Stochastic Preconditioning for Neural Field Optimization
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Neural fields are a highly effective representation across visual computing. This work observes that fitting these fields is greatly improved by incorporating spatial stochasticity during training, and that this simple technique can replace or even outperform custom-designed hierarchies and frequency-space constructions. The approach is formalized as implicitly operating on a blurred version of the field, evaluated in-expectation by sampling with Gaussian-distributed offsets. Querying the blurred field during optimization greatly improves convergence and robustness, akin to the role of preconditioners in numerical linear algebra. This implicit, sampling-based perspective fits naturally into the neural field paradigm, comes at no additional cost, and is extremely simple to implement. We describe the basic theory of this technique, including details such as handling boundary conditions, and extending to a spatially-varying blur. Experiments demonstrate this approach on representations including coordinate MLPs, neural hashgrids, triplanes, and more, across tasks including surface reconstruction and radiance fields. In settings where custom-designed hierarchies have already been developed, stochastic preconditioning nearly matches or improves their performance with a simple and unified approach; in settings without existing hierarchies it provides an immediate boost to quality and robustness.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".