Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 1 minor 41 references

AugSplat uses a radiance field trained on sparse inputs to synthesize auxiliary views that improve Gaussian Splatting optimization.

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

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

AugSplat augments Gaussian Splatting with synthetic views from a pre-trained radiance field to improve sparse-view reconstruction quality on mip-NeRF 360 scenes while keeping real-time rendering.

T0 review reviewed 2026-07-01 challenge →

load-bearing objection AugSplat adds synthetic views from a sparse-trained radiance field to supervise Gaussian Splatting, with staged and dual variants, but the abstract gives no numbers so the gains are unverified. the 2 major comments →

arxiv 2606.31556 v1 pith:XFAEIHBJ submitted 2026-06-30 cs.CV

AugSplat: Radiance Field-Informed Gaussian Splatting for Sparse-View Settings

Lorenzo Lazzaroni , Riccardo Bollati , Daniel Barath , Michael Niemeyer , Keisuke Tateno This is my paper
classification cs.CV
keywords Gaussian SplattingRadiance FieldsSparse-view ReconstructionView AugmentationNovel View Synthesis3D ReconstructionReal-time Rendering
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

The reading

The paper shows that a radiance field trained on limited real views can generate synthetic images from nearby novel viewpoints, and these images serve as extra supervision during Gaussian Splatting training. This matters because standard Gaussian Splatting optimization degrades when initial geometry from sparse views is incomplete or noisy, while radiance fields handle sparsity more robustly but render too slowly for real-time use. Combining the two through staged or dual supervision produces higher-quality reconstructions that still run at real-time speeds at inference. Experiments on sparse-view mip-NeRF 360 scenes confirm gains over plain Gaussian Splatting, with the staged variant performing best on average.

Core claim

A radiance field is first trained on the given sparse real views. It then synthesizes additional images from nearby novel viewpoints that increase view-space coverage. These synthetic images supply auxiliary supervision to Gaussian Splatting: Staged AugSplat optimizes first on the synthetic set before switching to real images, while Dual AugSplat trains jointly on both sets with a decaying weight on the synthetic loss. Both variants raise reconstruction quality on sparse-view mip-NeRF 360 scenes relative to standard Gaussian Splatting while preserving real-time rasterization at test time.

What carries the argument

Radiance field-informed view augmentation: a radiance field trained on sparse real views generates synthetic images used as auxiliary supervision for Gaussian Splatting optimization.

Load-bearing premise

The radiance field trained on the sparse real views produces synthetic images of high enough quality to supply beneficial auxiliary supervision without introducing artifacts that degrade the final Gaussian Splatting model.

What would settle it

A direct comparison showing that Gaussian Splatting models trained with the added synthetic views achieve lower PSNR, SSIM, or LPIPS scores than models trained only on the original sparse real views would falsify the benefit of the augmentation.

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

If this is right

  • Staged AugSplat reaches the highest average performance across the tested sparse-view scenes.
  • Dual AugSplat delivers nearly matching quality while keeping real-image supervision active throughout training.
  • Both variants outperform standard Gaussian Splatting without sacrificing real-time rendering speed.
  • The approach increases effective view coverage available for supervision in sparse regimes.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The same augmentation pattern could be tested on other fast-rendering methods that also depend on good initial geometry.
  • Applying the staged schedule to progressively sparser input sets would reveal how much view density the radiance field can compensate for.
  • The method implicitly suggests that any slow but robust sparse-view reconstructor could bootstrap a faster one through synthetic data.
  • Real-world captures with uneven camera distributions would be a direct test of whether the synthesized views remain helpful outside controlled benchmarks.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

2 major / 1 minor

Summary. The paper introduces AugSplat, a framework that trains a radiance field on sparse input views to synthesize additional images from novel viewpoints, which are then used as auxiliary supervision for Gaussian Splatting optimization. Two variants are studied: Staged AugSplat (initial optimization on synthetic views followed by real-image supervision) and Dual AugSplat (joint optimization with a decaying weight on the synthetic loss). The central claim, based on experiments with sparse-view mip-NeRF 360 scenes, is that both variants improve reconstruction quality over standard Gaussian Splatting, with the staged variant achieving the strongest average performance, while preserving real-time rasterization at inference.

