Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 3 cited by

LatticeWorld claims that a lightweight multimodal language model can translate text and sketch/height-map instructions into a 32×32 symbolic layout plus environment configuration, which Unreal Engine 5 renders into a large, dynamic 3D world

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

A multimodal LLM framework generates interactive Unreal-based 3D environments from text and height maps, claiming superior layout accuracy and over 90x faster production than manual methods.

T0 review reviewed 2026-08-05 challenge →

load-bearing objection A credible LLM-to-Unreal prototype with a clever symbolic layout representation, but the headline 'superior accuracy' and 90x efficiency claims are not supported by the evidence as written. the 4 major comments →

arxiv 2509.05263 v2 pith:CBLUCEC7 submitted 2025-09-05 cs.AI cs.CVcs.LG

LatticeWorld: A Multimodal Large Language Model-Empowered Framework for Interactive Complex World Generation

Yinglin Duan , Zhengxia Zou , Tongwei Gu , Wei Jia , Zhan Zhao , Luyi Xu , Xinzhu Liu , Yenan Lin
show 3 more authors
Hao Jiang Kang Chen Shuang Qiu
This is my paper
classification cs.AI cs.CVcs.LG
keywords 3D world generationmultimodal large language modelsprocedural content generationscene layout generationsymbolic layout representationUnreal Engineheight mapsinteractive agents
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

LatticeWorld is a proposal for turning ordinary language and a rough sketch of terrain into a large, playable 3D environment. The paper argues that a lightweight open language model (LLaMA-2-7B) can do the hard spatial reasoning if the scene is first reduced to a 32×32 grid of symbols, one letter per land-cover type, and that the same model can then pick plausible environmental parameters and agent placements. The generated layout and configuration are handed to Unreal Engine 5, which renders a dynamic scene with physics, weather, and adversarial non-player agents. The authors report that this pipeline beats general-purpose multimodal LLMs on layout fidelity and cuts production time from roughly 55 days to under a day, a claimed 90× efficiency gain. If these results hold, it would make industrial-grade virtual environments affordable for embodied-AI training, games, and simulation.

Core claim

The central claim is that 3D scene generation can be decomposed into two language-model tasks plus an engine call: (1) predict a 32×32 symbolic layout matrix whose letters encode asset categories and spatial adjacency, optionally conditioned on a height map or sketch; (2) predict a hierarchical JSON configuration specifying coarse scene attributes (season, weather, time) and fine parameters (density, materials, agent types, positions). The paper trains two fine-tuned LLaMA-2-7B models for these tasks, augments CLIP visual features through a learned projection, and feeds the outputs to Unreal Engine 5 through decoders that build masks and set engine properties. The paper claims this yields mo

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the sequential symbolic layout representation: a 32×32 matrix where each cell is a letter standing for a terrain or asset class (for example, W for water, F for forest). Because it is a fixed-length string with line breaks, spatial structure becomes token order, so a text-only LLM can generate it as ordinary sequence prediction. A decoder converts the symbol grid into per-class binary masks, stretched and edge-blended, which the engine reads as layout constraints. The second mechanism is a coarse-to-fine configuration hierarchy (season, weather, style, then density, material, rotation, agent parameters) serialized as JSON, which keeps hundreds of engine parameters

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the pre-built 3D asset library is a sunk cost; the reported sub-day production time and 90× speedup exclude the person-days spent creating those assets. If that one-time cost must be charged to a single generated environment, the efficiency advantage narrows substantially.

What would settle it

Audit the Table 10 ledger by adding the asset-library construction time into LatticeWorld's column and rerunning the same environment, or have two teams build one new environment from scratch with and without the pipeline; the true speedup is the ratio of total person-days. Separately, on held-out LoveDA and Wild splits, compute per-category intersection-over-union between the generated 32×32 symbol matrices and ground truth; LatticeWorld's accuracy claim over general vision-language models stands or falls on that quantitative metric, since the current comparison is visual.

Watch this falsifier. Get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

If this is right

  • If the pipeline works as reported, generating a new environment reduces to writing a paragraph and optionally sketching terrain; no 3D modeling skill is required from the user.
  • The framework is engine-portable: changing rendering backends only requires rewriting the layout decoder and configuration translator, so the same language models could drive Unity, Blender, or other engines.
  • Because the layout is a downloadable symbol matrix rather than a black-box image, scene generation becomes inspectable and editable: artists can correct letters before rendering.
  • Dynamic agents with simple pursuit and attack policies make the generated worlds candidates for embodied-agent and multi-agent training, not just visual demos.
  • The 90× efficiency claim, if true with amortized assets, means a studio could produce dozens of distinct environments in the time one manual environment takes.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The 90× speedup is computed against a 55-day manual job while charging LatticeWorld only 0.6 days for the rendering and assembly phase; the pre-built asset library's creation cost is excluded. For a single one-off environment, charging that asset cost would shrink the advantage; the claim is most honest when amortized across many environments.
  • The symbolic-grid trick is not limited to satellite land-cover maps. The same serialization could apply to any categorical spatial layout, such as floor plans, city zones, or dungeon maps, so a trained LLM on one domain may transfer to other grid-based spatial tasks.
  • The layout-accuracy comparison is qualitative; a more decisive test would compute per-category intersection-over-union between generated and ground-truth symbol matrices, which would also separate model strength from the symbolic representation's contribution.
  • Since the visual encoder is a fine-tuned CLIP and the sketch-to-heightmap model is a GAN, both modules are replaceable; upgrading them with newer conditional generators or vision encoders could improve fidelity without retraining the LLM.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. LatticeWorld proposes a pipeline for generating large-scale 3D interactive environments from multimodal instructions. A fine-tuned LLaMA-2-7B emits a 32x32 symbolic layout matrix from text and/or height-map/sketch inputs; a second fine-tuned LLaMA-2-7B generates hierarchical environmental configurations (scene attributes and agent parameters) in JSON; a decoder and translator map these outputs into Unreal Engine 5 for rendering. Training data are constructed from the LoveDA and a proprietary Wild dataset, with GPT-4o used for captioning and configuration annotation. The paper claims superior layout-generation accuracy and visual fidelity relative to existing LLM-based generators, and more than a 90x increase in industrial production efficiency relative to manual creation, supported by qualitative comparisons and a workload table.

