MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7131069750 · doi:10.1109/iccvw69036.2025.00395

3DGS-to-PC: 3D Gaussian Splatting to Dense Point Clouds

2025· article· W7131069750 on OpenAlexaff
Lewis A G Stuart, A. Morton, Ian Stavness, Michael P. Pound

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Language
FieldComputer Science
TopicComputer Graphics and Visualization Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPoint cloudGaussianGaussian processPoint (geometry)Representation (politics)PixelProcess (computing)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

3D Gaussian Splatting (3DGS) excels at producing highly detailed 3D reconstructions, but these scenes often require specialised renderers for effective visualisation. In contrast, point clouds are a widely used 3D representation and are compatible with most popular 3D processing soft-ware packages. In this work, we introduce 3DGS-to-PC, a highly customisable framework for transforming 3DGS scenes into dense, accurate point clouds. We first render new Gaussian colours by calculating the visual contributions that each Gaussian made to each pixel, and then as-signing these Gaussians with the colour of the pixel they contributed most to. We then remove Gaussians that contribute little to the scene, reducing noise. Finally, we gen-erate new points by sampling from each Gaussian as a mul-tivariate normal distribution, while removing erroneously generated points. The number of points per Gaussian is determined based on its relative scale and pixel contributions. The result is a dense point cloud that accurately represents each scene. At time of writing, there is no ded-icated method for converting a 3DGS scene into a point cloud. We evaluate our method against 3DGS meshing techniques - from which points can be sampled - and show that our method is competitive with state-of-the-art approaches that require training of the scene, while performing more efficiently than standard meshing methods, such as Pois-son Surface Reconstruction. 3DGS-to-PC is efficient, typically taking under a minute to process complex scenes, thus providing an effective tool for converting 3DGS data into robust point clouds. Our codebase can be accessed via https://github.com/Lewis-Stuart-11/3DGS-to-PC.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Scholarly communication
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 score0.846
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.000
Open science0.0020.003
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.297 · 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.

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 topicComputer Graphics and Visualization TechniquesFrench-language works237,207