MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413147320 · doi:10.1109/cvpr52734.2025.01053

Geometry-guided Online 3D Video Synthesis with Multi-View Temporal Consistency

2025· article· en· W4413147320 on OpenAlexaff
Hyunho Ha, Lei Xiao, Christian Richardt, Thu Nguyen-Phuoc, Chang-Il Kim, Min H. Kim, Douglas Lanman, Numair Khan

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Vision and Imaging
Canadian institutionsKootenay Association for Science & Technology
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceView synthesisConsistency (knowledge bases)Computer graphics (images)Computer visionArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We introduce a novel geometry-guided online video view synthesis method with enhanced view and temporal consistency. Traditional approaches achieve high-quality synthesis from dense multi-view camera setups but require significant computational resources. In contrast, selective-input methods reduce this cost but often compromise quality, leading to multi-view and temporal inconsistencies such as flickering artifacts. Our method addresses this challenge to deliver efficient, high-quality novel-view synthesis with view and temporal consistency. The key innovation of our approach lies in using global geometry to guide an image-based rendering pipeline. To accomplish this, we progressively refine depth maps using color difference masks across time. These depth maps are then accumulated through truncated signed distance fields in the synthesized view’s image space. This depth representation is view and temporally consistent, and is used to guide a pre-trained blending network that fuses multiple forward-rendered input-view images. Thus, the network is encouraged to output geometrically consistent synthesis results across multiple views and time. Our approach achieves consistent, high-quality video synthesis, while running efficiently in an online manner.

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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.972
Threshold uncertainty score0.486

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.286 · 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 designOther design
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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Vision and ImagingFrench-language works237,207