Significance. If the claims were substantiated, the framework would be practically relevant: it combines a lightweight LLM with an interpretable symbolic layout representation and an industry-grade rendering engine, and it contributes new multimodal datasets for this task. The symbolic 32x32 matrix representation is a reasonable alternative to bounding-box annotations for irregularly shaped terrain regions, and the hierarchical configuration scheme mirrors industrial PCG workflows. However, the paper currently provides almost no measurable evidence for its headline claims. The qualitative comparisons are author-selected, the efficiency comparison is not apples-to-apples, and no quantitative accuracy or fidelity metric is reported. The contribution is therefore better characterized as a system demonstration than as a validated research result.

major comments (4)
  1. [Abstract; §8.2, Table 10] The abstract claims 'over a 90x increase in industrial production efficiency' based on Table 10's 55 manual days vs. <0.6 LatticeWorld days. Section 8.2 explicitly states that LatticeWorld 'uses pre-completed assets for sketching, modeling, and texturing,' while the manual 55-day figure includes those phases. The 0.6-day figure is thus the incremental time after a mature asset library exists, not an end-to-end generation time. The following sentence, 'This advantage increases when generating multiple environments, as the pre-completion cost is distributed,' confirms the comparison is not apples-to-apples. Without reporting the asset-library creation cost and the number of environments over which it is amortized, the 90x claim is unsupported.
  2. [§8.2, Tables 3-9; Abstract] The paper claims 'superior accuracy in scene layout generation and visual fidelity,' but all supporting comparisons are qualitative images selected by the authors. Table 3 shows generated 32x32 symbol matrices but reports no numeric score (e.g., per-symbol accuracy, mIoU, or edit distance) against held-out ground-truth layouts. Tables 4-9 are rendered scenes with no fidelity metric, no user study, and no statistical test. The phrase 'qualitative comparison' used in §8.2 cannot support the unqualified 'superior' claims. A quantitative evaluation over the test split, with baselines run under identical inputs and measured by objective metrics, is required.
  3. [§8.2, Tables 7-8] Comparisons with prior methods use 'published demonstrations from prior works' and 'similar scenes' rather than running the baseline systems under identical prompts, assets, terrain inputs, and rendering settings. This introduces uncontrolled differences in scene content, asset libraries, and rendering environments, making the claimed visual superiority non-testable. At minimum, the baselines should be executed under the same evaluation protocol, or the comparison should be explicitly labeled as illustrative rather than as evidence of superiority.
  4. [§7, §4.4] The training data rely heavily on GPT-4o for captioning layout images, height maps, and environmental configurations, but no human-agreement study, error analysis, or validation of the annotation quality is provided. Since the same type of model is also used as a baseline in Table 3, the reader cannot assess whether the fine-tuned model learns underlying spatial semantics or simply imitates GPT-4o's annotation style. Reporting annotation agreement or a small human-validated test set would strengthen the claim that the dataset is accurate.
minor comments (5)
  1. [General] The Introduction contains several typos and spacing errors, e.g., 'multimodall arge' and 'interactivec omplex'. The paper would benefit from a careful proofreading pass.
  2. [§4.1, p=32] The choice of p=32 for the symbolic layout resolution is stated without discussion. No ablation or sensitivity analysis is provided to show how layout fidelity varies with p, nor whether 32x32 adequately preserves the spatial relationships claimed in §4.1.
  3. [Table 1] Table 1 is difficult to parse: the alignment between symbols, the LoveDA dataset, and the Wild dataset is ambiguous, and several entries use em-dashes without explanation. A clearer legend or explicit listing of symbols used in each dataset is needed.
  4. [Table 10] In the submitted version, Table 10 appears to contain only a caption and no visible table body or column headers. The workload breakdown should be displayed so that the efficiency comparison can be inspected.
  5. [§3, Eq. (1)-(3)] The equations always include the visual embedding term Φ(v_L), but §4.2 describes a text-only mode where this term is removed. Using a conditional notation or explicitly defining Φ(v_L)=∅ in the text-only case would avoid ambiguity.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: the pipeline's outputs are learned on held-out data and the efficiency claim is an accounting comparison, not a self-referential derivation.

full rationale

LatticeWorld is an empirical systems paper: it fine-tunes LLaMA-2-7B on datasets derived from LoveDA/Wild plus GPT-4o captions, and evaluates layout generation on a held-out split against zero-shot commercial LLMs. No claim in the paper reduces to its own inputs by construction. The layout symbolic matrix is a lossy encoding of ground-truth segmentation, and the caption-to-matrix mapping is learned, not defined as the answer; the evaluation uses held-out instances and does not fit a parameter and then predict the same quantity. The 90x efficiency figure in Section 8.2 / Table 10 is a workload comparison, not a fitted prediction; the paper itself discloses that LatticeWorld's 0.6-day estimate excludes pre-completed asset creation ('while LatticeWorld uses pre-completed assets for sketching, modeling, and texturing'), which is a legitimate apples-to-apples limitation but not a circularity—the ratio is an accounting estimate, not a quantity derived from the model's assumptions. There are no load-bearing self-citations: the cited prior work (LLaVA, Pix2PixHD, etc.) is external and the framework does not invoke a uniqueness theorem or an ansatz smuggled in via citation. Consequently, the central claims—layout accuracy, visual fidelity, and interactive rendering—rest on the experimental pipeline rather than on circular definition.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

