MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404525549 · doi:10.1145/3687759

GaussianObject: High-Quality 3D Object Reconstruction from Four Views with Gaussian Splatting

2024· article· en· W4404525549 on OpenAlexaff
Yang Chen, Sikuang Li, Jiemin Fang, Ruofan Liang, Lingxi Xie, Xiaopeng Zhang, Wei Shen, Qi Tian

Bibliographic record

VenueACM Transactions on Graphics · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicComputer Graphics and Visualization Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsComputer scienceComputer graphics (images)Object (grammar)GaussianQuality (philosophy)Artificial intelligenceComputer vision

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reconstructing and rendering 3D objects from highly sparse views is of critical importance for promoting applications of 3D vision techniques and improving user experience. However, images from sparse views only contain very limited 3D information, leading to two significant challenges: 1) Difficulty in building multi-view consistency as images for matching are too few; 2) Partially omitted or highly compressed object information as view coverage is insufficient. To tackle these challenges, we propose GaussianObject, a framework to represent and render the 3D object with Gaussian splatting that achieves high rendering quality with only 4 input images. We first introduce techniques of visual hull and floater elimination, which explicitly inject structure priors into the initial optimization process to help build multi-view consistency, yielding a coarse 3D Gaussian representation. Then we construct a Gaussian repair model based on diffusion models to supplement the omitted object information, where Gaussians are further refined. We design a self-generating strategy to obtain image pairs for training the repair model. We further design a COLMAP-free variant, where pre-given accurate camera poses are not required, which achieves competitive quality and facilitates wider applications. GaussianObject is evaluated on several challenging datasets, including MipNeRF360, OmniObject3D, OpenIllumination, and our-collected unposed images, achieving superior performance from only four views and significantly outperforming previous SOTA methods.

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)0.002
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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.262 · 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

Citations40
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACM Transactions on GraphicsSame topicComputer Graphics and Visualization TechniquesFrench-language works237,207