potential ground truth symmetry plane is on the origin." This guarantee holds only if the bounding sphere is the minimal enclosing sphere. For a reflection-symmetric shape, the minimal enclosing sphere is unique and its center lies on the mirror plane, but for an arbitrary bounding sphere (e.g., one derived from the axis-aligned bounding box or a Ritter-style approximation) the center need not lie on the mirror plane. In that case, candidate planes constrained to pass through the origin will have large Chamfer distances to the true plane, fail the manually selected threshold, and never be refined by ICP. Since the same protocol generates both the training labels (Objaverse+ShapeNet) and the test labels (GSO, OmniObject3D), this potential systematic omission directly affects all F-scores and geodesic distances in Tables 2 and 4. Please specify the exact bounding-sphere algorithm and, if it is not the minimal enclosing sphere, replace it with the minimal enclosing sphere or provide evidence that the resulting label set does not miss off-center symmetry planes.
  2. [Section 3.1 and Section 5] The problem definition in Eq. (3) states that a symmetry plane is parameterized by both its normal n_p and its distance d_p, but the proposed detector predicts only the normal and the evaluation metrics (geodesic distance, F@threshold) are computed solely on normals. The reported results therefore do not assess the full plane detection problem, and the abstract's claim of "3D reflection symmetry detection" is stronger than what is measured. Please either evaluate the full plane parameters (for instance, by aligning the predicted plane to the mesh and measuring offset error), or clearly and prominently state that the method and evaluation are for normal-only detection, and discuss the implications for downstream applications that require the plane position.
  3. [Tables 2 and 3] No variance estimates, confidence intervals, or significance tests are reported for any quantitative result. The evaluation sets are finite (572 GSO objects and 100 OmniObject3D objects), and the improvements over the best baseline are large, so the main conclusions are likely robust, but the paper should include bootstrap confidence intervals or repeated-run standard deviations to support the state-of-the-art claim and to let readers judge the stability of the F-scores, especially at the tight F@5 threshold where the absolute numbers are small.
  4. [Section 4 and Appendix 9.1] The manual selection of the Chamfer-distance threshold and the manual inspection of a "random subset" do not rule out systematic false negatives in the labeling protocol. In particular, if the threshold is set too strictly, the protocol will label as asymmetric objects that actually have a symmetry plane whose Chamfer distance is above the threshold due to surface noise or imperfect mesh quality. Since the detector is trained against these labels, a strict threshold would penalize the detector for predicting true planes, and the reported recall values could be depressed for all methods, while the training/evaluation alignment would still favor a model trained on the same threshold. Please report the threshold value, the distribution of Chamfer distances for accepted and rejected candidates, and the results of a more systematic human evaluation on a stratified sample of both positive and negative labels.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Equation (2)] The reflection matrix has a formatting error: the top-right entry appears as "−2dpnp" without the proper row/column separation, and the matrix is not cleanly typeset. Please fix the LaTeX so that the 3x1 block and the 1x3 zero row are clear.
  2. [Table 1] In the row for the proposed dataset, the dataset name is written as "Objaverse+ ShapeNet" with an odd spacing, and the footnote marker for "Ours" is not defined. Please clean up the table formatting and explain the asterisk in the caption or text.
  3. [Section 3.3] The K-means clustering threshold is set to 30 degrees in the appendix, but no sensitivity analysis is provided. A short plot or paragraph showing the effect of varying this threshold on F-scores would help justify the choice and the claim that the method is not sensitive to it.
  4. [Figure 4] The ablation study for the single-image 3D generation pipeline is qualitative only. Since Table 3 reports quantitative metrics, it would strengthen the paper to include a small table with CHD, CLIP-Sim, and F-scores for each ablated variant, so readers can see the magnitude of each component's contribution.
  5. [Abstract and Section 1] The term "zero-shot" is used to describe the detector, but the detector is trained on a large dataset of 84,789 objects. Please clarify in the abstract or introduction that "zero-shot" refers to generalization to unseen object categories and real-world scans without fine-tuning, not to a training-free method.
  6. [Section 4] The paper states that the dataset has "more comprehensive coverage of symmetry planes" based on the higher number of symmetry planes per object, but it does not report the distribution of the number of symmetry planes per object. Adding a histogram or at least mean/median values would make this claim more transparent.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: Reflect3D is trained and evaluated on independently generated 3D symmetry labels, and the 3D-generation gains are measured with external downstream metrics.

