Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 1 cited by

Plausible human motion can be encoded as the zero-level set of three neural distance fields on the rotation manifold, and that prior generalizes across denoising, in-betweening, and observation fitting.

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 ↗

T0 review · deepseek-v4-flash

2026-08-04 18:45 UTC pith:EEIGDA2T

load-bearing objection A credible new coupling of pose/transition/acceleration NDFs with consistent held-out gains, kept from independent verifiability by an undefined baseline, a missing adaptive-step algorithm, and an integrator inconsistency. the 4 major comments →

arxiv 2509.09667 v1 pith:EEIGDA2T submitted 2025-09-11 cs.CV

Geometric Neural Distance Fields for Learning Human Motion Priors

Zhengdi Yu , Simone Foti , Linguang Zhang , Amy Zhao , Cem Keskin , Stefanos Zafeiriou , Tolga Birdal This is my paper
classification cs.CV
keywords neural distance fieldshuman motion priorRiemannian geometrySO(3)motion denoisingmotion in-betweeningacceleration priortest-time optimization
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.

This paper tries to establish that a generative human-motion prior can be built by representing plausible poses, velocities, and accelerations as the zero-level sets of three neural distance fields defined on the Riemannian product space of joint rotations. The authors argue that such a prior, unlike VAE- or diffusion-based alternatives, is a single object that can be plugged into test-time optimization, generation, and in-betweening without task-specific training. They back this with a projection algorithm that maps noisy states onto the learned manifold and a geometric integrator that rolls out realistic trajectories, reporting consistent improvements on denoising, partial-observation fitting, in-the-wild recovery, and motion synthesis.

Core claim

NRMF models the space of plausible motions as S = {X | fΓ(X)=0}, where the state X includes root translation, joint rotations θ, angular velocities θ̇, and angular accelerations θ̈. The function fΓ is the concatenation of three neural distance fields — a pose field, a transition field conditioned on pose, and an acceleration field conditioned on pose and velocity — each trained to regress the geodesic distance to the nearest training example. Projection onto S is performed by the RMF-Grad update, which uses Riemannian gradients and exponential maps on SO(3), and motion is generated or repaired by the RMF-Integrator, a projected Euler integration over the learned fields. The claim is that pro

What carries the argument

The central object is the decomposition fΓ = (f^R_Φ(θ), f^ω_Ψ(θ̇|θ), f^ω̇_Ξ(θ̈|θ,θ̇)) of the state manifold into three neural unsigned distance fields, whose zero level sets define plausible poses, transitions, and accelerations. Two algorithms carry the argument: RMF-Grad, an adaptive-step Riemannian gradient descent that projects noisy states onto the zero level set using the exponential map on SO(3), and RMF-Integrator, a geometric projected Euler integrator that rolls out motion while correcting errors in all three components. The conditioned structure lets the three fields share information hierarchically instead of treating each joint's acceleration in isolation.

Load-bearing premise

The pipeline relies on the RMF-Grad and RMF-Integrator iterations reliably driving noisy states onto the zero level set and staying there over long sequences; the paper explicitly states that these projected integrators lack rigorous theoretical understanding, so their convergence and optimality are not certified.

What would settle it

On a held-out AMASS sequence with added Gaussian noise, run RMF-Grad and then roll out 100 steps with the RMF-Integrator, tracking the three field values. If any field stops decreasing during projection or if the rollout produces states whose pose/velocity/acceleration field values grow monotonically, the central claim that the zero-level set supports projection and rollout would be falsified.

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

If this is right

  • A single prior trained once on AMASS can be reused across different tasks—denoising, partial 3D fitting, 2D/3D in-the-wild optimization, in-betweening, and generation—with no task-specific retraining.
  • Including the acceleration field reduces drift and oversmoothing, yielding lower acceleration errors and better floor-contact plausibility than priors that model only poses or poses plus velocities.
  • Geometrically consistent projection (Riemannian gradients, exponential maps) is more stable under large noise than Euclidean projection, allowing the prior to degrade gracefully as noise increases.
  • The RMF-Integrator provides a deterministic rollout mechanism that can be used both for generating new motions from an initial pose and for repairing noisy trajectories, effectively denoising the derivatives along with the poses.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The same hierarchical field construction could be extended to other articulated objects (hands, quadruped skeletons) or to higher-order derivatives (jerk), since the formulas for the product manifold generalize.
  • Because the zero-level set is an implicit manifold, the authors' projection and integrator could be paired with Riemannian Langevin sampling to turn the deterministic prior into a calibrated probabilistic generative model.
  • A natural stress test is to check the consistency condition of Remark 1: whether the pose projection followed by differentiation agrees with the velocity projection. If that mismatch is large on real data, the three fields are not perfectly coordinated and the rollout may need a correction step.
  • The reported runtimes (minutes for a 10-second clip) suggest a learned optimization or a faster projection scheme would be needed for interactive use; the paper itself points toward learning-to-optimize as future work.

