Habitat Synthetic Scenes Dataset (HSSD-200): An Analysis of 3D Scene Scale and Realism Tradeoffs for ObjectGoal Navigation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We contribute the Habitat Synthetic Scenes Dataset (HSSD-200), a dataset of 211 high-quality 3D scenes, and use it to test navigation agent generalization to realistic 3D environments. Our dataset represents real interiors and contains a diverse set of 18,656 models of real-world objects. We investigate the impact of synthetic 3D scene dataset scale and realism on the task of training embodied agents to find and navigate to objects (ObjectGoal navigation). By comparing to synthetic 3D scene datasets from prior work, we find that scale helps in generalization, but the benefits quickly saturate, making visual fidelity and correlation to real-world scenes more important. Our experiments show that agents trained on our smaller-scale dataset can outperform agents trained on much larger datasets. Surprisingly, we observe that agents trained on just 122 scenes from our dataset outperform agents trained on 10,000 scenes from the ProcTHOR-10K dataset in terms of zero-shot generalization in real-world scanned environments.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.005 |
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".