MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2902539442 · doi:10.1145/3272127.3275035

Language-driven synthesis of 3D scenes from scene databases

2018· article· en· W2902539442 on OpenAlexafffund
Rui Ma, Akshay Gadi Patil, Matthew Fisher, Manyi Li, Sören Pirk, Binh‐Son Hua, Sai-Kit Yeung, Xin Tong, Leonidas Guibas, Hao Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueACM Transactions on Graphics · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicHuman Pose and Action Recognition
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaAdobe SystemsHong Kong University of Science and TechnologyMinistry of Education - SingaporeAmazon Web ServicesNational Science Foundation
KeywordsComputer scienceScene graphScene statisticsParsingArtificial intelligenceSemantics (computer science)Context (archaeology)Natural languageNatural (archaeology)Natural language user interfaceComputer visionNatural language processingRendering (computer graphics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We introduce a novel framework for using natural language to generate and edit 3D indoor scenes, harnessing scene semantics and text-scene grounding knowledge learned from large annotated 3D scene databases. The advantage of natural language editing interfaces is strongest when performing semantic operations at the sub-scene level, acting on groups of objects. We learn how to manipulate these sub-scenes by analyzing existing 3D scenes. We perform edits by first parsing a natural language command from the user and transforming it into a semantic scene graph that is used to retrieve corresponding sub-scenes from the databases that match the command. We then augment this retrieved sub-scene by incorporating other objects that may be implied by the scene context. Finally, a new 3D scene is synthesized by aligning the augmented sub-scene with the user's current scene, where new objects are spliced into the environment, possibly triggering appropriate adjustments to the existing scene arrangement. A suggestive modeling interface with multiple interpretations of user commands is used to alleviate ambiguities in natural language. We conduct studies comparing our approach against both prior text-to-scene work and artist-made scenes and find that our method significantly outperforms prior work and is comparable to handmade scenes even when complex and varied natural sentences are used.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.003

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.

Opus teacher head0.035
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.244 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations98
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACM Transactions on GraphicsSame topicHuman Pose and Action RecognitionFrench-language works237,207