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

4 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper introduces NRMF, an unconditional human-motion prior that represents plausible poses, transitions (velocities), and accelerations as the zero level sets of three neural distance fields on the product manifold M = R^3 × SO(3)^NJ × so(3)^NJ × R^{3×NJ}. At test time, the framework uses a projected gradient descent (RMF-Grad, Prop. 4) and a projected Euler-style integrator (RMF-Integrator, Prop. 5 / Alg. 1) to map noisy, partial, or incomplete observations onto the learned zero-level sets; these operators are then wrapped in a HuMoR-like test-time optimization, motion generation, and in-betweening pipeline. The paper reports gains over VAE, diffusion, and NDF baselines on AMASS denoising and partial-3D fitting, 3DPW refinement, i3DB/EgoBody/PROX in-the-wild fitting, and generation metrics.

Significance. If the central claims hold, NRMF is a valuable alternative to VAE- and diffusion-based motion priors: modeling velocity and acceleration as learned distance fields is a natural way to enforce higher-order temporal consistency, and the geometry-aware formulation on SO(3)^NJ is principled. The differential-geometric parts (Props. 1, 2, and suppl. A) are standard and, in the supplement, essentially correct; the learning objective in Prop. 6 is simple and reproducible in spirit. The breadth of downstream tasks is a strength, as is the explicit limitation paragraph. The main weakness is that the deployment machinery driving all experiments is under-specified and internally inconsistent, and the numerical claims currently lack the supporting statistical and baseline detail needed to certify them.

major comments (4)
  1. [Prop. 5 vs. Supp. Alg. 1] There is a direct inconsistency between the integrator formula and its pseudocode. Eq. (12) updates the pose as θ_{t+1} = Π_R(Exp_{θ_t}(α_t [θ̇_t]_×)) and the text says velocities are updated before rotations. In Alg. 1, however, the velocity loop is completed for all t before any pose is updated, and line 6 uses θ̇_{t-1}, not the newly computed θ̇_t. These are different discrete dynamics and would produce different rollouts in every generation and test-time-optimization experiment. Please state the exact ordering and step-size schedules used in the reported results, and provide corrected pseudocode.
  2. [Abstract / Introduction / Prop. 4] The abstract and introduction promise an 'adaptive-step hybrid algorithm' for projecting onto the zero-level set, and the introduction refers to a 'three-stage adaptive-step hybrid gradient descent.' Prop. 4 and the supplement, however, give only fixed-step RMF-Grad updates (Eq. 9) with no adaptive rule. Since projection is the core mechanism for denoising and fitting, the adaptive variant must be specified, or the claim should be removed. This is not a cosmetic issue: the step sizes α_θ, α_ω, α_ω̇ are free parameters that control whether the iterate converges to the zero level set, and the paper does not report how they are chosen or adapted.
  3. [Tables 1, 2, 4] The row 'Motion-NDF' appears in Tables 1, 2, and 4 but is never defined in §5.1 or elsewhere. It is unclear whether this is an existing method, an ablation, or a new baseline introduced by the authors. Without a definition and configuration, those comparisons are not reproducible. Relatedly, none of the tables report error bars or significance tests; given the claim of 'significant and consistent gains,' please provide variance over seeds/initializations for the main tables, or at least error bars on the headline metrics (MPJPE, Acc Err, FID).
  4. [Limitation section and deployment] The Limitation section states that the projected integrators 'lack rigorous theoretical understanding, preventing us from certifying their optimality.' I do not require a theoretical proof, but because every downstream application routes through Π and the RMF-Integrator, the paper needs an empirical convergence/stability analysis: report the residual f_Γ after projection, the behavior of the iterates over the optimization horizon, rollout length versus drift, and sensitivity to the step sizes and to out-of-distribution noise. Without such evidence, the central claim that the prior can be 'deployed' robustly is not fully supported. The current qualitative figures and aggregate tables are suggestive but not sufficient.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Prop. 2, Eq. (6)] Eq. (6) as written is dimensionally inconsistent: d[ω_t]_×/dt and [ω̇_t]_× are elements of so(3), while R̈_t is an ambient 3×3 matrix. The correct statement, given in suppl. Prop. 2, is [ω̇]_× = skew(R_t^T R̈_t). Please rewrite Eq. (6) to match the supplementary derivation.
  2. [Section 5.1] In the dataset list, i3DB is cited as [56], but reference [56] is 3DPW (von Marcard et al.). The i3DB citation should be to Monszpart et al. [38]. Please check all dataset citations for accuracy.
  3. [Section 4 / Table 3 caption] There are several typos: Table 3 caption reads 'Ftting to 2D obsertations on 3DPW'; in Section 4, 'E_I ndE′_I' should be 'E_I and E′_I'. Also in the supplementary coefficient list, λ_˙θ appears twice; one of the two should be λ_¨θ.
  4. [Supp. Computational Cost] The text says NRMF 'reduces the turnaround for 10 times' but the table reports 'Total (Ours) 6.03' versus HuMoR Stage I 61.56. Please clarify the comparison: is the total 6.03 minutes for NRMF versus 61.56 for HuMoR, and are these timings on the same hardware and sequence length?