Significance. If the empirical results hold and the synthetic views prove beneficial without introducing harmful artifacts, the work provides a simple, practical bridge between radiance fields and Gaussian Splatting for sparse-view regimes. The explicit comparison of staged versus dual supervision schedules is a useful design contribution, and the emphasis on maintaining real-time inference is aligned with application needs.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: The statement that 'Experiments on sparse-view mip-NeRF 360 scenes show that AugSplat improves reconstruction quality over standard Gaussian Splatting' and that 'Staged AugSplat achieves the strongest average performance' is presented without any quantitative metrics (PSNR, SSIM, LPIPS), baseline tables, or error analysis. This absence makes the central empirical claim impossible to evaluate from the provided information.
  2. [Method / Experiments] Method description (and Experiments section): No quantitative validation is supplied that the radiance field, trained only on the sparse real views, produces synthetic images whose geometry and appearance are sufficiently accurate to serve as auxiliary supervision. In particular, there is no reported correlation between radiance-field quality on held-out real views and the observed GS improvement, leaving the key assumption that synthetic views are net beneficial (rather than artifact-inducing) untested.
minor comments (1)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract would be clearer if it briefly named the evaluation metrics and the number of scenes or views used in the mip-NeRF 360 experiments.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive comments on our manuscript. Below we provide point-by-point responses to the major comments and indicate the revisions we will make.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: The statement that 'Experiments on sparse-view mip-NeRF 360 scenes show that AugSplat improves reconstruction quality over standard Gaussian Splatting' and that 'Staged AugSplat achieves the strongest average performance' is presented without any quantitative metrics (PSNR, SSIM, LPIPS), baseline tables, or error analysis. This absence makes the central empirical claim impossible to evaluate from the provided information.

    Authors: We agree that the abstract would be strengthened by including concrete quantitative results. In the revised version we will update the abstract to report the key average improvements (e.g., PSNR, SSIM, LPIPS) achieved by Staged and Dual AugSplat relative to standard Gaussian Splatting on the sparse-view mip-NeRF 360 scenes, with explicit references to the corresponding tables. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Method / Experiments] Method description (and Experiments section): No quantitative validation is supplied that the radiance field, trained only on the sparse real views, produces synthetic images whose geometry and appearance are sufficiently accurate to serve as auxiliary supervision. In particular, there is no reported correlation between radiance-field quality on held-out real views and the observed GS improvement, leaving the key assumption that synthetic views are net beneficial (rather than artifact-inducing) untested.

    Authors: The observation is correct: the current manuscript does not provide a direct quantitative assessment of radiance-field accuracy on held-out views or a correlation analysis with the observed Gaussian Splatting gains. While the end-to-end improvements serve as indirect support, we acknowledge that an explicit validation would be valuable. We will add a short analysis in the Experiments section that reports radiance-field metrics on held-out real views and examines their relationship to the final reconstruction quality. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: empirical augmentation method with independent supervision sources

full rationale

The paper presents AugSplat as a practical pipeline: train a radiance field on the given sparse real views, synthesize additional images from novel viewpoints, and use those as auxiliary supervision (either staged or dual-weighted) while optimizing Gaussian Splatting. No derivation chain, first-principles prediction, or fitted parameter is claimed to produce a result that is definitionally equivalent to the inputs. The reported gains are empirical measurements on mip-NeRF 360 scenes; the quality of the radiance-field synthetics is an external, falsifiable assumption rather than a self-referential fit. No self-citation is invoked as a uniqueness theorem or load-bearing premise, and the method does not rename a known result or smuggle an ansatz. The approach is therefore self-contained against external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

Only the abstract is available, limiting extraction to the high-level domain assumption that enables the core method.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption A radiance field trained on sparse input views can synthesize additional novel viewpoints that are useful for supervising Gaussian Splatting.
    This premise is required for the view augmentation step described in the abstract.

reviewed 2026-07-01 · how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of AugSplat: Radiance Field-Informed Gaussian Splatting for Sparse-View Settings." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/XFAEIHBJ

@misc{pith2026260631556,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: AugSplat: Radiance Field-Informed Gaussian Splatting for Sparse-View Settings},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/XFAEIHBJ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2606.31556}
}
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN
read the original abstract

