Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 1 cited by

Drive Any Mesh: 4D Latent Diffusion for Mesh Deformation from Video

T0 review · 3 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read DriveAnyMesh claims a single monocular video and a still 3D mesh are enough to generate render-ready vertex-trajectory animations, replacing skeleton rigging and slow SDS optimization.

desk verdict A coherent engineering solution to mesh animation from monocular video, with real practical upside, but the headline numbers rest on an unfair baseline comparison and an untested monocular-vs-multi-view gap. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.07489 v1 pith:WIOZWVLL submitted 2025-06-09 cs.CV

Yahao Shi , Yang Liu , Yanmin Wu , Xing Liu , Chen Zhao , Jie Luo , Bin Zhou This is my paper
classification cs.CV
keywords 4Dgenerationmeshdeformationlatentdiffusionmonocularvideopointcloudtrajectoriessetsvideo-drivenanimationrendering-enginecompatibility
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

DriveAnyMesh proposes to turn a static 3D mesh into an animated 4D asset by learning the conditional distribution $\mathbf{P}\sim p(\mathbf{P}\mid \mathbf{P}_1,\mathbf{V})$ of later mesh-vertex point clouds given the initial mesh and a monocular video. The paper's aim is to replace two existing routes to 4D content—skeleton binding, which needs manual rigging per asset, and score-distillation generation from scratch, which is slow and produces renderer-unfriendly outputs—with direct, explicit per-vertex trajectories. A 4D latent diffusion model, built on transformer-based latent sets that encode geometry and motion, denoises a whole sequence of latent frames conditioned on the mesh and video, and a decoder turns them into point-cloud trajectories that drive the mesh vertices. The authors report about 10 seconds of inference for 30 frames on a single NPU and better appearance, geometry, and human-preference scores than four prior 4D-generation baselines.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the latent set, a fixed-size set of $M$ latent vectors that encodes both the starting geometry and the deformation between two keyframes. The encoder uses a geometry head with cross-attention between farthest-point-sampled and full point clouds, plus a multi-view appearance head built from a vision transformer with Plücker camera embeddings and pixel shuffle, fused by self-attention; a KL-regularized bottleneck compresses the result. The diffusion stage is a transformer-based denoiser following the EDM formulation, alternating spatial self-attention, cross-attention on the initial point cloud and the video frames, and temporal self-attention across each latent point's trajectory. The decoder reconstructs each frame's deformed point cloud from these latent sets, and a threshold refinement freezes points whose predicted displacement is tiny, reducing jitter.

What would settle it

Run the trained model on a held-out test mesh from a category not seen in training, using a monocular video that contains a large articulation or camera motion, and compare the predicted vertex trajectories against the ground-truth mesh animation; if the Chamfer distance is no better than keeping the mesh frozen, or if rigid parts visibly bend, the claimed cross-category generalization fails.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper claims that the conditional distribution of vertex trajectories, conditioned only on the initial mesh and a monocular video, can be learned in a compressed latent space and that samples decode into high-quality mesh animations compatible with modern rendering engines. The method represents an animation as latent sets, fixed-size collections of vectors that jointly encode the initial shape and the deformation between frames, and uses a transformer-based variational autoencoder to turn the mesh and rendered multi-view images into these sets. A spatiotemporal transformer-based diffusion denoiser, trained with the EDM objective, exchanges information across all latent frames and conditions on the mesh plus the video; the VAE decoder then queries each latent set to deform the original point cloud. The paper's experiments on a curated 40,000-asset motion dataset are reported to beat four prior 4D-generation baselines on appearance metrics, Chamfer distance, and user-rated appearance and motion, and to preserve mesh topology so the result can be exported to rasterization engines.