2 free parameters · 6 axioms · 0 invented entities

No fitted numerical parameters beyond the design choice of p=32 and the hand-defined symbol set. The main assumptions are domain assumptions about LLM trainability, GPT-4o annotation quality, CLIP height-map alignment, and the fairness of the manual-workload baseline; the latter is the most fragile.

free parameters (2)
  • Layout matrix resolution p = 32
    Chosen by hand (Section 4.1). Determines the coarseness of the symbolic layout and therefore the fidelity of generated scenes; an ad hoc design choice that the evaluation is based on.
  • Asset symbol mapping = Set of 10 symbols (A, B, D, F, G, R, S, W, etc.)
    Hand-defined in Table 1 to map terrain types to letters; the set of semantic categories is a modeling choice that constrains what the system can generate.
axioms (6)
  • domain assumption Supervised fine-tuning of LLaMA-2-7B on symbolic matrix outputs yields generalizable spatial layout generation
    The whole framework assumes the LLM can learn 2D layout structure from a flat string of letters given only paired captions (Section 4.4).
  • domain assumption GPT-4o annotations are accurate and unbiased
    Captions for training and instructions for evaluation are generated by GPT-4o; any systematic error or bias in annotation transfers to model behavior (Sections 4.4, 7.1).
  • domain assumption CLIP visual features, after projection, provide sufficient height-map understanding for layout-constrained generation
    The visual branch relies on CLIP ViT-B/32 plus a CNN projection (Section 4.3); claims about terrain-aware layout rest on this alignment working.
  • domain assumption The Google Earth / DEM-derived Wild dataset with simulated erosion is representative of real terrain and height maps
    The variable-height experiments depend on this proprietary dataset; no external validation of its realism is offered (Section 7.1).
  • domain assumption Unreal Engine's physics and agent rules constitute 'high-fidelity physics simulation' and 'competitive multi-agent interaction'
    The framework inherits UE capabilities but the paper does not measure simulation fidelity or interaction quality (Sections 3, 6).
  • ad hoc to paper Manual production baseline '55 days' is accurate and comparable
    The workload comparison in Table 10 uses an internal, non-public estimate of artist effort and excludes the pre-completed asset cost from LatticeWorld, making the baseline assumption favorable to the proposed method (Section 8.2).

reviewed 2026-08-05 · how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of LatticeWorld: A Multimodal Large Language Model-Empowered Framework for Interactive Complex World Generation." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/CBLUCEC7

@misc{pith2026250905263,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: LatticeWorld: A Multimodal Large Language Model-Empowered Framework for Interactive Complex World Generation},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/CBLUCEC7}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2509.05263}
}
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN
abstract

Recent research has been increasingly focusing on developing 3D world models that simulate complex real-world scenarios. World models have found broad applications across various domains, including embodied AI, autonomous driving, entertainment, etc. A more realistic simulation with accurate physics will effectively narrow the sim-to-real gap and allow us to gather rich information about the real world conveniently. While traditional manual modeling has enabled the creation of virtual 3D scenes, modern approaches have leveraged advanced machine learning algorithms for 3D world generation, with most recent advances focusing on generative methods that can create virtual worlds based on user instructions. This work explores such a research direction by proposing LatticeWorld, a simple yet effective 3D world generation framework that streamlines the industrial production pipeline of 3D environments. LatticeWorld leverages lightweight LLMs (LLaMA-2-7B) alongside the industry-grade rendering engine (e.g., Unreal Engine 5) to generate a dynamic environment. Our proposed framework accepts textual descriptions and visual instructions as multimodal inputs and creates large-scale 3D interactive worlds with dynamic agents, featuring competitive multi-agent interaction, high-fidelity physics simulation, and real-time rendering. We conduct comprehensive experiments to evaluate LatticeWorld, showing that it achieves superior accuracy in scene layout generation and visual fidelity. Moreover, LatticeWorld achieves over a $90\times$ increase in industrial production efficiency while maintaining high creative quality compared with traditional manual production methods. Our demo video is available at https://youtu.be/8VWZXpERR18

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2509.05263 by Hao Jiang, Kang Chen, Luyi Xu, Shuang Qiu, Tongwei Gu, Wei Jia, Xinzhu Liu, Yenan Lin, Yinglin Duan, Zhan Zhao, Zhengxia Zou.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Demonstration of generated results via LatticeWorld [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Technical framework of LatticeWorld of LatticeWorld. Eventually, we create a playable virtual world, where the main agent can be controlled to interact with other virtual agents. The main agent’s actions are currently controlled through input devices, but this can be easily expanded to AI algorithmic policies by using existing UE plug-ins. Our primary focus is on the methodology for creating virtual worlds… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Illustration of the dataset construction process. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_3.png] view at source ↗

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. 3D Generation for Embodied AI and Robotic Simulation: A Survey

    cs.RO 2026-04 accept novelty 7.0

    3D generation for embodied AI is shifting from visual realism toward interaction readiness, organized into data generation, simulation environments, and sim-to-real bridging roles.

  2. 3D Generation for Embodied AI and Robotic Simulation: A Survey

    cs.RO 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 3.0

    The survey organizes 3D generation for embodied AI into data generators for assets, simulation environments for interaction, and sim-to-real bridges, noting a shift toward interaction readiness and listing bottlenecks...