full rationale

The paper's central derivation is a supervised detection pipeline: ground-truth symmetry plane normals are generated from 3D geometry by sampling candidate planes, computing Chamfer distance between original and reflected point clouds, thresholding, and ICP refinement (Sec. 4 and Appendix 9.1). The transformer decoder is trained with BCE classification and quaternion regression losses against those labels, and evaluation compares fresh predictions to held-out labels from GSO and OmniObject3D using geodesic F-scores. This is a standard supervised evaluation, not a reduction of predictions to fitted inputs. The multi-view aggregation step clusters independent per-view predictions with K-Means and does not fit any evaluation metric. The 3D-generation experiment is an external downstream task: symmetry is detected and then integrated into DreamGaussian, with improvements measured by CLIP-Sim, Chamfer distance, and F-scores against ground-truth meshes; no parameter is tuned to those metrics. The 'Shape to Symmetry' baseline reuses the automatic labeling routine, but that is a baseline construction and applies symmetrically to all methods. The only mild concern is that the automatic ground-truth protocol assumes symmetry planes pass through the bounding-sphere center and uses a manually selected threshold, which could bias labels for off-center or weak symmetries; however, this is a data-quality and validity concern, not circularity. The self-citation to ZeroShape for F-score evaluation is not load-bearing. No equation or design choice in the paper equates a claimed prediction to its own input by construction.

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

The central claims are empirical and rest on standard deep learning assumptions plus a custom labeling protocol; no physical entities are introduced. The most substantive choices are the manual threshold in ground truth generation and the hyperparameters controlling the symmetry hypothesis discretization and multi-view aggregation.

free parameters (5)
  • Chamfer distance threshold for ground truth symmetry = not specified numerically (manually selected)
    Appendix 9.1: threshold chosen after examining results to align with human perception; affects all training and evaluation labels.
  • Number of symmetry hypotheses N = 31
    Section 3.5 sets N=31 to discretize the normal space; paper claims minimal impact but it defines the output resolution.
  • Clustering threshold in multi-view aggregation = 30 degrees
    Appendix 9.2: K-Means aggregation uses 30-degree threshold; affects final symmetry predictions.
  • Number of generated multi-views M = 8
    Appendix 9.2 sets M=8; performance said to saturate, but this is a chosen hyperparameter.
  • Loss weights for classification and regression heads = 1.0 and 0.1
    Appendix 9.2: weighting between BCE and MSE, influences precision/recall balance of detector.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption DINOv2 features encode 3D geometric information relevant to symmetry detection.
    Section 3.2 relies on prior work [3,45] showing DINOv2 is sensitive to 3D spatial features; the paper's own ablation replacing DINOv2 with ViT supports this but the premise is taken from the literature.
  • domain assumption Multi-view diffusion models produce sufficiently consistent novel views for symmetry aggregation.
    Section 3.3 assumes generated surrounding views preserve object identity and geometry; CLIP filtering is used but the core premise is that generative priors resolve single-view ambiguity.
  • standard math Chamfer distance between reflected and original point clouds is a valid proxy for symmetry planes.
    Appendix 9.1 uses Chamfer distance to detect symmetric planes; this is a standard geometric tool, and the threshold is chosen manually.
  • standard math ICP refinement converges to the correct symmetry plane for roughly aligned point clouds.
    Appendix 9.1 and Section 3.4 rely on ICP to refine symmetry planes; this assumes appropriate initialization and no poor local minima.
  • domain assumption The GSO and OmniObject3D symmetric subsets are representative of real-world symmetric objects.
    Section 4 evaluates on all symmetric GSO objects and a random OmniObject3D subset; generalization to in-the-wild images is inferred from these datasets.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Symmetry Strikes Back: From Single-Image Symmetry Detection to 3D Generation." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/SYFKJE6Y

@misc{pith2026241117763,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Symmetry Strikes Back: From Single-Image Symmetry Detection to 3D Generation},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/SYFKJE6Y}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2411.17763}
}
read the original abstract

