Learning 3D Scene Synthesis from Annotated RGB‐D Images
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract We present a data‐driven method for synthesizing 3D indoor scenes by inserting objects progressively into an initial, possibly, empty scene. Instead of relying on few hundreds of hand‐crafted 3D scenes, we take advantage of existing large‐scale annotated RGB‐D datasets, in particular, the SUN RGB‐D database consisting of 10,000+ depth images of real scenes, to form the prior knowledge for our synthesis task. Our object insertion scheme follows a co‐occurrence model and an arrangement model, both learned from the SUN dataset. The former elects a highly probable combination of object categories along with the number of instances per category while a plausible placement is defined by the latter model. Compared to previous works on probabilistic learning for object placement, we make two contributions. First, we learn various classes of higher‐order object‐object relations including symmetry, distinct orientation, and proximity from the database. These relations effectively enable considering objects in semantically formed groups rather than by individuals. Second, while our algorithm inserts objects one at a time, it attains holistic plausibility of the whole current scene while offering controllability through progressive synthesis. We conducted several user studies to compare our scene synthesis performance to results obtained by manual synthesis, state‐of‐the‐art object placement schemes, and variations of parameter settings for the arrangement model.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it