  3. 3D Generation for Embodied AI and Robotic Simulation: A Survey

    cs.RO 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 2.0

    The paper surveys 3D generation techniques for embodied AI and robotics, categorizing them into data generation, simulation environments, and sim-to-real bridging while identifying bottlenecks in physical validity and...

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

74 extracted references · 44 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper · 1 internal anchor

  1. [1]

    Flamingo: a visual language model for few-shot learning.Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 35:23716–23736, 2022

    Jean-Baptiste Alayrac, Jeff Donahue, Pauline Luc, Antoine Miech, Iain Barr, Yana Hasson, Karel Lenc, Arthur Mensch, Katherine Millican, Malcolm Reynolds, et al. Flamingo: a visual language model for few-shot learning.Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 35:23716–23736, 2022

    2022

  2. [2]

    The claude 3 model family: Opus, sonnet, haiku.Claude-3 Model Card, 2024

    AI Anthropic. The claude 3 model family: Opus, sonnet, haiku.Claude-3 Model Card, 2024

    2024

  3. [3]

    Deterministic chaos game: a new fractal based pseudo-random number generator and its cryptographic application.Journal of Information Security and Applications, 52:102472, 2020

    Peyman Ayubi, Saeed Setayeshi, and Amir Masoud Rahmani. Deterministic chaos game: a new fractal based pseudo-random number generator and its cryptographic application.Journal of Information Security and Applications, 52:102472, 2020

    work page 2020

  4. [4]

    Procedural content generation using neuroevolution and novelty search for diverse video game levels

    Michael Beukman, Christopher W Cleghorn, and Steven James. Procedural content generation using neuroevolution and novelty search for diverse video game levels. InProceedings of the Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference, pages 1028–1037, 2022

    work page 2022

  5. [5]

    Flip: a low-dissipation, particle-in-cell method for fluid flow.Computer Physics Communications, 48(1):25–38, 1988

    Jeremiah U Brackbill, Douglas B Kothe, and Hans M Ruppel. Flip: a low-dissipation, particle-in-cell method for fluid flow.Computer Physics Communications, 48(1):25–38, 1988

    work page 1988

  6. [6]

    Language models are few-shot learn- ers.Advances in neural information processing systems, 33:1877–1901, 2020

    Tom Brown, Benjamin Mann, Nick Ryder, Melanie Subbiah, Jared D Kaplan, Prafulla Dhariwal, Arvind Neelakantan, Pranav Shyam, Girish Sastry, Amanda Askell, et al. Language models are few-shot learn- ers.Advances in neural information processing systems, 33:1877–1901, 2020

    1901

  7. [7]

    Text-to-3d using gaussian splatting

    Zilong Chen, Feng Wang, Yikai Wang, and Huaping Liu. Text-to-3d using gaussian splatting. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 21401– 21412, 2024

    work page 2024

  8. [8]

    DeepSeek-AI, Daya Guo, Dejian Yang, Haowei Zhang, Junxiao Song, Ruoyu Zhang, Runxin Xu, Qihao Zhu, Shirong Ma, Peiyi Wang, Xiao Bi, Xiaokang Zhang, Xingkai Yu, Yu Wu, Z. F. Wu, Zhibin Gou, Zhihong Shao, Zhuoshu Li, Ziyi Gao, Aixin Liu, Bing Xue, Bingxuan Wang, Bochao Wu, Bei Feng, Chengda Lu, Chenggang Zhao, Chengqi Deng, Chenyu Zhang, Chong Ruan, Damai D...

    work page 2025

  9. [9]

    Citygen: Infinite and controllable 3d city layout generation, 2023

    Jie Deng, Wenhao Chai, Jianshu Guo, Qixuan Huang, Wenhao Hu, Jenq-Neng Hwang, and Gaoang Wang. Citygen: Infinite and controllable 3d city layout generation, 2023. 20

    work page 2023

  10. [10]

    Citycraft: A real crafter for 3d city generation

    Jie Deng, Wenhao Chai, Junsheng Huang, Zhonghan Zhao, Qixuan Huang, Mingyan Gao, Jianshu Guo, Shengyu Hao, Wenhao Hu, Jenq-Neng Hwang, et al. Citycraft: A real crafter for 3d city generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.04983, 2024

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  11. [11]

    Illuminating diverse neural cellular automata for level generation

    Sam Earle, Justin Snider, Matthew C Fontaine, Stefanos Nikolaidis, and Julian Togelius. Illuminating diverse neural cellular automata for level generation. InProceedings of the Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference, pages 68–76, 2022

    work page 2022

  12. [12]

    A survey on the procedural generation of virtual worlds

    Jonas Freiknecht and Wolfgang Effelsberg. A survey on the procedural generation of virtual worlds. Multimodal Technologies and Interaction, 1(4):27, 2017

    work page 2017

  13. [13]

    Scenescape: Text-driven consistent scene generation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2302.01133, 2023

    Rafail Fridman, Amit Abecasis, Yoni Kasten, and Tali Dekel. Scenescape: Text-driven consistent scene generation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2302.01133, 2023

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  14. [14]

    Scenescape: Text-driven consistent scene generation.Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 36, 2024

    Rafail Fridman, Amit Abecasis, Yoni Kasten, and Tali Dekel. Scenescape: Text-driven consistent scene generation.Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 36, 2024

    work page 2024

  15. [15]

    Automatically testing self-driving cars with search- based procedural content generation