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: the learned distance fields are trained on external AMASS distances and evaluated on held-out ground-truth metrics; self-citations are architectural, not load-bearing.

full rationale

The paper's central derivation chain is: (i) define a state space of poses, transitions, and accelerations; (ii) regress three neural distance fields to the nearest-neighbor distances in the AMASS training set (Prop. 6); (iii) use these fields as soft constraints in a test-time optimization and in projection/integration routines (Props. 4–5); and (iv) measure reconstruction/generation quality against held-out ground truth. The training objective in Prop. 6 is a distance-regression loss, not the downstream evaluation metric. MPJPE, PA-MPJPE, FID, and acceleration error are computed from held-out AMASS/3DPW/PROX/EgoBody data and from the learned model's outputs, so the headline numbers are not forced by the training equations. The RMF-Grad and RMF-Integrator operators simply move states along gradients of the learned fields; they do not inject the ground-truth answer or a fitted constant into the evaluation. The paper's self-citations to NRDF and HuMoR are architectural and optimization-skeleton references, not the justification of the central novelty (the joint transition/acceleration priors). The Limitation statement that the projected integrators 'lack rigorous theoretical understanding' is an honest robustness caveat, not evidence of circularity: an unproven convergence property is a correctness risk, not a reduction of the derivation to its inputs. No equation in the paper reduces, by construction, to a fitted parameter renamed as a prediction, and no uniqueness claim is imported from the authors' prior work to forbid alternatives. Overall, the derivation is self-contained against external benchmarks and the reported gains are empirically testable, so circularity is absent.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

4 free parameters · 5 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the learned distance fields being accurate proxies for plausibility, on the geometry-aware updates and integrator working in practice, and on a set of hand-chosen weights and sampling schedules. The geometric facts (Exp/Log, egrad2rgrad) are standard. The main domain assumptions, that AMASS defines plausibility and that central differencing approximates acceleration, are empirical and only partially validated.

free parameters (4)
  • test-time objective weights (λ_β, λ_θ, λ_θ̇, λ_θ̈, λ_reg, λ_2d) = λ_2d=1e-3, λ_smooth=10, λ_β=8e-2, λ_θ=8e-2, λ_θ̇=1.0, λ_θ̈=5e-2 (suppl. B)
    Hand-tuned coefficients balancing data terms, pose, transition, and acceleration priors in Eqs. (13)-(15); no sensitivity analysis is given.
  • projection and integrator step sizes (α_θ, α_ω, α_ω̇, λ_t, α_t) = not stated
    Appear in Eqs. (9), (11)-(12) and Alg. 1; the adaptive-step schedule is claimed but its details are not in the main text or provided suppl.
  • negative-sampling ratios for NDF training = 60% half-Gaussian, 30% random-swap, 10% random
    Ad hoc choice for generating negative samples for distance field training; affects the learned distance fields.
  • FAISS nearest-neighbor parameters k' and k = k'=1000, k=1
    Used to compute distance regression targets in Prop. 6; choosing k=1 instead of PoseNDF's k=5 is a design choice.
axioms (5)
  • standard math SO(3) geometry: left-invariant tangent space RΩ, Exp/Log maps, egrad2rgrad projector, geodesic distances on the power manifold SO(3)^K
    Used throughout Props. 1, 4, 5; proved in suppl. A and standard in the literature.
  • domain assumption The training dataset AMASS is representative of realistic human motion, and distance to the nearest training sample is a valid plausibility measure
    Prop. 6 trains NDFs to regress min over dataset; the whole approach defines plausibility by proximity to training data.
  • domain assumption Central differencing of angular velocities gives a good approximation of angular acceleration, justifying the construction of the acceleration dataset
    Used to construct D_θ̈ (Sec. 3.2); empirically validated in suppl. Fig. 8 but not guaranteed, especially for noisy inputs.
  • domain assumption The product-space decomposition treats plausibility as the intersection of three independent zero-level sets; exact consistency between projected pose and projected velocity is not guaranteed
    Prop. 3 decomposes f_Γ into pose, transition, and acceleration fields; Remark 1 acknowledges consistency holds only under ideal conditions.
  • ad hoc to paper The heuristic projected-Euler integrator (Alg. 1) and the RMF-Grad updates converge in practice to a plausible motion without divergence or oscillation over the optimization horizon
    The paper's Limitation states the integrators 'lack rigorous theoretical understanding' and 'optimality' cannot be certified; the updates are used as-is.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 29341 in / 18932 out tokens · 191032 ms · 2026-08-04T18:45:07.700395+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

