MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386076278 · doi:10.1109/cvpr52729.2023.01207

HumanGen: Generating Human Radiance Fields with Explicit Priors

2023· article· en· W4386076278 on OpenAlexaff
Suyi Jiang, Haoran Jiang, Ziyu Wang, Haimin Luo, Wenzheng Chen, Lan Xu

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
Topic3D Shape Modeling and Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRadiancePrior probabilityComputer scienceRendering (computer graphics)Generator (circuit theory)Artificial intelligenceComputer visionMesh generationRepresentation (politics)Computer graphics (images)Finite element method

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent years have witnessed the tremendous progress of 3D GANs for generating view-consistent radiance fields with photo-realism. Yet, high-quality generation of human radiance fields remains challenging, partially due to the limited human-related priors adopted in existing methods. We present HumanGen, a novel 3D human generation scheme with detailed geometry and 360° realistic free-view rendering. It explicitly marries the 3D human generation with various priors from the 2D generator and 3D reconstructor of humans through the design of “anchor image”. We introduce a hybrid feature representation using the anchor image to bridge the latent space of HumanGen with the existing 2D generator. We then adopt a pronged design to disentangle the generation of geometry and appearance. With the aid of the anchor image, we adapt a 3D reconstructor for fine-grained details synthesis and propose a two-stage blending scheme to boost appearance generation. Extensive experiments demonstrate our effectiveness for state-of-the-art 3D human generation regarding geometry details, texture quality, and free-view performance. Notably, HumanGen can also incorporate various off-the-shelf 2D latent editing methods, seamlessly lifting them into 3D.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.206 · 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

Citations26
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topic3D Shape Modeling and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207