Symmetry is a ubiquitous and fundamental property in the visual world, serving as a critical cue for perception and structure interpretation. This paper investigates the detection of 3D reflection symmetry from a single RGB image, and reveals its significant benefit on single-image 3D generation. We introduce Reflect3D, a scalable, zero-shot symmetry detector capable of robust generalization to diverse and real-world scenarios. Inspired by the success of foundation models, our method scales up symmetry detection with a transformer-based architecture. We also leverage generative priors from multi-view diffusion models to address the inherent ambiguity in single-view symmetry detection. Extensive evaluations on various data sources demonstrate that Reflect3D establishes a new state-of-the-art in single-image symmetry detection. Furthermore, we show the practical benefit of incorporating detected symmetry into single-image 3D generation pipelines through a symmetry-aware optimization process. The integration of symmetry significantly enhances the structural accuracy, cohesiveness, and visual fidelity of the reconstructed 3D geometry and textures, advancing the capabilities of 3D content creation.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2411.17763 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. We propose Reflect3D, a zero-shot 3D reflection symmetry detector capable of accurately detecting 3D symmetry from a single [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p001_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Overview of Reflect3D, our zero-shot single-image symmetry detector. Top: Our transformer-based feed-forward symmetry [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Our symmetry-aware 3D generation pipeline (Section [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (2 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Ablation studies for our single-image 3D generation [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Qualitative results for our symmetry-conditioned single [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_6.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

49 extracted references · 37 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Stable Zero123, 2023

    Stability AI. Stable Zero123, 2023. 7

    work page 2023

  2. [2]

    Mikhail J. Atallah. On symmetry detection. IEEE Transac- tions on Computers, 1985. 2

    work page 1985

  3. [3]

    Matching 2d images in 3d: Metric relative pose from metric correspondences

    Axel Barroso-Laguna, Sowmya Munukutla, Victor Prisacariu, and Eric Brachmann. Matching 2d images in 3d: Metric relative pose from metric correspondences. In CVPR, 2024. 4

    work page 2024

  4. [4]

    Language models are few-shot learners

    Tom Brown, Benjamin Mann, Nick Ryder, Melanie Sub- biah, Jared D Kaplan, Prafulla Dhariwal, Arvind Neelakan- tan, Pranav Shyam, Girish Sastry, Amanda Askell, Sand- hini Agarwal, Ariel Herbert-V oss, Gretchen Krueger, Tom Henighan, Rewon Child, Aditya Ramesh, Daniel Ziegler, Jeffrey Wu, Clemens Winter, Chris Hesse, Mark Chen, Eric Sigler, Mateusz Litwin, S...

    work page 2020

  5. [5]

    Shapenet: An information-rich 3d model repository

    Angel X Chang, Thomas Funkhouser, Leonidas Guibas, Pat Hanrahan, Qixing Huang, Zimo Li, Silvio Savarese, Mano- lis Savva, Shuran Song, Hao Su, et al. Shapenet: An information-rich 3d model repository. ArXiv, 2015. 2, 6

    work page 2015

  6. [6]

    Objaverse: A universe of annotated 3d objects

    Matt Deitke, Dustin Schwenk, Jordi Salvador, Luca Weihs, Oscar Michel, Eli VanderBilt, Ludwig Schmidt, Kiana Ehsani, Aniruddha Kembhavi, and Ali Farhadi. Objaverse: A universe of annotated 3d objects. In CVPR, 2023. 2, 6

    work page 2023

  7. [7]

    Google scanned objects: A high- quality dataset of 3d scanned household items

    Laura Downs, Anthony Francis, Nate Koenig, Brandon Kin- man, Ryan Hickman, Krista Reymann, Thomas B McHugh, and Vincent Vanhoucke. Google scanned objects: A high- quality dataset of 3d scanned household items. In ICRA,

  8. [8]

    Prs-net: Planar reflective symmetry detection net for 3d models

    Lin Gao, Ling-Xiao Zhang, Hsien-Yu Meng, Yi-Hui Ren, Yu-Kun Lai, and Leif Kobbelt. Prs-net: Planar reflective symmetry detection net for 3d models. TVCG, 2020. 2

    work page 2020

Show all 49 references
  1. [9]