We introduce Neural Riemannian Motion Fields (NRMF), a novel 3D generative human motion prior that enables robust, temporally consistent, and physically plausible 3D motion recovery. Unlike existing VAE or diffusion-based methods, our higher-order motion prior explicitly models the human motion in the zero level set of a collection of neural distance fields (NDFs) corresponding to pose, transition (velocity), and acceleration dynamics. Our framework is rigorous in the sense that our NDFs are constructed on the product space of joint rotations, their angular velocities, and angular accelerations, respecting the geometry of the underlying articulations. We further introduce: (i) a novel adaptive-step hybrid algorithm for projecting onto the set of plausible motions, and (ii) a novel geometric integrator to "roll out" realistic motion trajectories during test-time-optimization and generation. Our experiments show significant and consistent gains: trained on the AMASS dataset, NRMF remarkably generalizes across multiple input modalities and to diverse tasks ranging from denoising to motion in-betweening and fitting to partial 2D / 3D observations.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2509.09667 by Amy Zhao, Cem Keskin, Linguang Zhang, Simone Foti, Stefanos Zafeiriou, Tolga Birdal, Zhengdi Yu.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: NRMF is a general-purpose, expressive and robust unconditional motion prior. It models the space of plausible poses (θ), tran￾sitions (θ˙ ) and accelerations (θ¨) on the zero-level set of a geometric neural distance field. This implicitly captures the data distribution. Poses are depicted alongside their transitions and accelerations, which are visualized as blue dots onto the per-joint distributions of le… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Neural Riemannian Motion Fields (NRMF) models the motion in the zero-level-set of three disjoint distance fields. where α∗ corresponds to individual learning rates and grad and Exp denote the Riemannian gradient and Exponential maps as we provide in our suppl. material. Remark 1. Note that under ideal conditions where transi￾tion (velocities) are obtained computationally, we expect: Π ω  θ˙  ≈  Π R (θ) … view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Comparison of pose and transition distributions. Each distribution is estimated from the points obtained intersecting rotated skeletal bones with a sphere centered at the joint. The pose distributions p(θ) are obtained applying θ rotations (left), while the transition distributions p(θ˙) applying θ˙ (right). Each sphere effectively displays the range of motion of eah joint [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fi… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Qualitative comparison with state-of-the-art methods [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Behavior of different methods for increasing levels of noise. To test motion estimation under occlusions (i.e. par￾tial observation) we sam￾ple the AMASS dataset with a standard mask height of 0.9m following [43] to yield partial 3D observa￾tions. Tab. 2 reveals that while applying only a pose prior term (i.e. -t) gives lower errors for visible body parts, the model suffers from over-smoothing and higher r… view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Qualitative comparison with state-of-the-art methods for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Illustration of angular velocity and accelaration for two [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Comparing log-central differencing to classical central dif￾ferencing for angular acceleration estimation. The attained error be￾tween the two (last row) is relatively low indicating that simple cen￾tral differences are good estimators of angular acceleration, given geometrically meaningful angular velocities. Left multiplying this with R(t) ⊤ yields: R(t) ⊤R¨(t) = Ω2 (t) + Ω ( ˙ t). (40) Since the square … view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Transitions and accelerations overlaid onto the pose distributions. Four motions originating from the most common body pose in the AMASS dataset are represented as colored arrows on the surface of the spheres depicting the per-joint pose distributions comprising p(θ). Spheres here are oriented to maximize visibility of the high-probability region of the distribution rather than showcasing the range of moti… view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Qualitative results on in-the-wild fitting on PROX [ [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_10.png] view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Qualitative results on downstream applications. The [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_11.png] view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: In-the-wild motion estimation. We show qualitative comparisons on real-world videos with challenging conditions such as [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_12.png] view at source ↗

discussion (0)

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

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. MoLingo: Motion-Language Alignment for Text-to-Human Motion Generation

    cs.CV 2025-12 conditional novelty 6.0

    A semantically aligned latent space plus multi-token cross-attention conditioning sets a new state of the art in text-to-human-motion generation on HumanML3D.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

64 extracted references · 3 linked inside Pith · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    Make-an-animation: Large-scale text- conditional 3d human motion generation

    Samaneh Azadi, Akbar Shah, Thomas Hayes, Devi Parikh, and Sonal Gupta. Make-an-animation: Large-scale text- conditional 3d human motion generation. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vi- sion, pages 15039–15048, 2023. 1

    2023

  2. [2]

    Pose- bert: A generic transformer module for temporal 3d human modeling.IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Ma- chine Intelligence, 45(11):12798–12815, 2022

    Fabien Baradel, Romain Brégier, Thibault Groueix, Philippe Weinzaepfel, Yannis Kalantidis, and Grégory Rogez. Pose- bert: A generic transformer module for temporal 3d human modeling.IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Ma- chine Intelligence, 45(11):12798–12815, 2022. 2

    2022

  3. [3]

    Forecasting continuous non-conservative dy- namical systems in so (3)

    Lennart Bastian, Mohammad Rashed, Nassir Navab, and Tolga Birdal. Forecasting continuous non-conservative dy- namical systems in so (3). InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision, 2025. 3

    2025

  4. [4]

    The fitting of power se- ries, meaning polynomials, illustrated on band-spectroscopic data.Technometrics, 16(2):147–185, 1974

    Albert E Beaton and John W Tukey. The fitting of power se- ries, meaning polynomials, illustrated on band-spectroscopic data.Technometrics, 16(2):147–185, 1974. 4