Load-bearing premise

The method assumes that a single monocular video, together with the input mesh, carries enough information to predict a plausible 3D vertex trajectory for objects never seen in training, even though training uses four fixed orthogonal views and the temporal module never receives the timestamp of a frame.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the central claim holds, animating an existing game or film asset requires only a driving video, not a hand-built skeleton or per-asset rigging.
  • Generating 30 frames of vertex trajectories takes around 10 seconds on a single NPU, replacing hours of SDS optimization in 4D content pipelines.
  • Because the output is explicit per-vertex trajectories, the animation can be exported directly to rasterization-based rendering engines and edited per vertex.
  • The disentanglement of input mesh and driving video enables motion transfer: one video can drive many different static assets.
  • The curated 40,000-asset motion dataset, if released, becomes a training resource for other 4D generation and video-to-motion models.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • A natural extension would be to condition on multiple or interactive videos, enabling style-controlled animation of a single mesh from different motion sources.
  • Since the temporal module deliberately ignores timestamps, the method probably captures qualitative motion style rather than precise timing; adding explicit temporal conditioning could improve synchronization with audio or event cues, at the cost of generalization.
  • The per-point deformation without rigid-body constraints suggests that physically rigid objects are the hardest case; coupling the diffusion output with a rigidity-preserving post-processing step would be a testable fix.
  • The same latent-set formulation could apply to meshes with changing topology or to non-mesh deformable objects if the VAE decoder were replaced by a dense field decoder.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 6 minor

Summary. This paper introduces DriveAnyMesh, a method that takes a static 3D mesh P1 and a monocular video V, and outputs a sequence of point-cloud trajectories that deform the mesh vertices. The authors propose a transformer-based variational autoencoder that encodes the initial point cloud and multi-view images into latent sets, and a spatiotemporal transformer-based diffusion model that denoises these latents conditioned on P1 and the video. They construct a dataset of 40k textured and 10k untextured animated Objaverse objects, and report quantitative and user-study comparisons against DreamGaussian4D, Consistent4D, STAG4D, and DreamMesh4D, along with ablations of loss and latent size. The main claimed contributions are a rendering-engine-compatible 4D representation, a large-scale 4D asset dataset, and state-of-the-art performance on mesh animation from monocular video.

Significance. If the central claims were fully supported, this would be a practically valuable step for animating existing 3D assets without skeleton binding, with an industrial application story and a notably fast inference time (about 10 s for 30 frames). The paper also delivers a clearly described dataset curation pipeline on top of Objaverse and a detailed set of training equations. The held-out test split is a positive sign. However, the evaluation as presented does not yet establish the claimed conditional distribution p(P|P1,V): the target latents are learned from multi-view inputs while inference uses monocular video, and the main quantitative comparison gives the proposed method access to the ground-truth mesh while baselines do not receive it. These issues are load-bearing for the headline claims.

major comments (3)
  1. [Sec. 3.3, Eqs. (2)-(3); Sec. 3.4, Eq. (9)] The target latents Zt used in the denoising objective are produced by a VAE encoder that is trained only with v=4 orthogonal views, whereas the diffusion condition at inference is a monocular video. The manuscript never states whether the It in Eq. (9) is the four-view stack or a single frame, and no experiment varies the number of condition views. If the denoiser was trained on multi-view conditions, inference from a single viewpoint is an unquantified domain shift; if trained on a single view, the notation conceals a key design decision. The statement in Sec. 3.3 that multi-view appearance encoding 'provides the foundation for enabling the latent diffusion model to relax its constraints to a monocular video' is an assertion without supporting evidence. This gap directly affects the learnability of the claimed conditional distribution p(P|P1,V).
  2. [Sec. 4.1 and Table 1] The quantitative comparison with DreamGaussian4D, Consistent4D, STAG4D, and DreamMesh4D is not on equal terms. Those methods reconstruct a dynamic object from a monocular video and do not receive the initial mesh P1, while DriveAnyMesh is given the ground-truth input asset. The reported 24.39 PSNR versus 17.03 for the closest baseline therefore partly measures the additional information provided to our method, not just the quality of the generative model. The paper should either adapt all baselines to the same mesh-input setting, add a variant of the proposed method without the input mesh, or re-scope the claim to mesh-driven animation and avoid a direct head-to-head comparison.
  3. [Abstract and Sec. 4.1] The 'Drive Any Mesh' and cross-category generalization claims are supported only by a held-out split drawn from the same curated 40k-object Objaverse subset. There is no experiment on out-of-distribution objects, real videos, or different camera trajectories, and the dataset explicitly excludes abstract and fluid motions by construction. Without such evidence, the generalization statement in the title and abstract is overstated, and the reported numbers should be presented as results on this specific curated distribution.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Table 1] The Chamfer Distance column is labeled with an upward arrow (CD↑), but lower Chamfer distance is better; the values in Tables 1-3 treat lower as better. Please correct the arrow and define the metric explicitly.
  2. [Sec. 3.4] The sentence 'Given a monocular video V, the denoised latent sequence is denoted as {Z1,Z2,...,Zt}, which is encoded by V AE encoder using P1 and {I1,I2,...,It}' is inconsistent with the diffusion formulation: the denoised latents are outputs of the denoiser, not encodings by the VAE encoder; the target latents are the VAE encodings.
  3. [Sec. 3.4] The temporal attention description 'we fuse the features from the first row of each Zt.e.g., we fuse the features from the first row of each Zt' is duplicated and incomplete; please clarify how trajectories are formed and attended over.
  4. [Sec. 4.1] The user study uses only 15 evaluators and reports no confidence intervals or inter-rater agreement; the AS/MS scores in Table 1 should be interpreted accordingly.
  5. [Sec. 3.2 and Sec. 4.1] The paper states the dataset contains 40,000 textured and 10,000 untextured models, but the experiment section only describes evaluation on textured assets; please clarify how the untextured split is used and whether it is included in training.
  6. [Sec. 4.1] The statement that code will be publicly released is a promise, not a deliverable; no code or dataset link is provided at submission time, which limits reproducibility.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the learned conditional distribution p(P|P1,V) is trained on ground-truth vertex trajectories with a held-out test split; no self-citation chain or construction-fit makes the prediction equivalent to its inputs.