    Lvis: A dataset for large vocabulary instance segmentation

    Agrim Gupta, Piotr Dollar, and Ross Girshick. Lvis: A dataset for large vocabulary instance segmentation. InCVPR,

  2. [10]

    Lrm: Large reconstruction model for single image to 3d

    Yicong Hong, Kai Zhang, Jiuxiang Gu, Sai Bi, Yang Zhou, Difan Liu, Feng Liu, Kalyan Sunkavalli, Trung Bui, and Hao Tan. Lrm: Large reconstruction model for single image to 3d. In ICLR, 2024. 2

    2024

  3. [11]

    Zeroshape: Regression-based zero-shot shape reconstruction

    Zixuan Huang, Stefan Stojanov, Anh Thai, Varun Jampani, and James M Rehg. Zeroshape: Regression-based zero-shot shape reconstruction. In CVPR, 2024. 2, 7

    2024

  4. [12]

    Robust symmetry detection via riemannian langevin dynamics

    Jihyeon Je, Jiayi Liu, Guandao Yang, Boyang Deng, Shengqu Cai, Gordon Wetzstein, Or Litany, and Leonidas Guibas. Robust symmetry detection via riemannian langevin dynamics. In SIGGRAPH Asia, 2024. 2

    2024

  5. [13]

    A fast and efficient 3d reflection symmetry detector based on neural networks

    Penglei Ji and Xinguo Liu. A fast and efficient 3d reflection symmetry detector based on neural networks. Multimedia Tools and Applications, 2019. 2

    2019

  6. [14]

    Shap-e: Generating condi- tional 3d implicit functions

    Heewoo Jun and Alex Nichol. Shap-e: Generating condi- tional 3d implicit functions. ArXiv, 2023. 2

    2023

  7. [15]

    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. In SIGGRAPH, 2023. 3

    2023

  8. [16]

    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 ICCV, 2023. 2

    2023

  9. [17]

    Detecting symmetry in grey level images: The global optimization approach

    Nahum Kiryati and Yossi Gofman. Detecting symmetry in grey level images: The global optimization approach. IJCV,

  10. [18]

    Ln3diff: Scalable latent neural fields diffusion for speedy 3d generation

    Yushi Lan, Fangzhou Hong, Shuai Yang, Shangchen Zhou, Xuyi Meng, Bo Dai, Xingang Pan, and Chen Change Loy. Ln3diff: Scalable latent neural fields diffusion for speedy 3d generation. In ECCV, 2024. 2

    2024

  11. [19]

    E3sym: Leveraging e(3) invariance for unsu- pervised 3d planar reflective symmetry detection

    Ren-Wu Li, Ling-Xiao Zhang, Chun-Peng Li, Yu-Kun Lai, and Lin Gao. E3sym: Leveraging e(3) invariance for unsu- pervised 3d planar reflective symmetry detection. In ICCV,

  12. [20]

    Nerd++: Improved 3d-mirror symmetry learning from a sin- gle image

    Yancong Lin, Silvia-Laura Pintea, and Jan van Gemert. Nerd++: Improved 3d-mirror symmetry learning from a sin- gle image. In BMVC, 2022. 2, 6

    2022

  13. [21]

    Zero-1-to-3: Zero-shot one image to 3d object

    Ruoshi Liu, Rundi Wu, Basile Van Hoorick, Pavel Tok- makov, Sergey Zakharov, and Carl V ondrick. Zero-1-to-3: Zero-shot one image to 3d object. In ICCV, 2023. 2

    2023

  14. [22]

    Lorensen and Harvey E

    William E. Lorensen and Harvey E. Cline. Marching cubes: a high resolution 3d surface construction algorithm. In SIG- GRAPH, 1998. 4

    1998

  15. [23]

    Symmetry and uncertainty-aware object slam for 6dof object pose estimation

    Nathaniel Merrill, Yuliang Guo, Xingxing Zuo, Xinyu Huang, Stefan Leutenegger, Xi Peng, Liu Ren, and Guo- quan Huang. Symmetry and uncertainty-aware object slam for 6dof object pose estimation. In CVPR, 2022. 2

    2022

  16. [24]

    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. In ECCV, 2020. 2

    2020

  17. [25]

