MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409368571 · doi:10.1609/aaai.v39i4.32373

Motion Decoupled 3D Gaussian Splatting for Dynamic Object Representation

2025· article· en· W4409368571 on OpenAlexaff
Xiaojun Hu, Libo Long, Jochen Lang

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRobotics and Sensor-Based Localization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceRepresentation (politics)Motion (physics)Object (grammar)Artificial intelligenceComputer vision

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dynamic object modeling is a critical challenge in 3D scene reconstruction. Previous methods typically maintain a canonical space to represent the object model, and a deformation field to express the object motion. However, this approach fails when the object undergoes large motions. The position variation caused by significant motion not only complicates the establishment of a canonical space, but also misleads the interpretation of the deformation field. To overcome the above weaknesses, we propose Motion Decoupled Dynamic 3D Gaussian Splatting (M5D-GS), the first 3D-GS model that separates motion and deformation modeling for dynamic object representation with large motion from a monocular camera. M5D-GS increases the practicality of 3D-GS, as it is common for objects to move, rotate, and deform simultaneously. Current datasets only contain object deformations with slight motions. We introduce a pipeline to reuse current benchmarks by adding large motions into the scene. We also introduce a new benchmark featuring several new scenes with complex motions, scenes augmented from previous datasets, and some real world recorded testcases, to fully demonstrate our improvements. Our M5D-GS significantly increases the accuracy under large motion scenarios while maintaining high rendering speed, which makes it suitable for dynamic object representation tasks including 4D novel view synthesis and real-time rendering.

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.717
Threshold uncertainty score0.521

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.301
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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial IntelligenceSame topicRobotics and Sensor-Based LocalizationFrench-language works237,207