Generating high-quality novel views at real-time frame rates remains a central challenge in 3D vision, particularly in sparse-view scenarios. Neural radiance fields have demonstrated robust reconstruction from limited observations, but their reliance on volumetric rendering leads to high computational cost and slow inference. In contrast, Gaussian Splatting methods achieve real-time rendering through rasterization, but their optimization is highly sensitive to the quality of the initial geometry. This sensitivity becomes especially problematic in sparse-view settings, where limited observations often lead to incomplete or noisy point-cloud reconstructions. In this work, we present AugSplat, a simple framework for improving Gaussian Splatting in sparse-view regimes using radiance-field-based view augmentation. We first train a radiance field on the sparse input views and use it to synthesize additional images from nearby novel viewpoints, increasing the effective view-space coverage available for supervision. These synthetic views are then used as auxiliary supervision during Gaussian Splatting optimization. We study two variants: Staged AugSplat, which uses synthetic views for an initial optimization phase before switching to real images, and Dual AugSplat, which jointly trains on real and synthetic views with a decaying synthetic loss weight. Experiments on sparse-view mip-NeRF 360 scenes show that AugSplat improves reconstruction quality over standard Gaussian Splatting. Staged AugSplat achieves the strongest average performance, while Dual AugSplat provides a closely performing formulation that keeps real-image supervision active throughout training, and both variants preserve real-time rendering at inference.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2606.31556 by Daniel Barath, Keisuke Tateno, Lorenzo Lazzaroni, Michael Niemeyer, Riccardo Bollati.

Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Example NeRF-rendered synthetic view and correspond [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Overview of the AugSplat pipeline. rotation. Rendering is performed by rasterizing and alpha￾compositing visible Gaussians: cGS = X G g=1 cgαgτg, (8) with transmittance defined analogously to NeRF. While enabling efficient real-time rendering, 3DGS re￾lies on an explicit set of primitives initialized from re￾constructed geometry. Although densification can add new primitives during training, the optimizati… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Visual comparison between Staged AugSplat and standard GSplat on the kitchen and garden scenes. In the kitchen scene, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Training dynamics on the stump scene. The combined [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Detailed training dynamics for PSNR, SSIM, and LPIPS on a representative sparse-view scene. PSNR and SSIM peak early and [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_5.png] view at source ↗

discussion (0)

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

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

41 extracted references · 41 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Barron, Ben Mildenhall, Matthew Tancik, Peter Hedman, Ricardo Martin-Brualla, and Pratul P

    Jonathan T. Barron, Ben Mildenhall, Matthew Tancik, Peter Hedman, Ricardo Martin-Brualla, and Pratul P. Srinivasan. Mip-nerf: A multiscale representation for anti-aliasing neu- ral radiance fields. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Interna- tional Conference on Computer Vision, 2021. 5

    work page 2021

  2. [2]

    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. InCVPR, 2022. 2, 5

    work page 2022

  3. [3]

    Barron, Ben Mildenhall, Dor Verbin, Pratul P

    Jonathan T. Barron, Ben Mildenhall, Dor Verbin, Pratul P. Srinivasan, and Peter Hedman. Zip-nerf: Anti-aliased grid- based neural radiance fields. InICCV, 2023. 2

    work page 2023

  4. [4]

    Learning implicit fields for generative shape modeling

    Zhiqin Chen and Hao Zhang. Learning implicit fields for generative shape modeling. InCVPR, 2019. 1

    work page 2019

  5. [5]

    Luciddreamer: Domain-free genera- tion of 3d gaussian splatting scenes.IEEE transactions on visualization and computer graphics, PP, 2025

    Jaeyoung Chung, Suyoung Lee, Hyeongjin Nam, Lee Jaerin, and Kyoung Mu Lee. Luciddreamer: Domain-free genera- tion of 3d gaussian splatting scenes.IEEE transactions on visualization and computer graphics, PP, 2025. 2

    work page 2025

  6. [6]

    Headgas: Real-time animatable head avatars via 3d gaussian splatting

    Helisa Dhamo, Yinyu Nie, Arthur Moreau, Jifei Song, Richard Shaw, Yiren Zhou, and Eduardo P ´erez-Pellitero. Headgas: Real-time animatable head avatars via 3d gaussian splatting. InComputer Vision – ECCV 2024, pages 459–476. Springer Nature Switzerland, 2024. 2

    work page 2024

  7. [7]