    Guibas, and Mark Pauly

    Niloy Jyoti Mitra, Leonidas J. Guibas, and Mark Pauly. Par- tial and approximate symmetry detection for 3d geometry. In SIGGRAPH, 2006. 2

    2006

  18. [26]

    Dinov2: Learning robust visual features without supervision

    Maxime Oquab, Timoth ´ee Darcet, Th ´eo Moutakanni, Huy V o, Marc Szafraniec, Vasil Khalidov, Pierre Fernandez, Daniel Haziza, Francisco Massa, Alaaeldin El-Nouby, et al. Dinov2: Learning robust visual features without supervision. TMLR, 2024. 2, 4

    2024

  19. [27]

    Barron, and Ben Milden- hall

    Ben Poole, Ajay Jain, Jonathan T. Barron, and Ben Milden- hall. Dreamfusion: Text-to-3d using 2d diffusion. In ICLR,

  20. [28]

    Learn- ing transferable visual models from natural language super- vision

    Alec Radford, Jong Wook Kim, Chris Hallacy, Aditya Ramesh, Gabriel Goh, Sandhini Agarwal, Girish Sastry, Amanda Askell, Pamela Mishkin, Jack Clark, et al. Learn- ing transferable visual models from natural language super- vision. In ICML, 2021. 4

    2021

  21. [29]

    Robust speech recognition via large-scale weak supervision

    Alec Radford, Jong Wook Kim, Tao Xu, Greg Brockman, Christine McLeavey, and Ilya Sutskever. Robust speech recognition via large-scale weak supervision. In ICML,

  22. [30]

    Symmetrynet: Learning to pre- dict reflectional and rotational symmetries of 3d shapes from single-view rgb-d images

    Yifei Shi, Junwen Huang, Hongjia Zhang, Xin Xu, Szymon Rusinkiewicz, and Kai Xu. Symmetrynet: Learning to pre- dict reflectional and rotational symmetries of 3d shapes from single-view rgb-d images. ACM TOG, 2020. 2, 5, 6 9

    2020

  23. [31]

    Symmetrygrasp: Symmetry-aware antipo- dal grasp detection from single-view rgb-d images

    Yifei Shi, Zixin Tang, Xiangting Cai, Hongjia Zhang, Dewen Hu, and Xin Xu. Symmetrygrasp: Symmetry-aware antipo- dal grasp detection from single-view rgb-d images. IEEE RA-L, 2022. 2

    2022

  24. [32]

    Learning to detect 3d symmetry from single-view rgb-d images with weak supervision

    Yifei Shi, Xin Xu, Junhua Xi, Xiaochang Hu, Dewen Hu, and Kai Xu. Learning to detect 3d symmetry from single-view rgb-d images with weak supervision. IEEE TPAMI, 2022. 2

    2022

  25. [33]

    Lgm: Large multi-view gaus- sian model for high-resolution 3d content creation

    Jiaxiang Tang, Zhaoxi Chen, Xiaokang Chen, Tengfei Wang, Gang Zeng, and Ziwei Liu. Lgm: Large multi-view gaus- sian model for high-resolution 3d content creation. InECCV,

  26. [34]

    Dreamgaussian: Generative gaussian splatting for ef- ficient 3d content creation

    Jiaxiang Tang, Jiawei Ren, Hang Zhou, Ziwei Liu, and Gang Zeng. Dreamgaussian: Generative gaussian splatting for ef- ficient 3d content creation. In ICLR, 2024. 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11

    2024

  27. [35]

    Behind the looking-glass: A re- view on human symmetry perception

    Matthias Sebastian Treder. Behind the looking-glass: A re- view on human symmetry perception. Symmetry, 2010. 2

    2010

  28. [36]

    Crm: Single image to 3d textured mesh with convolu- tional reconstruction model

    Zhengyi Wang, Yikai Wang, Yifei Chen, Chendong Xiang, Shuo Chen, Dajiang Yu, Chongxuan Li, Hang Su, and Jun Zhu. Crm: Single image to 3d textured mesh with convolu- tional reconstruction model. In ECCV, 2024. 2

    2024

  29. [37]

