MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409368222 · doi:10.1609/aaai.v39i4.32403

EGSRAL:An Enhanced 3D Gaussian Splatting Based Renderer with Automated Labeling for Large-Scale Driving Scene

2025· article· en· W4409368222 on OpenAlexaff
Yixiong Huo, Guangfeng Jiang, Hongyang Wei, Ji Liu, Song Zhang, Han Liu, Mingjie Lu, Jinzhang Peng, Dong Li, Lu Tian, Emad Barsoum

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicComputer Graphics and Visualization Techniques
Canadian institutionsAdvanced Micro Devices (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceComputer graphics (images)Scale (ratio)Artificial intelligenceComputer visionCartographyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

3D Gaussian Splatting (3D GS) has gained popularity due to its faster rendering speed and high-quality novel view synthesis. Some researchers have explored using 3D GS for reconstructing driving scenes. However, these methods often rely on various types of data, such as depth maps, 3D bounding boxes, and trajectories of moving objects. Additionally, the lack of annotations for synthesized images limits their direct application in downstream tasks. To address these issues, we propose EGSRAL, a 3D GS-based method that relies solely on training images without extra annotations. EGSRAL enhances 3D GS's capability to model both dynamic objects and static backgrounds and introduces a novel adaptor for auto labeling, generating corresponding annotations based on existing annotations. We also propose a grouping strategy for vanilla 3D GS to address perspective issues in rendering large-scale, complex scenes. Our method achieves state-of-the-art performance on multiple datasets without any extra annotation. For example, the PSNR metric reaches 29.04 on the nuScenes dataset. Moreover, our automated labeling can significantly improve the performance of 2D/3D detection tasks.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.919
Threshold uncertainty score0.800

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.041
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.291 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial IntelligenceSame topicComputer Graphics and Visualization TechniquesFrench-language works237,207