    Alessio Gambi, Marc Mueller, and Gordon Fraser. Automatically testing self-driving cars with search- based procedural content generation. InProceedings of the 28th ACM SIGSOFT International Sympo- sium on Software Testing and Analysis, pages 318–328, 2019

    work page 2019

  16. [16]

    Blendergpt.https://github.com/gd3kr/BlenderGPT, April 2023

    gd3kr. Blendergpt.https://github.com/gd3kr/BlenderGPT, April 2023

    work page 2023

  17. [17]

    Genie-2: Advanced interactive virtual environment.https://genie2.co/, 2024

    Genie-2 Team. Genie-2: Advanced interactive virtual environment.https://genie2.co/, 2024. Ac- cessed: 2024-12-12

    work page 2024

  18. [18]

    Interactive example-based terrain authoring with conditional generative adversarial networks

    ´Eric Gu´ erin, Julie Digne, Eric Galin, Adrien Peytavie, Christian Wolf, Bedrich Benes, and Beno ˆ ıt Martinez. Interactive example-based terrain authoring with conditional generative adversarial networks. ACM Trans. Graph., 36(6):228–1, 2017

    work page 2017

  19. [19]

    Text2room: Extracting textured 3d meshes from 2d text-to-image models

    Lukas H¨ ollein, Ang Cao, Andrew Owens, Justin Johnson, and Matthias Nießner. Text2room: Extracting textured 3d meshes from 2d text-to-image models. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision, pages 7909–7920, 2023

    work page 2023

  20. [20]

    Scenecraft: An llm agent for synthesizing 3d scenes as blender code

    Ziniu Hu, Ahmet Iscen, Aashi Jain, Thomas Kipf, Yisong Yue, David A Ross, Cordelia Schmid, and Alireza Fathi. Scenecraft: An llm agent for synthesizing 3d scenes as blender code. InForty-first International Conference on Machine Learning, 2024

    2024

  21. [21]

    Mistral 7b

    Albert Q Jiang, Alexandre Sablayrolles, Arthur Mensch, Chris Bamford, Devendra Singh Chaplot, Diego de las Casas, Florian Bressand, Gianna Lengyel, Guillaume Lample, Lucile Saulnier, et al. Mistral 7b. arXiv e-prints, pages arXiv–2310, 2023

    work page 2023

  22. [22]

    3d gaussian splatting for real-time radiance field rendering.ACM Transactions on Graphics (SIGGRAPH), 42(4), July 2023

    Bernhard Kerbl, Georgios Kopanas, Thomas Leimk¨ uhler, and George Drettakis. 3d gaussian splatting for real-time radiance field rendering.ACM Transactions on Graphics (SIGGRAPH), 42(4), July 2023

    work page 2023

  23. [23]

    Pcgrl: Procedural content genera- tion via reinforcement learning

    Ahmed Khalifa, Philip Bontrager, Sam Earle, and Julian Togelius. Pcgrl: Procedural content genera- tion via reinforcement learning. InProceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Interactive Digital Entertainment, volume 16, pages 95–101, 2020

    work page 2020

  24. [24]

    Karen Liu, Hyowon Gweon, Jiajun Wu, Li Fei-Fei, and Silvio Savarese

    Chengshu Li, Fei Xia, Roberto Mart ´ ın-Mart ´ ın, Michael Lingelbach, Sanjana Srivastava, Bokui Shen, Kent Vainio, Cem Gokmen, Gokul Dharan, Tanish Jain, Andrey Kurenkov, C. Karen Liu, Hyowon Gweon, Jiajun Wu, Li Fei-Fei, and Silvio Savarese. igibson 2.0: Object-centric simulation for robot learning of everyday household tasks, 2021

    work page 2021

  25. [25]

    Dreamscene: 3d gaussian-based text-to-3d scene generation via formation pattern sampling

    Haoran Li, Haolin Shi, Wenli Zhang, Wenjun Wu, Yong Liao, Lin Wang, Lik-hang Lee, and Peng Yuan Zhou. Dreamscene: 3d gaussian-based text-to-3d scene generation via formation pattern sampling. In European Conference on Computer Vision, pages 214–230. Springer, 2025. 21

    work page 2025

  26. [26]

    Director3D: Real-world Camera Trajectory and 3D Scene Generation from Text

    Xinyang Li, Zhangyu Lai, Linning Xu, Yansong Qu, Liujuan Cao, Shengchuan Zhang, Bo Dai, and Rongrong Ji. Director3d: Real-world camera trajectory and 3d scene generation from text.arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.17601, 2024

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  27. [27]

    Llm-grounded diffusion: Enhancing prompt under- standing of text-to-image diffusion models with large language models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2305.13655, 2023

    Long Lian, Boyi Li, Adam Yala, and Trevor Darrell. Llm-grounded diffusion: Enhancing prompt under- standing of text-to-image diffusion models with large language models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2305.13655, 2023

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  28. [28]

    Softgym: Benchmarking deep reinforcement learning for deformable object manipulation, 2021

    Xingyu Lin, Yufei Wang, Jake Olkin, and David Held. Softgym: Benchmarking deep reinforcement learning for deformable object manipulation, 2021

    work page 2021

  29. [29]

    Visual instruction tuning.Advances in neural information processing systems, 36, 2023

    Haotian Liu, Chunyuan Li, Qingyang Wu, and Yong Jae Lee. Visual instruction tuning.Advances in neural information processing systems, 36, 2023

    work page 2023

  30. [30]

    Controllable procedural generation of landscapes

    Jia-Hong Liu, Shao-Kui Zhang, Chuyue Zhang, and Song-Hai Zhang. Controllable procedural generation of landscapes. InACM Multimedia 2024, 2024

    work page 2024

  31. [31]