    Optimal algorithms for symmetry detection in two and three dimen- sions

    Jan D Wolter, Tony C Woo, and Richard A V olz. Optimal algorithms for symmetry detection in two and three dimen- sions. The Visual Computer, 1985. 2

    1985

  30. [38]

    Unsupervised learning of probably symmetric deformable 3d objects from images in the wild

    Shangzhe Wu, Christian Rupprecht, and Andrea Vedaldi. Unsupervised learning of probably symmetric deformable 3d objects from images in the wild. In CVPR, 2020. 2, 3

    2020

  31. [39]

    De-rendering the world’s revolutionary artefacts

    Shangzhe Wu, Ameesh Makadia, Jiajun Wu, Noah Snavely, Richard Tucker, and Angjoo Kanazawa. De-rendering the world’s revolutionary artefacts. In CVPR, 2021. 2, 3

    2021

  32. [40]

    Omniobject3d: Large-vocabulary 3d object dataset for realistic perception, reconstruction and generation

    Tong Wu, Jiarui Zhang, Xiao Fu, Yuxin Wang, Liang Pan Jiawei Ren, Wayne Wu, Lei Yang, Jiaqi Wang, Chen Qian, Dahua Lin, and Ziwei Liu. Omniobject3d: Large-vocabulary 3d object dataset for realistic perception, reconstruction and generation. In CVPR, 2023. 2, 6

    2023

  33. [41]

    Ladybird: Quasi-monte carlo sampling for deep implicit field based 3d reconstruction with symmetry

    Yifan Xu, Tianqi Fan, Yi Yuan, and Gurprit Singh. Ladybird: Quasi-monte carlo sampling for deep implicit field based 3d reconstruction with symmetry. In ECCV, 2020. 2, 3

    2020

  34. [42]

    Yang, Kun Huang, Shankar Rao, Wei Hong, and Yi Ma

    Allen Y . Yang, Kun Huang, Shankar Rao, Wei Hong, and Yi Ma. Symmetry-based 3-d reconstruction from perspective images. In CVIU, 2005. 3

    2005

  35. [43]

    Front2back: Single view 3d shape reconstruction via front to back prediction

    Yuan Yao, Nico Schertler, Enrique Rosales, Helge Rhodin, Leonid Sigal, and Alla Sheffer. Front2back: Single view 3d shape reconstruction via front to back prediction. In CVPR,

  36. [44]

    Symmetry as a continuous feature

    Hagit Zabrodsky, Shmuel Peleg, and David Avnir. Symmetry as a continuous feature. IEEE TPAMI, 1995. 2

    1995

  37. [45]

    A tale of two features: Stable diffusion complements dino for zero-shot semantic correspondence

    Junyi Zhang, Charles Herrmann, Junhwa Hur, Luisa Pola- nia Cabrera, Varun Jampani, Deqing Sun, and Ming-Hsuan Yang. A tale of two features: Stable diffusion complements dino for zero-shot semantic correspondence. In NeurIPS,

  38. [46]

    Single depth-image 3d reflection symmetry and shape prediction

    Zhaoxuan Zhang, Bo Dong, Tong Li, Felix Heide, Pieter Peers, Baocai Yin, and Xin Yang. Single depth-image 3d reflection symmetry and shape prediction. In ICCV, 2023. 2

    2023

  39. [47]

    Learning symmetry-aware geometry correspondences for 6d object pose estimation

    Heng Zhao, Shenxing Wei, Dahu Shi, Wenming Tan, Zheyang Li, Ye Ren, Xing Wei, Yi Yang, and Shiliang Pu. Learning symmetry-aware geometry correspondences for 6d object pose estimation. In ICCV, 2023. 2

    2023

  40. [48]

    NeRD: Neural 3d reflection symmetry detector

    Yichao Zhou, Shichen Liu, and Yi Ma. NeRD: Neural 3d reflection symmetry detector. In CVPR, 2021. 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 10

    2021

  41. [49]

    All refer- ences and citations in this supplementary document refer to the main paper

    Appendix In this appendix, we present 1) a detailed description of our ground truth symmetry plane generation method; 2) more implementation details for our Reflect3D symmetry detec- tor and our single-image 3D generation pipeline. All refer- ences and citations in this supple...

Pith tools

Reviewed August 12, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.