    1974

  5. [5]

    Probabilistic permuta- tion synchronization using the riemannian structure of the birkhoff polytope

    Tolga Birdal and Umut Simsekli. Probabilistic permuta- tion synchronization using the riemannian structure of the birkhoff polytope. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Con- ference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 11105–11116, 2019. 9, 1

    2019

  6. [6]

    Bayesian pose graph optimization via bingham distributions and tempered geodesic mcmc.Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 31, 2018

    Tolga Birdal, Umut Simsekli, Mustafa Onur Eken, and Slo- bodan Ilic. Bayesian pose graph optimization via bingham distributions and tempered geodesic mcmc.Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 31, 2018. 1

    2018

  7. [7]

    Keep it smpl: Automatic estimation of 3d human pose and shape from a single image

    Federica Bogo, Angjoo Kanazawa, Christoph Lassner, Peter Gehler, Javier Romero, and Michael J Black. Keep it smpl: Automatic estimation of 3d human pose and shape from a single image. InComputer Vision–ECCV 2016: 14th Euro- pean Conference, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, October 11- 14, 2016, Proceedings, Part V 14, pages 561–578. Springer,

    2016

  8. [8]

    SMPLer-X: Scaling up expressive human pose and shape estimation

    Zhongang Cai, Wanqi Yin, Ailing Zeng, Chen Wei, Qing- ping Sun, Wang Yanjun, Hui En Pang, Haiyi Mei, Mingyuan Zhang, Lei Zhang, Chen Change Loy, Lei Yang, and Zi- wei Liu. SMPLer-X: Scaling up expressive human pose and shape estimation. InAdvances in Neural Information Pro- cessing Systems, 2023. 2, 6, 7

    2023

  9. [9]

    Z. Cao, G. Hidalgo Martinez, T. Simon, S. Wei, and Y . A. Sheikh. Openpose: Realtime multi-person 2d pose estima- tion using part affinity fields.IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 2019. 7, 8

    2019

  10. [10]

    Projective manifold gra- dient layer for deep rotation regression

    Jiayi Chen, Yingda Yin, Tolga Birdal, Baoquan Chen, Leonidas J Guibas, and He Wang. Projective manifold gra- dient layer for deep rotation regression. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 6646–6655, 2022. 1

    2022

  11. [11]

    Rethinking atrous convolution for seman- tic image segmentation.arXiv preprint arXiv:1706.05587,

    Liang-Chieh Chen, George Papandreou, Florian Schroff, and Hartwig Adam. Rethinking atrous convolution for seman- tic image segmentation.arXiv preprint arXiv:1706.05587,

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  12. [12]

    Neural unsigned distance fields for implicit function learning.Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 33:21638–21652,

    Julian Chibane, Gerard Pons-Moll, et al. Neural unsigned distance fields for implicit function learning.Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 33:21638–21652,

  13. [13]

    Gfpose: Learn- ing 3d human pose prior with gradient fields

    Hai Ci, Mingdong Wu, Wentao Zhu, Xiaoxuan Ma, Hao Dong, Fangwei Zhong, and Yizhou Wang. Gfpose: Learn- ing 3d human pose prior with gradient fields. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pages 4800–4810, 2023. 2

    2023

  14. [14]

    Momanifold: 9 Learning to measure 3d human motion via decoupled joint acceleration manifolds

    Ziqiang Dang, Tianxing Fan, Boming Zhao, Xujie Shen, Lei Wang, Guofeng Zhang, and Zhaopeng Cui. Momanifold: 9 Learning to measure 3d human motion via decoupled joint acceleration manifolds. In35th British Machine Vision Con- ference 2024, BMVC 2024, Glasgow, UK, November 25-28,

    2024

  15. [15]

    Adversarial parametric pose prior

    Andrey Davydov, Anastasia Remizova, Victor Constantin, Sina Honari, Mathieu Salzmann, and Pascal Fua. Adversarial parametric pose prior. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Con- ference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 10997–11005, 2022. 8

    2022

  16. [16]

    Collaborative regression of expressive bodies using moderation

    Yao Feng, Vasileios Choutas, Timo Bolkart, Dimitrios Tzionas, and Michael J Black. Collaborative regression of expressive bodies using moderation. In2021 International Conference on 3D Vision (3DV), pages 792–804. IEEE,

  17. [17]

    Statistical methods for tomographic image restoration.Bull

    Stuart Geman. Statistical methods for tomographic image restoration.Bull. Internat. Statist. Inst., 52:5–21, 1987. 4

    1987

  18. [18]

    Humans in 4D: Reconstructing and tracking humans with transformers

    Shubham Goel, Georgios Pavlakos, Jathushan Rajasegaran, Angjoo Kanazawa, and Jitendra Malik. Humans in 4D: Reconstructing and tracking humans with transformers. In ICCV, 2023. 2

    2023

  19. [19]

    Survey of higher order rigid body motion interpolation methods for keyframe animation and continuous-time trajectory estima- tion

