MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406812170 · doi:10.1109/lra.2025.3533457

3DGS-CD: 3D Gaussian Splatting-Based Change Detection for Physical Object Rearrangement

2025· article· en· W4406812170 on OpenAlexaff
Ziqi Lu, Jianbo Ye, John Leonard

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Robotics and Automation Letters · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicVideo Surveillance and Tracking Methods
Canadian institutionsReach Technologies (Canada)
FundersMIT Portugal
KeywordsComputer scienceObject (grammar)GaussianArtificial intelligenceComputer visionPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present 3DGS-CD, the first 3D Gaussian Splatting (3DGS)-based method for detecting physical object rearrangements in 3D scenes. Our approach estimates 3D object-level changes by comparing two sets of unaligned images taken at different times. Leveraging 3DGS's novel view rendering and EfficientSAM's zero-shot segmentation capabilities, we detect 2D object-level changes, which are then associated and fused across views to estimate 3D change masks and object transformations. Our method canaccuratelyidentify changes incluttered environmentsusingsparse(as few as one) post-change images within as little as18 s. It does not rely on depth input, user instructions, pre-defined object classes, or object models – An object is recognized simply if it has been re-arranged. Our approach is evaluated on both public and self-collected real-world datasets, achieving up to14% higher accuracyandthree orders of magnitude fasterperformance compared to the state-of-the-art radiance-field-based change detection method. This significant performance boost enables a broad range of downstream applications, where we highlight threekey use cases:object reconstruction, robot workspace reset, and 3DGS model update.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.271 · 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

Citations7
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Robotics and Automation LettersSame topicVideo Surveillance and Tracking MethodsFrench-language works237,207