full rationale

The derivation chain is self-contained against external benchmarks. The VAE encoder (Eqs. 1-3) and decoder (Eq. 7) are trained to reconstruct the ground-truth point cloud P_t from initial P_1 and multi-view frames, while the diffusion denoiser (Eq. 8) is trained to recover the VAE latents Z_t conditioned on P_1 and the video V; the test trajectories are held out from training, so the reported PSNR/SSIM/LPIPS and Chamfer results are genuine generalization measurements rather than fitted outputs. There are no load-bearing self-citations: the cited 3DShape2VecSets latent-set representation is external prior work, and no uniqueness theorem or author-specific prior result is invoked to force the design. Concerns raised by the reader, such as the monocular-vs-multi-view condition gap and the baselines lacking access to the input mesh, are evaluation-fairness or domain-shift risks, not derivation-equivalence; they do not make the predicted trajectories equal to the training targets by construction. The dataset and test split are drawn from the same curated Objaverse subset, but that is a standard held-out evaluation protocol and does not constitute circular reasoning.

Assumptions & free parameters 5 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests mainly on learned components and a curated dataset rather than on a mathematical derivation. The free parameters are hyperparameters selected by ablation or hand-set losses; the axioms are domain assumptions about data validity, monocular-video conditioning, and point-based deformation. No invented entities are introduced.

free parameters (5)
  • Latent dimension C0=32 = 32
    Chosen from latent-size ablation in Tab. 3; the model's capacity and reconstruction quality depend on it.
  • Latent set width C=512 = 512
    Ablated in Tab. 3; larger latent width improves PSNR and Chamfer Distance.
  • KL regularization weight = 0.001
    Set in Sec. 3.3 Eq. 5; balances latent compression versus reconstruction, not derived.
  • Deformation loss weight lambda = 0.1
    Eq. 7 combines MSE and Euclidean distance with lambda=0.1; ablation in Tab. 2 shows the mix matters.
  • Jitter threshold delta = not given
    Sec. 3.5 resets points below a distance threshold; the value is not specified in the paper.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Objaverse 'Animated' labels correspond to correct dynamic 3D ground truth
    Sec. 3.2 filters assets but relies on the original animation data being topologically consistent and synchronized with rendered images.
  • domain assumption Monocular video with fixed camera pose is a valid test-time condition for training with four orthogonal views
    Sec. 3.1 and 3.4; the model is trained on multi-view renders but evaluated on monocular driving videos.
  • domain assumption Per-point deformation vectors are sufficient to represent arbitrary articulated and rigid motion
    Sec. 3.3 and Sec. 5; the conclusion admits this breaks for rigid objects, stating 'challenges in maintaining the shape of rigid objects'.
  • standard math EDM diffusion and transformer VAE formulations apply unchanged to latent-set sequences
    Sec. 3.3 to 3.4; the paper adopts the EDM denoising objective and KL reparameterization without deriving them.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Drive Any Mesh: 4D Latent Diffusion for Mesh Deformation from Video." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/WIOZWVLL