    Adrian Haarbach, Tolga Birdal, and Slobodan Ilic. Survey of higher order rigid body motion interpolation methods for keyframe animation and continuous-time trajectory estima- tion. In2018 International Conference on 3D Vision (3DV), pages 381–389. IEEE, 2018. 3

    2018

  20. [20]

    williamjameshandley/spherical_kde 0.1.1,

    Will Handley. williamjameshandley/spherical_kde 0.1.1,

  21. [21]

    Mohamed Hassan, Vasileios Choutas, Dimitrios Tzionas, and Michael J. Black. Resolving 3D human pose ambigu- ities with 3D scene constraints. InInternational Conference on Computer Vision, pages 2282–2292, 2019. 2, 5, 6

    2019

  22. [22]

    Nemf: Neural motion fields for kinematic an- imation.Advances in Neural Information Processing Sys- tems, 35:4244–4256, 2022

    Chengan He, Jun Saito, James Zachary, Holly Rushmeier, and Yi Zhou. Nemf: Neural motion fields for kinematic an- imation.Advances in Neural Information Processing Sys- tems, 35:4244–4256, 2022. 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 4

    2022

  23. [23]

    Nrdf: Neural riemannian distance fields for learning articulated pose priors

    Yannan He, Garvita Tiwari, Tolga Birdal, Jan Eric Lenssen, and Gerard Pons-Moll. Nrdf: Neural riemannian distance fields for learning articulated pose priors. InConference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), 2024. 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9

    2024

  24. [24]

    World Scientific Publishing Company, 2011

    Darryl D Holm.Geometric mechanics-Part I: Dynamics and symmetry. World Scientific Publishing Company, 2011. 2

    2011

  25. [25]

    World Scientific, 2011

    Darryl D Holm.Geometric mechanics-part II: rotating, translating and rolling. World Scientific, 2011. 2

    2011

  26. [26]

    Stablemofusion: Towards robust and efficient diffusion-based motion generation framework

    Yiheng Huang, Hui Yang, Chuanchen Luo, Yuxi Wang, Shibiao Xu, Zhaoxiang Zhang, Man Zhang, and Jun- ran Peng. Stablemofusion: Towards robust and efficient diffusion-based motion generation framework. InProceed- ings of the 32nd ACM International Conference on Multime- dia, pages 224–232, 2024. 2

    2024

  27. [27]

    Billion- scale similarity search with gpus.IEEE Transactions on Big Data, 7(3):535–547, 2019

    Jeff Johnson, Matthijs Douze, and Hervé Jégou. Billion- scale similarity search with gpus.IEEE Transactions on Big Data, 7(3):535–547, 2019. 5

    2019

  28. [28]

    Muhammed Kocabas, Nikos Athanasiou, and Michael J. Black. Vibe: Video inference for human body pose and shape estimation. InThe IEEE Conference on Computer Vi- sion and Pattern Recognition, 2020. 8

    2020

  29. [29]

    Pare: Part attention regressor for 3d human body estimation

    Muhammed Kocabas, Chun-Hao P Huang, Otmar Hilliges, and Michael J Black. Pare: Part attention regressor for 3d human body estimation. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision, pages 11127– 11137, 2021. 2

    2021

  30. [30]

    Nifty: Neural object interaction fields for guided human mo- tion synthesis

    Nilesh Kulkarni, Davis Rempe, Kyle Genova, Abhijit Kundu, Justin Johnson, David Fouhey, and Leonidas Guibas. Nifty: Neural object interaction fields for guided human mo- tion synthesis. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 947– 957, 2024. 2

    2024

  31. [31]

    Cliff: Carrying location information in full frames into human pose and shape estimation

    Zhihao Li, Jianzhuang Liu, Zhensong Zhang, Songcen Xu, and Youliang Yan. Cliff: Carrying location information in full frames into human pose and shape estimation. In European Conference on Computer Vision, pages 590–606. Springer, 2022. 6

    2022

  32. [32]

    Character controllers using motion vaes

    Hung Yu Ling, Fabio Zinno, George Cheng, and Michiel van de Panne. Character controllers using motion vaes. In ACM Transactions on Graphics (Proceedings of ACM SIG- GRAPH). ACM, 2020. 2, 6, 7, 8

    2020

  33. [33]

    Planercnn: 3d plane detection and reconstruction from a single image

    Chen Liu, Kihwan Kim, Jinwei Gu, Yasutaka Furukawa, and Jan Kautz. Planercnn: 3d plane detection and reconstruction from a single image. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Con- ference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 4450–4459, 2019. 8

    2019

  34. [34]

    Matthew Loper, Naureen Mahmood, Javier Romero, Ger- ard Pons-Moll, and Michael J. Black. SMPL: A skinned multi-person linear model.ACM Trans. Graphics (Proc. SIGGRAPH Asia), 34(6):248:1–248:16, 2015. 2, 3

    2015

  35. [35]

    Dposer: Diffusion model as robust 3d human pose prior.arXiv preprint arXiv:2312.05541, 2023