    Deep learning for procedural content generation.Neural Computing and Applications, 33(1):19–37, 2021

    Jialin Liu, Sam Snodgrass, Ahmed Khalifa, Sebastian Risi, Georgios N Yannakakis, and Julian Togelius. Deep learning for procedural content generation.Neural Computing and Applications, 33(1):19–37, 2021

    work page 2021

  32. [32]

    Decoupled weight decay regularization.arXiv preprint arXiv:1711.05101, 2017

    I Loshchilov. Decoupled weight decay regularization.arXiv preprint arXiv:1711.05101, 2017

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  33. [33]

    Urban architect: Steerable 3d urban scene generation with layout prior.arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.06780, 2024

    Fan Lu, Kwan-Yee Lin, Yan Xu, Hongsheng Li, Guang Chen, and Changjun Jiang. Urban architect: Steerable 3d urban scene generation with layout prior.arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.06780, 2024

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  34. [34]

    Genex: Generating an explorable world, 2024

    Taiming Lu, Tianmin Shu, Junfei Xiao, Luoxin Ye, Jiahao Wang, Cheng Peng, Chen Wei, Daniel Khashabi, Rama Chellappa, Alan Yuille, and Jieneng Chen. Genex: Generating an explorable world, 2024

    work page 2024

  35. [35]

    Llama 3 model, 2024

    MetaAI. Llama 3 model, 2024. Accessed: 2024-06-13

    work page 2024

  36. [36]

    Nerf: Representing scenes as neural radiance fields for view synthesis.Communications of the ACM, 65(1):99–106, 2021

    Ben Mildenhall, Pratul P Srinivasan, Matthew Tancik, Jonathan T Barron, Ravi Ramamoorthi, and Ren Ng. Nerf: Representing scenes as neural radiance fields for view synthesis.Communications of the ACM, 65(1):99–106, 2021

    2021

  37. [37]

    Particle-based fluid simulation for interactive applications

    Matthias M¨ uller, David Charypar, and Markus Gross. Particle-based fluid simulation for interactive applications. InProceedings of the 2003 ACM SIGGRAPH/Eurographics symposium on Computer animation, pages 154–159. Citeseer, 2003

    work page 2003

  38. [38]

    Instant neural graphics primitives with a multiresolution hash encoding.ACM Transactions on Graphics (ToG), 41(4):1–15, 2022

    Thomas M¨ uller, Alex Evans, Christoph Schied, and Alexander Keller. Instant neural graphics primitives with a multiresolution hash encoding.ACM Transactions on Graphics (ToG), 41(4):1–15, 2022

    work page 2022

  39. [39]

    Isaac sim 4.0 - robotics simulation and synthetic data generation

    NVIDIA. Isaac sim 4.0 - robotics simulation and synthetic data generation. https://developer.nvidia.com/isaac-sim, 2024

    work page 2024

  40. [40]

    GPT-4V(ision) system card, 2023

    OpenAI. GPT-4V(ision) system card, 2023

    2023

  41. [41]

    Gpt-4 technical report, 2024

    OpenAI. Gpt-4 technical report, 2024

    2024

  42. [42]

    Gpt-4o: Openai’s optimized language model.Technical Report, 2024

    OpenAI. Gpt-4o: Openai’s optimized language model.Technical Report, 2024. Accessed: 2024-10-01

    work page 2024

  43. [43]

    Training language models to follow in- structions with human feedback.Advances in neural information processing systems, 35:27730–27744, 2022

    Long Ouyang, Jeffrey Wu, Xu Jiang, Diogo Almeida, Carroll Wainwright, Pamela Mishkin, Chong Zhang, Sandhini Agarwal, Katarina Slama, Alex Ray, et al. Training language models to follow in- structions with human feedback.Advances in neural information processing systems, 35:27730–27744, 2022

    work page 2022

  44. [44]

    General video game ai: A multitrack framework for evaluating agents, games, and content generation algorithms.IEEE Transactions on Games, 11(3):195–214, 2019

    Diego Perez-Liebana, Jialin Liu, Ahmed Khalifa, Raluca D Gaina, Julian Togelius, and Simon M Lucas. General video game ai: A multitrack framework for evaluating agents, games, and content generation algorithms.IEEE Transactions on Games, 11(3):195–214, 2019. 22

    work page 2019

  45. [45]

    Virtualhome: Simulating household activities via programs

    Xavier Puig, Kevin Ra, Marko Boben, Jiaman Li, Tingwu Wang, Sanja Fidler, and Antonio Torralba. Virtualhome: Simulating household activities via programs. InProceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pages 8494–8502, 2018

    2018

  46. [46]

    Turner, Oleksandr Maksymets, Zsolt Kira, Mrinal Kalakrish- nan, Jitendra Malik, Devendra Singh Chaplot, Unnat Jain, Dhruv Batra, Akshara Rai, and Roozbeh Mottaghi

    Xavier Puig, Eric Undersander, Andrew Szot, Mikael Dallaire Cote, Tsung-Yen Yang, Ruslan Part- sey, Ruta Desai, Alexander William Clegg, Michal Hlavac, So Yeon Min, Vladim ´ ır Vondruˇ s, Theophile Gervet, Vincent-Pierre Berges, John M. Turner, Oleksandr Maksymets, Zsolt Kira, Mrinal Kalakrish- nan, Jitendra Malik, Devendra Singh Chaplot, Unnat Jain, Dhru...

    work page 2023

  47. [47]