@misc{pith2026250607489,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Drive Any Mesh: 4D Latent Diffusion for Mesh Deformation from Video},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/WIOZWVLL}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.07489}
}
read the original abstract

We propose DriveAnyMesh, a method for driving mesh guided by monocular video. Current 4D generation techniques encounter challenges with modern rendering engines. Implicit methods have low rendering efficiency and are unfriendly to rasterization-based engines, while skeletal methods demand significant manual effort and lack cross-category generalization. Animating existing 3D assets, instead of creating 4D assets from scratch, demands a deep understanding of the input's 3D structure. To tackle these challenges, we present a 4D diffusion model that denoises sequences of latent sets, which are then decoded to produce mesh animations from point cloud trajectory sequences. These latent sets leverage a transformer-based variational autoencoder, simultaneously capturing 3D shape and motion information. By employing a spatiotemporal, transformer-based diffusion model, information is exchanged across multiple latent frames, enhancing the efficiency and generalization of the generated results. Our experimental results demonstrate that DriveAnyMesh can rapidly produce high-quality animations for complex motions and is compatible with modern rendering engines. This method holds potential for applications in both the gaming and filming industries.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2506.07489 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Starting with a 3D asset, DriveAnyMesh leverages monocular videos to produce dynamic animations that seamlessly integrate into modern rendering engines. As shown in the figure, given a 3D asset, we can render a still image and then generate a driving video using video diffusion. Our approach utilize the provided 3D assets and monocular video to generate the motion trajectories for the mesh vertices. Finally, we can … view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Overview of the proposed DriveAnyMesh framework. It is based on 4D latent diffusion, where we utilize latent sets as a motion representation that encodes both geometry and deformation between two frames (e.g., (P1, I1), (P1, I2), . . . , (P1, It)). On the left, we employ a transformer￾based VAE to learn the motion representation conditioned on multi-view images. This learned latent set can then be used to deform the… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Qualitative comparison of apperance and motion on our proposed datasets. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Visualization of application and failure cases. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_4.png]

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Advances in 4D Representation: Geometry, Motion, and Interaction

    cs.CV 2025-10 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    A representation-centric survey of 4D generation and reconstruction, organized by geometry, motion, and interaction, with qualitative trade-off comparisons across seven representation families.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

38 extracted references · 10 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    4d-fy: Text-to-4d generation using hybrid score distillation sampling

    Sherwin Bahmani, Ivan Skorokhodov, Victor Rong, Gordon Wetzstein, Leonidas Guibas, Peter Wonka, Sergey Tulyakov, Jeong Joon Park, Andrea Tagliasacchi, and David B Lindell. 4d-fy: Text-to-4d generation using hybrid score distillation sampling. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 7996–8006, 2024

    2024

  2. [2]

    Stable video diffusion: Scaling latent video diffusion models to large datasets, 2023

    Andreas Blattmann, Tim Dockhorn, Sumith Kulal, Daniel Mendelevitch, Maciej Kilian, Dominik Lorenz, Yam Levi, Zion English, Vikram V oleti, Adam Letts, Varun Jampani, and Robin Rombach. Stable video diffusion: Scaling latent video diffusion models to large datasets, 2023

    work page 2023

  3. [3]

    Hexplane: A fast representation for dynamic scenes

    Ang Cao and Justin Johnson. Hexplane: A fast representation for dynamic scenes. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 130–141, 2023

    2023

  4. [4]

    Objaverse-xl: A universe of 10m+ 3d objects

    Matt Deitke, Ruoshi Liu, Matthew Wallingford, Huong Ngo, Oscar Michel, Aditya Kusupati, Alan Fan, Christian Laforte, Vikram V oleti, Samir Yitzhak Gadre, et al. Objaverse-xl: A universe of 10m+ 3d objects. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 36, 2024

    work page 2024

  5. [5]

