LARM: A Large Articulated Object Reconstruction Model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Modeling 3D articulated objects with realistic geometry, textures, and kinematics is essential for a wide range of applications. However, existing optimization-based reconstruction methods often require dense multi-view inputs and expensive per-instance optimization, limiting their scalability. Recent feedforward approaches offer faster alternatives but frequently produce coarse geometry, lack texture reconstruction, and rely on brittle, complex multi-stage pipelines. We introduce LARM, a unified feedforward framework that reconstructs 3D articulated objects from sparse-view images by jointly recovering detailed geometry, realistic textures, and accurate joint structures. LARM extends LVSM—a recent novel view synthesis (NVS) approach for static 3D objects—into the articulated setting by jointly reasoning over camera pose and articulation variation using a transformer-based architecture, enabling scalable and accurate novel view synthesis. In addition, LARM generates auxiliary outputs such as depth maps and part masks to facilitate explicit 3D mesh extraction and joint estimation. Our pipeline eliminates the need for dense supervision and supports high-fidelity reconstruction across diverse object categories. Extensive experiments demonstrate that LARM outperforms state-of-the-art methods in both novel view and state synthesis as well as 3D articulated object reconstruction, generating high-quality meshes that closely adhere to the input images. Code for this paper is at https://github.com/sylviayuan-sy/LARM.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.003 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".