    Learning transferable visual models from natural language supervision

    Alec Radford, Jong Wook Kim, Chris Hallacy, Aditya Ramesh, Gabriel Goh, Sandhini Agarwal, Girish Sastry, Amanda Askell, Pamela Mishkin, Jack Clark, et al. Learning transferable visual models from natural language supervision. InInternational conference on machine learning, pages 8748–8763. PMLR, 2021

    2021

  48. [48]

    Exploring the limits of transfer learning with a unified text-to-text transformer.Journal of machine learning research, 21(140):1–67, 2020

    Colin Raffel, Noam Shazeer, Adam Roberts, Katherine Lee, Sharan Narang, Michael Matena, Yanqi Zhou, Wei Li, and Peter J Liu. Exploring the limits of transfer learning with a unified text-to-text transformer.Journal of machine learning research, 21(140):1–67, 2020

    2020

  49. [49]

    Infinite photorealistic worlds using procedural gener- ation

    Alexander Raistrick, Lahav Lipson, Zeyu Ma, Lingjie Mei, Mingzhe Wang, Yiming Zuo, Karhan Kayan, Hongyu Wen, Beining Han, Yihan Wang, et al. Infinite photorealistic worlds using procedural gener- ation. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pages 12630–12641, 2023

    work page 2023

  50. [50]

    Hierarchical text- conditional image generation with clip latents.arXiv preprint arXiv:2204.06125, 1(2):3, 2022

    Aditya Ramesh, Prafulla Dhariwal, Alex Nichol, Casey Chu, and Mark Chen. Hierarchical text- conditional image generation with clip latents.arXiv preprint arXiv:2204.06125, 1(2):3, 2022

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  51. [51]

    Infiniteworld: A unified scalable simulation framework for general visual-language robot interaction, 2024

    Pengzhen Ren, Min Li, Zhen Luo, Xinshuai Song, Ziwei Chen, Weijia Liufu, Yixuan Yang, Hao Zheng, Rongtao Xu, Zitong Huang, Tongsheng Ding, Luyang Xie, Kaidong Zhang, Changfei Fu, Yang Liu, Liang Lin, Feng Zheng, and Xiaodan Liang. Infiniteworld: A unified scalable simulation framework for general visual-language robot interaction, 2024

    work page 2024

  52. [52]

    Urbanworld: An urban world model for 3d city generation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.11965, 2024

    Yu Shang, Jiansheng Chen, Hangyu Fan, Jingtao Ding, Jie Feng, and Yong Li. Urbanworld: An urban world model for 3d city generation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.11965, 2024

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  53. [53]

    Alfred: A benchmark for interpreting grounded instructions for everyday tasks

    Mohit Shridhar, Jesse Thomason, Daniel Gordon, Yonatan Bisk, Winson Han, Roozbeh Mottaghi, Luke Zettlemoyer, and Dieter Fox. Alfred: A benchmark for interpreting grounded instructions for everyday tasks. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pages 10740–10749, 2020

    2020

  54. [54]

    Roomdreamer: Text-driven 3d indoor scene synthesis with coherent geometry and texture.arXiv preprint arXiv:2305.11337, 2023

    Liangchen Song, Liangliang Cao, Hongyu Xu, Kai Kang, Feng Tang, Junsong Yuan, and Yang Zhao. Roomdreamer: Text-driven 3d indoor scene synthesis with coherent geometry and texture.arXiv preprint arXiv:2305.11337, 2023

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  55. [55]

    3d-gpt: Procedural 3d modeling with large language models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2310.12945, 2023

    Chunyi Sun, Junlin Han, Weijian Deng, Xinlong Wang, Zishan Qin, and Stephen Gould. 3d-gpt: Procedural 3d modeling with large language models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2310.12945, 2023

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  56. [56]

    Habitat 2.0: Training home assistants to rearrange their habitat, 2022

    Andrew Szot, Alex Clegg, Eric Undersander, Erik Wijmans, Yili Zhao, John Turner, Noah Maestre, Mustafa Mukadam, Devendra Chaplot, Oleksandr Maksymets, Aaron Gokaslan, Vladimir Vondrus, Sameer Dharur, Franziska Meier, Wojciech Galuba, Angel Chang, Zsolt Kira, Vladlen Koltun, Jitendra Malik, Manolis Savva, and Dhruv Batra. Habitat 2.0: Training home assista...

    work page 2022

  57. [57]

    Gemini: A family of highly capable multimodal models, 2024

    Gemini Team. Gemini: A family of highly capable multimodal models, 2024

    2024

  58. [58]

    What is procedural content generation? mario on the borderline

    Julian Togelius, Emil Kastbjerg, David Schedl, and Georgios N Yannakakis. What is procedural content generation? mario on the borderline. InProceedings of the 2nd international workshop on procedural content generation in games, pages 1–6, 2011. 23

    work page 2011

  59. [59]

    Llama 2: Open foundation and fine-tuned chat models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2307.09288, 2023

    Hugo Touvron, Louis Martin, Kevin Stone, Peter Albert, Amjad Almahairi, Yasmine Babaei, Nikolay Bashlykov, Soumya Batra, Prajjwal Bhargava, Shruti Bhosale, et al. Llama 2: Open foundation and fine-tuned chat models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2307.09288, 2023

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  60. [60]

    LoveDA: A remote sensing land-cover dataset for domain adaptive semantic segmentation, October 2021

    Junjue Wang, Zhuo Zheng, Ailong Ma, Xiaoyan Lu, and Yanfei Zhong. LoveDA: A remote sensing land-cover dataset for domain adaptive semantic segmentation, October 2021

    work page 2021

  61. [61]

    Loveda: A remote sensing land-cover dataset for domain adaptive semantic segmentation