    Putting nerf on a diet: Semantically consistent few-shot view synthesis

    Ajay Jain, Matthew Tancik, and Pieter Abbeel. Putting nerf on a diet: Semantically consistent few-shot view synthesis. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV), pages 5885–5894, 2021. 1

    work page 2021

  8. [8]

    3d gaussian splatting for real-time radiance field rendering.SIGGRAPH, 2023

    Bernhard Kerbl, Georgios Kopanas, Thomas Leimk ¨uhler, and George Drettakis. 3d gaussian splatting for real-time radiance field rendering.SIGGRAPH, 2023. 1, 2

    work page 2023

  9. [9]

    Dngaussian: Optimizing sparse-view 3d gaussian radiance fields with global-local depth normaliza- tion

    Jiahe Li, Jiawei Zhang, Xiao Bai, Jin Zheng, Xin Ning, Jun Zhou, and Lin Gu. Dngaussian: Optimizing sparse-view 3d gaussian radiance fields with global-local depth normaliza- tion. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Com- puter Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), pages 20775– 20785, 2024. 2

    work page 2024

  10. [10]

    Sgs-slam: Se- mantic gaussian splatting for neural dense slam

    Mingrui Li, Shuhong Liu, Heng Zhou, Guohao Zhu, Na Cheng, Tianchen Deng, and Hongyu Wang. Sgs-slam: Se- mantic gaussian splatting for neural dense slam. InEuropean Conference on Computer Vision, pages 163–179. Springer,

    work page

  11. [11]

    Scaffold-gs: Structured 3d gaussians for view-adaptive rendering

    Tao Lu, Mulin Yu, Linning Xu, Yuanbo Xiangli, Limin Wang, Dahua Lin, and Bo Dai. Scaffold-gs: Structured 3d gaussians for view-adaptive rendering. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 20654–20664, 2024. 2

    work page 2024

  12. [12]

    Gaussian splat- ting with nerf-based color and opacity.Computer Vision and Image Understanding, 251, 2025

    Dawid Malarz, Weronika Smolak-Dy ˙zewska, Jacek Tabor, Sławomir Tadeja, and Przemysław Spurek. Gaussian splat- ting with nerf-based color and opacity.Computer Vision and Image Understanding, 251, 2025. 2

    work page 2025

  13. [13]

    Ricardo Martin-Brualla, Noha Radwan, Mehdi S. M. Sajjadi, Jonathan T. Barron, Alexey Dosovitskiy, and Daniel Duck- worth. Nerf in the wild: Neural radiance fields for uncon- strained photo collections. InCVPR, 2021. 1

    work page 2021

  14. [14]

    Gaussian splatting slam

    Hidenobu Matsuki, Riku Murai, Paul HJ Kelly, and Andrew J Davison. Gaussian splatting slam. InCVPR, 2024. 2

    work page 2024

  15. [15]

    Occupancy networks: Learning 3d reconstruction in function space

    Lars Mescheder, Michael Oechsle, Michael Niemeyer, Se- bastian Nowozin, and Andreas Geiger. Occupancy networks: Learning 3d reconstruction in function space. InCVPR,

    work page

  16. [16]

    Splatfields: Neural gaussian splats for sparse 3d and 4d re- construction

    Marko Mihajlovic, Sergey Prokudin, Siyu Tang, Robert Maier, Federica Bogo, Tony Tung, and Edmond Boyer. Splatfields: Neural gaussian splats for sparse 3d and 4d re- construction. InEuropean Conference on Computer Vision (ECCV). Springer, 2024. 2

    work page 2024

  17. [17]

    Srinivasan, Matthew Tancik, Jonathan T

    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. InECCV, 2020. 1, 2

    work page 2020

  18. [18]

    Human gaussian splatting: Real-time rendering of animatable avatars

    Arthur Moreau, Jifei Song, Helisa Dhamo, Richard Shaw, Yiren Zhou, and Eduardo P ´erez-Pellitero. Human gaussian splatting: Real-time rendering of animatable avatars. In CVPR, 2024. 2

    work page 2024

  19. [19]

