Generative 3D Part Assembly via Part-Whole-Hierarchy Message Passing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Generative 3D part assembly involves understanding part relationships and predicting their 6-DoF poses for assembling a realistic 3D shape. Prior work often focus on the geometry of individual parts, neglecting part-whole hierarchies of objects. Leveraging two key observations: 1) super-part poses provide strong hints about part poses, and 2) predicting super-part poses is easier due to fewer super-parts, we propose a part-whole-hierarchy message passing network for efficient 3D part assembly. We first introduce super-parts by grouping geometrically similar parts without any semantic labels. Then we employ a part-whole hierarchical encoder, wherein a super-part encoder predicts latent super-part poses based on input parts. Subsequently, we transform the point cloud using the latent poses, feeding it to the part encoder for aggregating super-part information and reasoning about part relationships to predict all part poses. In training, only ground-truth part poses are required. During inference, the predicted latent poses of super-parts enhance interpretability. Experimental results on the PartNet dataset show that our method achieves state-of-the-art performance in part and connectivity accuracy and enables an interpretable hierarchical part assembly. Code is available at https://github.com//pkudba/3DHPA.
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 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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".