    Junjue Wang, Zhuo Zheng, Ailong Ma, Xiaoyan Lu, and Yanfei Zhong. Loveda: A remote sensing land-cover dataset for domain adaptive semantic segmentation. In J. Vanschoren and S. Yeung, editors, Proceedings of the Neural Information Processing Systems Track on Datasets and Benchmarks, volume 1. Curran Associates, Inc., 2021

    work page 2021

  62. [62]

    Qwen2-vl: Enhancing vision-language model’s perception of the world at any resolution.arXiv preprint arXiv:2409.12191, 2024

    Peng Wang, Shuai Bai, Sinan Tan, Shijie Wang, Zhihao Fan, Jinze Bai, Keqin Chen, Xuejing Liu, Jialin Wang, Wenbin Ge, et al. Qwen2-vl: Enhancing vision-language model’s perception of the world at any resolution.arXiv preprint arXiv:2409.12191, 2024

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  63. [63]

    Finetuned language models are zero-shot learners.arXiv preprint arXiv:2109.01652, 2021

    Jason Wei, Maarten Bosma, Vincent Y Zhao, Kelvin Guu, Adams Wei Yu, Brian Lester, Nan Du, Andrew M Dai, and Quoc V Le. Finetuned language models are zero-shot learners.arXiv preprint arXiv:2109.01652, 2021

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  64. [64]

    Worldlabs: Ai-powered virtual world platform.https://www.worldlabs.ai/, 2024

    WorldLabs Team. Worldlabs: Ai-powered virtual world platform.https://www.worldlabs.ai/, 2024. Accessed: 2024-12-12

    work page 2024

  65. [65]

    Metaurban: An embodied ai simulation platform for urban micromobility.arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.08725, 2024

    Wayne Wu, Honglin He, Jack He, Yiran Wang, Chenda Duan, Zhizheng Liu, Quanyi Li, and Bolei Zhou. Metaurban: An embodied ai simulation platform for urban micromobility.arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.08725, 2024

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  66. [66]

    Procedural game map generation using multi-leveled cellu- lar automata by machine learning

    Zhixuan Wu, Yuwei Mao, and Qiyu Li. Procedural game map generation using multi-leveled cellu- lar automata by machine learning. InProceedings of the 2nd International Symposium on Artificial Intelligence for Medicine Sciences, pages 168–172, 2021

    work page 2021

  67. [67]

    Urban generative intelligence (ugi): A foundational platform for agents in embodied city environment.arXiv preprint arXiv:2312.11813, 2023

    Fengli Xu, Jun Zhang, Chen Gao, Jie Feng, and Yong Li. Urban generative intelligence (ugi): A foundational platform for agents in embodied city environment.arXiv preprint arXiv:2312.11813, 2023

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  68. [68]

    Gaussiandreamer: Fast generation from text to 3d gaussians by bridging 2d and 3d diffusion models

    Taoran Yi, Jiemin Fang, Junjie Wang, Guanjun Wu, Lingxi Xie, Xiaopeng Zhang, Wenyu Liu, Qi Tian, and Xinggang Wang. Gaussiandreamer: Fast generation from text to 3d gaussians by bridging 2d and 3d diffusion models. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 6796–6807, 2024

    work page 2024

  69. [69]

    Text2nerf: Text-driven 3d scene generation with neural radiance fields.arXiv preprint arXiv:2305.11588, 2023

    Jingbo Zhang, Xiaoyu Li, Ziyu Wan, Can Wang, and Jing Liao. Text2nerf: Text-driven 3d scene generation with neural radiance fields.arXiv preprint arXiv:2305.11588, 2023

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  70. [70]

    Llama-adapter: Efficient fine-tuning of language models with zero-init attention.arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.16199, 2023

    Renrui Zhang, Jiaming Han, Chris Liu, Peng Gao, Aojun Zhou, Xiangfei Hu, Shilin Yan, Pan Lu, Hongsheng Li, and Yu Qiao. Llama-adapter: Efficient fine-tuning of language models with zero-init attention.arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.16199, 2023

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  71. [71]

    3d-scenedreamer: Text-driven 3d-consistent scene generation

    Songchun Zhang, Yibo Zhang, Quan Zheng, Rui Ma, Wei Hua, Hujun Bao, Weiwei Xu, and Changqing Zou. 3d-scenedreamer: Text-driven 3d-consistent scene generation. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 10170–10180, 2024

    work page 2024

  72. [72]

    Unrealzoo: Enriching photo-realistic virtual worlds for embodied ai, 2024

    Fangwei Zhong, Kui Wu, Churan Wang, Hao Chen, Hai Ci, Zhoujun Li, and Yizhou Wang. Unrealzoo: Enriching photo-realistic virtual worlds for embodied ai, 2024

    work page 2024

  73. [73]

    Scenex: Procedural controllable large-scale scene generation via large-language models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2403.15698, 2024

    Mengqi Zhou, Jun Hou, Chuanchen Luo, Yuxi Wang, Zhaoxiang Zhang, and Junran Peng. Scenex: Procedural controllable large-scale scene generation via large-language models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2403.15698, 2024

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  74. [74]

    Dreamscene360: Unconstrained text-to-3d scene generation with panoramic gaussian splatting.arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.06903, 2024

    Shijie Zhou, Zhiwen Fan, Dejia Xu, Haoran Chang, Pradyumna Chari, Suya Bharadwaj, Tejas You, Zhangyang Wang, and Achuta Kadambi. Dreamscene360: Unconstrained text-to-3d scene generation with panoramic gaussian splatting.arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.06903, 2024. 24

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

This paper was first reviewed by deepseek-v4-flash on August 5, 2026.