    Junzhe Lu, Jing Lin, Hongkun Dou, Yulun Zhang, Yue Deng, and Haoqian Wang. Dposer: Diffusion model as robust 3d human pose prior.arXiv preprint arXiv:2312.05541, 2023. 1, 2, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  36. [36]

    Troje, Ger- ard Pons-Moll, and Michael J

    Naureen Mahmood, Nima Ghorbani, Nikolaus F. Troje, Ger- ard Pons-Moll, and Michael J. Black. AMASS: Archive of motion capture as surface shapes. In2019 IEEE/CVF In- ternational Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV), pages 5441–5450, 2019. 2, 5, 3

    2019

  37. [37]

    Springer Science & Business Media, 2013

    Jerrold E Marsden and Tudor S Ratiu.Introduction to me- chanics and symmetry: a basic exposition of classical me- chanical systems. Springer Science & Business Media, 2013. 2

    2013

  38. [38]

    Aron Monszpart, Paul Guerrero, Duygu Ceylan, Ersin Yumer, and Niloy J. Mitra. iMapper: Interaction-guided scene mapping from monocular videos.ACM SIGGRAPH,

  39. [39]

    Pytorch: An im- perative style, high-performance deep learning library.Ad- vances in neural information processing systems, 32, 2019

    Adam Paszke, Sam Gross, Francisco Massa, Adam Lerer, James Bradbury, Gregory Chanan, Trevor Killeen, Zeming Lin, Natalia Gimelshein, Luca Antiga, et al. Pytorch: An im- perative style, high-performance deep learning library.Ad- vances in neural information processing systems, 32, 2019. 4

    2019

  40. [40]

    Expressive body capture: 3d hands, face, and body from a single image

    Georgios Pavlakos, Vasileios Choutas, Nima Ghorbani, Timo Bolkart, Ahmed AA Osman, Dimitrios Tzionas, and Michael J Black. Expressive body capture: 3d hands, face, and body from a single image. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pages 10975–10985, 2019. 2, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 10

    2019

  41. [41]

    Georgios Pavlakos, Vasileios Choutas, Nima Ghorbani, Timo Bolkart, Ahmed A. A. Osman, Dimitrios Tzionas, and Michael J. Black. Expressive body capture: 3D hands, face, and body from a single image. InProceedings IEEE Conf. on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), pages 10975–10985, 2019. 5, 4

    2019

  42. [42]

    Tmr: Text-to-motion retrieval using contrastive 3d human motion synthesis

    Mathis Petrovich, Michael J Black, and Gül Varol. Tmr: Text-to-motion retrieval using contrastive 3d human motion synthesis. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision, pages 9488–9497, 2023. 1

    2023

  43. [43]

    Davis Rempe, Tolga Birdal, Aaron Hertzmann, Jimei Yang, Srinath Sridhar, and Leonidas J. Guibas. Humor: 3d human motion model for robust pose estimation. InInternational Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV), 2021. 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 3

    2021

  44. [44]

    Em- bodied hands: Modeling and capturing hands and bodies to- gether.ACM Transactions on Graphics, 36(6), 2017

    Javier Romero, Dimitris Tzionas, and Michael J Black. Em- bodied hands: Modeling and capturing hands and bodies to- gether.ACM Transactions on Graphics, 36(6), 2017. 3

    2017

  45. [45]

    Javier Romero, Dimitrios Tzionas, and Michael J. Black. Embodied hands: Modeling and capturing hands and bod- ies together.ACM Transactions on Graphics, (Proc. SIG- GRAPH Asia), 36(6), 2017. 2, 3

    2017

  46. [46]

    Metrabs: metric-scale truncation-robust heatmaps for absolute 3d human pose estimation.IEEE Transactions on Biometrics, Behavior, and Identity Science, 3(1):16–30,

    István Sárándi, Timm Linder, Kai Oliver Arras, and Bastian Leibe. Metrabs: metric-scale truncation-robust heatmaps for absolute 3d human pose estimation.IEEE Transactions on Biometrics, Behavior, and Identity Science, 3(1):16–30,

  47. [47]

    Human motion diffusion as a generative prior

    Yonatan Shafir, Guy Tevet, Roy Kapon, and Amit H Bermano. Human motion diffusion as a generative prior. arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.01418, 2023. 2

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  48. [48]

    Human motion diffusion as a generative prior

    Yoni Shafir, Guy Tevet, Roy Kapon, and Amit Haim Bermano. Human motion diffusion as a generative prior. InThe Twelfth International Conference on Learning Rep- resentations, 2024. 1, 2

    2024

  49. [49]

    You can find geodesic paths in triangle meshes by just flipping edges.ACM Trans

    Nicholas Sharp and Keenan Crane. You can find geodesic paths in triangle meshes by just flipping edges.ACM Trans. Graph., 39(6), 2020. 6

    2020

  50. [50]

    Phasemp: Robust 3d pose estimation via phase-conditioned human motion prior

    Mingyi Shi, Sebastian Starke, Yuting Ye, Taku Komura, and Jungdam Won. Phasemp: Robust 3d pose estimation via phase-conditioned human motion prior. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vi- sion, pages 14725–14737, 2023. 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 9, 3, 5, 8

