Large steps in inverse rendering of geometry
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Inverse reconstruction from images is a central problem in many scientific and engineering disciplines. Recent progress on differentiable rendering has led to methods that can efficiently differentiate the full process of image formation with respect to millions of parameters to solve such problems via gradient-based optimization. At the same time, the availability of cheap derivatives does not necessarily make an inverse problem easy to solve. Mesh-based representations remain a particular source of irritation: an adverse gradient step involving vertex positions could turn parts of the mesh inside-out, introduce numerous local self-intersections, or lead to inadequate usage of the vertex budget due to distortion. These types of issues are often irrecoverable in the sense that subsequent optimization steps will further exacerbate them. In other words, the optimization lacks robustness due to an objective function with substantial non-convexity. Such robustness issues are commonly mitigated by imposing additional regularization, typically in the form of Laplacian energies that quantify and improve the smoothness of the current iterate. However, regularization introduces its own set of problems: solutions must now compromise between solving the problem and being smooth. Furthermore, gradient steps involving a Laplacian energy resemble Jacobi's iterative method for solving linear equations that is known for its exceptionally slow convergence. We propose a simple and practical alternative that casts differentiable rendering into the framework of preconditioned gradient descent. Our pre-conditioner biases gradient steps towards smooth solutions without requiring the final solution to be smooth. In contrast to Jacobi-style iteration, each gradient step propagates information among all variables, enabling convergence using fewer and larger steps. Our method is not restricted to meshes and can also accelerate the reconstruction of other representations, where smooth solutions are generally expected. We demonstrate its superior performance in the context of geometric optimization and texture reconstruction.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.002 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".