    Instant neural graphics primitives with a multires- olution hash encoding.ACM Trans

    Thomas M ¨uller, Alex Evans, Christoph Schied, and Alexan- der Keller. Instant neural graphics primitives with a multires- olution hash encoding.ACM Trans. Graph., 41(4):102:1– 102:15, 2022. 2

    work page 2022

  20. [20]

    Barron, Ben Mildenhall, Mehdi S

    Michael Niemeyer, Jonathan T. Barron, Ben Mildenhall, Mehdi S. M. Sajjadi, Andreas Geiger, and Noha Radwan. Regnerf: Regularizing neural radiance fields for view syn- thesis from sparse inputs. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), pages 5480–5490, 2022. 1, 2

    work page 2022

  21. [21]

    Radsplat: Radiance field-informed gaussian splat- ting for robust real-time rendering with 900+ fps

    Michael Niemeyer, Fabian Manhardt, Marie-Julie Rakoto- saona, Michael Oechsle, Daniel Duckworth, Rama Gosula, Keisuke Tateno, John Bates, Dominik Kaeser, and Federico Tombari. Radsplat: Radiance field-informed gaussian splat- ting for robust real-time rendering with 900+ fps. In2025 International Conference on 3D Vision (3DV), pages 134– 144, 2025. 2

    work page 2025

  22. [22]

    Deepsdf: Learning con- tinuous signed distance functions for shape representation

    Jeong Joon Park, Peter Florence, Julian Straub, Richard Newcombe, and Steven Lovegrove. Deepsdf: Learning con- tinuous signed distance functions for shape representation. InCVPR, 2019. 1

    work page 2019

  23. [23]

    Gaus- sianavatars: Photorealistic head avatars with rigged 3d gaus- sians

    Shenhan Qian, Tobias Kirschstein, Liam Schoneveld, Davide Davoli, Simon Giebenhain, and Matthias Nießner. Gaus- sianavatars: Photorealistic head avatars with rigged 3d gaus- sians. InCVPR, 2024. 2

    work page 2024

  24. [24]

    Langsplat: 3d language gaussian splatting

    Minghan Qin, Wanhua Li, Jiawei Zhou, Haoqian Wang, and Hanspeter Pfister. Langsplat: 3d language gaussian splatting. InCVPR, 2024. 2

    work page 2024

  25. [25]

    Splat- slam: Globally optimized rgb-only slam with 3d gaussians

    Erik Sandstr ¨om, Ganlin Zhang, Keisuke Tateno, Michael Oechsle, Michael Niemeyer, Youmin Zhang, Manthan Patel, Luc Van Gool, Martin Oswald, and Federico Tombari. Splat- slam: Globally optimized rgb-only slam with 3d gaussians. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) Workshops, pages 1686–1697, 2025. 2

    work page 2025

  26. [26]

    Schonberger and Jan-Michael Frahm

    Johannes L. Schonberger and Jan-Michael Frahm. Structure- from-motion revisited. InProceedings of the IEEE Confer- ence on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR),

    work page

  27. [27]

    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. InCVPR, 2024. 2

    work page 2024

  28. [28]

    Nerfstudio: A modular framework for neural radiance field development

    Matthew Tancik, Ethan Weber, Evonne Ng, Ruilong Li, Brent Yi, Justin Kerr, Terrance Wang, Alexander Kristof- fersen, Jake Austin, Kamyar Salahi, Abhik Ahuja, David McAllister, and Angjoo Kanazawa. Nerfstudio: A modular framework for neural radiance field development. InACM SIGGRAPH 2023 Conference Proceedings, 2023. 5

    work page 2023

  29. [29]

    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. InICLR, 2024. 2

    work page 2024

  30. [30]

    Sparsenerf: Distilling depth ranking for few-shot novel view synthesis.IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV), 2023

    Guangcong Wang, Zhaoxi Chen, Chen Change Loy, and Zi- wei Liu. Sparsenerf: Distilling depth ranking for few-shot novel view synthesis.IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV), 2023. 2

    work page 2023

  31. [31]

    Vggsfm: Visual geometry grounded deep structure from motion

    Jianyuan Wang, Nikita Karaev, Christian Rupprecht, and David Novotny. Vggsfm: Visual geometry grounded deep structure from motion. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), pages 21686–21697, 2024. 1

    work page 2024

  32. [32]