    2023

  51. [51]

    Animating rotation with quaternion curves

    Ken Shoemake. Animating rotation with quaternion curves. InProceedings of the 12th Annual Conference on Computer Graphics and Interactive Techniques (SIGGRAPH), pages 245–254. ACM, 1985. 5, 8

    1985

  52. [52]

    Yu Sun, Qian Bao, Wu Liu, Tao Mei, and Michael J. Black. TRACE: 5D Temporal Regression of Avatars with Dynamic Cameras in 3D Environments. InCVPR, 2023. 2

    2023

  53. [53]

    Human motion diffu- sion model

    Guy Tevet, Sigal Raab, Brian Gordon, Yoni Shafir, Daniel Cohen-or, and Amit Haim Bermano. Human motion diffu- sion model. InThe Eleventh International Conference on Learning Representations, 2023. 1, 2, 5, 6, 7, 8

    2023

  54. [54]

    Pose-ndf: Modeling human pose manifolds with neural distance fields

    Garvita Tiwari, Dimitrije Antic, Jan Eric Lenssen, Nikolaos Sarafianos, Tony Tung, and Gerard Pons-Moll. Pose-ndf: Modeling human pose manifolds with neural distance fields. InEuropean Conference on Computer Vision (ECCV), 2022. 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9

    2022

  55. [55]

    Townsend, N

    J. Townsend, N. Koep, and S. Weichwald. PyManopt: a Python toolbox for optimization on manifolds using auto- matic differentiation.Journal of Machine Learning Re- search, 17(137):1–5, 2016. 1

    2016

  56. [56]

    Recovering accurate 3d human pose in the wild using imus and a moving camera

    Timo von Marcard, Roberto Henschel, Michael Black, Bodo Rosenhahn, and Gerard Pons-Moll. Recovering accurate 3d human pose in the wild using imus and a moving camera. In European Conference on Computer Vision (ECCV), 2018. 2, 5

    2018

  57. [57]

    Smpler: Tam- ing transformers for monocular 3d human shape and pose estimation.IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Ma- chine Intelligence, 46(5):3275–3289, 2023

    Xiangyu Xu, Lijuan Liu, and Shuicheng Yan. Smpler: Tam- ing transformers for monocular 3d human shape and pose estimation.IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Ma- chine Intelligence, 46(5):3275–3289, 2023. 2

    2023

  58. [58]

    Convolutional sequence generation for skeleton- based action synthesis

    Sijie Yan, Zhizhong Li, Yuanjun Xiong, Huahan Yan, and Dahua Lin. Convolutional sequence generation for skeleton- based action synthesis. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision, pages 4394– 4402, 2019. 2

    2019

  59. [59]

    Towards efficient and di- verse generative model for unconditional human motion syn- thesis

    Hua Yu, Weiming Liu, Jiapeng Bai, Xu Gui, Yaqing Hou, YewSoon Ong, and Qiang Zhang. Towards efficient and di- verse generative model for unconditional human motion syn- thesis. InProceedings of the 32nd ACM International Con- ference on Multimedia, pages 2535–2544, 2024. 2

    2024

  60. [60]

    Dyn- hamr: Recovering 4d interacting hand motion from a dy- namic camera

    Zhengdi Yu, Stefanos Zafeiriou, and Tolga Birdal. Dyn- hamr: Recovering 4d interacting hand motion from a dy- namic camera. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), 2025. 5

    2025

  61. [61]

    Pymaf-x: To- wards well-aligned full-body model regression from monoc- ular images.IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Ma- chine Intelligence, 45(10):12287–12303, 2023

    Hongwen Zhang, Yating Tian, Yuxiang Zhang, Mengcheng Li, Liang An, Zhenan Sun, and Yebin Liu. Pymaf-x: To- wards well-aligned full-body model regression from monoc- ular images.IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Ma- chine Intelligence, 45(10):12287–12303, 2023. 2

    2023

  62. [62]

    Ego- body: Human body shape and motion of interacting peo- ple from head-mounted devices

    Siwei Zhang, Qianli Ma, Yan Zhang, Zhiyin Qian, Taein Kwon, Marc Pollefeys, Federica Bogo, and Siyu Tang. Ego- body: Human body shape and motion of interacting peo- ple from head-mounted devices. InEuropean conference on computer vision, pages 180–200. Springer, 2022. 2, 5

    2022

  63. [63]

    Rohm: Robust human motion reconstruction via diffusion

    Siwei Zhang, Bharat Lal Bhatnagar, Yuanlu Xu, Alexan- der Winkler, Petr Kadlecek, Siyu Tang, and Federica Bogo. Rohm: Robust human motion reconstruction via diffusion. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 14606–14617, 2024. 2, 6, 7, 8, 9, 3, 5 11 Geometric Neural Distance Fields for Learning Human Moti...

    arXiv 2024

  64. [2024]

    2, 4, 5, 8

    BMV A, 2024. 2, 4, 5, 8

    2024