    Vggt: Visual geometry grounded transformer

    Jianyuan Wang, Minghao Chen, Nikita Karaev, Andrea Vedaldi, Christian Rupprecht, and David Novotny. Vggt: Visual geometry grounded transformer. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2025. 5

    work page 2025

  33. [33]

    4d gaussian splatting for real-time dynamic scene rendering

    Guanjun Wu, Taoran Yi, Jiemin Fang, Lingxi Xie, Xiaopeng Zhang, Wei Wei, Wenyu Liu, Qi Tian, and Xinggang Wang. 4d gaussian splatting for real-time dynamic scene rendering. InCVPR, 2024. 2

    work page 2024

  34. [34]

    Neural fields in visual computing and beyond.Computer Graphics Forum, 41(2):641–676, 2022

    Yiheng Xie, Towaki Takikawa, Shunsuke Saito, Or Litany, Shiqin Yan, Numair Khan, Federico Tombari, James Tomp- kin, Vincent Sitzmann, and Srinath Sridhar. Neural fields in visual computing and beyond.Computer Graphics Forum, 41(2):641–676, 2022. 1

    work page 2022

  35. [35]

    Sparsegs: Sparse view synthesis using 3d gaussian splatting

    Haolin Xiong, Sairisheek Muttukuru, Hanyuan Xiao, Rishi Upadhyay, Pradyumna Chari, Yajie Zhao, and Achuta Kadambi. Sparsegs: Sparse view synthesis using 3d gaussian splatting. InProceedings of the International Conference on 3D Vision (3DV), 2025. 2

    work page 2025

  36. [36]

    4k4d: Real-time 4d view synthesis at 4k resolution

    Zhen Xu, Sida Peng, Haotong Lin, Guangzhao He, Jiaming Sun, Yujun Shen, Hujun Bao, and Xiaowei Zhou. 4k4d: Real-time 4d view synthesis at 4k resolution. InCVPR, 2024. 2

    work page 2024

  37. [37]

    Gs-slam: Dense visual slam with 3d gaussian splatting

    Chi Yan, Delin Qu, Dan Xu, Bin Zhao, Zhigang Wang, Dong Wang, and Xuelong Li. Gs-slam: Dense visual slam with 3d gaussian splatting. InCVPR, 2024. 2

    work page 2024

  38. [38]

    gsplat: An open-source library for gaussian splatting.Journal of Ma- chine Learning Research, 26(34):1–17, 2025

    Vickie Ye, Ruilong Li, Justin Kerr, Matias Turkulainen, Brent Yi, Zhuoyang Pan, Otto Seiskari, Jianbo Ye, Jeffrey Hu, Matthew Tancik, and Angjoo Kanazawa. gsplat: An open-source library for gaussian splatting.Journal of Ma- chine Learning Research, 26(34):1–17, 2025. 5

    work page 2025

  39. [39]

    Gaussiandreamer: Fast generation from text to 3d gaussians by bridging 2d and 3d diffusion models

    Taoran Yi, Jiemin Fang, Junjie Wang, Guanjun Wu, Lingxi Xie, Xiaopeng Zhang, Wenyu Liu, Qi Tian, and Xinggang Wang. Gaussiandreamer: Fast generation from text to 3d gaussians by bridging 2d and 3d diffusion models. InCVPR,

    work page

  40. [40]

    pixelnerf: Neural radiance fields from one or few images

    Alex Yu, Vickie Ye, Matthew Tancik, and Angjoo Kanazawa. pixelnerf: Neural radiance fields from one or few images. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), pages 4578–4587,

    work page

  41. [41]

    Gps- gaussian: Generalizable pixel-wise 3d gaussian splatting for real-time human novel view synthesis

    Shunyuan Zheng, Boyao Zhou, Ruizhi Shao, Boning Liu, Shengping Zhang, Liqiang Nie, and Yebin Liu. Gps- gaussian: Generalizable pixel-wise 3d gaussian splatting for real-time human novel view synthesis. InCVPR, 2024. 2

    work page 2024

This paper was first reviewed by grok-4.3 on July 1, 2026.