    Objaverse: A universe of annotated 3d objects

    Matt Deitke, Dustin Schwenk, Jordi Salvador, Luca Weihs, Oscar Michel, Eli VanderBilt, Ludwig Schmidt, Kiana Ehsani, Aniruddha Kembhavi, and Ali Farhadi. Objaverse: A universe of annotated 3d objects. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 13142– 13153, 2023

    2023

  6. [6]

    An image is worth 16x16 words: Transformers for image recognition at scale.arXiv preprint arXiv:2010.11929, 2020

    Alexey Dosovitskiy. An image is worth 16x16 words: Transformers for image recognition at scale.arXiv preprint arXiv:2010.11929, 2020

    arXiv 2010

  7. [7]

    K-planes: Explicit radiance fields in space, time, and appearance

    Sara Fridovich-Keil, Giacomo Meanti, Frederik Rahbæk Warburg, Benjamin Recht, and Angjoo Kanazawa. K-planes: Explicit radiance fields in space, time, and appearance. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 12479–12488, 2023

    work page 2023

  8. [8]

    Animatediff: Animate your personalized text-to-image diffusion models without specific tuning.arXiv preprint arXiv:2307.04725, 2023

    Yuwei Guo, Ceyuan Yang, Anyi Rao, Zhengyang Liang, Yaohui Wang, Yu Qiao, Maneesh Agrawala, Dahua Lin, and Bo Dai. Animatediff: Animate your personalized text-to-image diffusion models without specific tuning.arXiv preprint arXiv:2307.04725, 2023

    arXiv 2023

Show all 38 references
  1. [9]

    Denoising diffusion probabilistic models.Advances in neural information processing systems, 33:6840–6851, 2020

    Jonathan Ho, Ajay Jain, and Pieter Abbeel. Denoising diffusion probabilistic models.Advances in neural information processing systems, 33:6840–6851, 2020

    2020

  2. [10]

    Video diffusion models.Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 35:8633–8646, 2022

    Jonathan Ho, Tim Salimans, Alexey Gritsenko, William Chan, Mohammad Norouzi, and David J Fleet. Video diffusion models.Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 35:8633–8646, 2022

    2022

  3. [11]

    Sc-gs: Sparse- controlled gaussian splatting for editable dynamic scenes

    Yi-Hua Huang, Yang-Tian Sun, Ziyi Yang, Xiaoyang Lyu, Yan-Pei Cao, and Xiaojuan Qi. Sc-gs: Sparse- controlled gaussian splatting for editable dynamic scenes. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), pages 4220–4230, June 2024

    2024

  4. [12]

    Consistent4d: Consistent 360° dynamic object generation from monocular video

    Yanqin Jiang, Li Zhang, Jin Gao, Weiming Hu, and Yao Yao. Consistent4d: Consistent 360° dynamic object generation from monocular video. InThe Twelfth International Conference on Learning Representations, 2024

    2024

  5. [13]

    Hifi4g: High-fidelity human performance rendering via compact gaussian splatting

    Yuheng Jiang, Zhehao Shen, Penghao Wang, Zhuo Su, Yu Hong, Yingliang Zhang, Jingyi Yu, and Lan Xu. Hifi4g: High-fidelity human performance rendering via compact gaussian splatting. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 19734...

    2024

  6. [14]

    Elucidating the design space of diffusion-based generative models.Advances in neural information processing systems, 35:26565–26577, 2022

    Tero Karras, Miika Aittala, Timo Aila, and Samuli Laine. Elucidating the design space of diffusion-based generative models.Advances in neural information processing systems, 35:26565–26577, 2022

    2022

  7. [15]

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

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

    2023

  8. [16]

    Auto-encoding variational bayes.arXiv preprint arXiv:1312.6114, 2013

    Diederik P Kingma. Auto-encoding variational bayes.arXiv preprint arXiv:1312.6114, 2013

    2013 arXiv

  9. [17]

    Advances in 3d generation: A survey.arXiv preprint arXiv:2401.17807, 2024

    Xiaoyu Li, Qi Zhang, Di Kang, Weihao Cheng, Yiming Gao, Jingbo Zhang, Zhihao Liang, Jing Liao, Yan-Pei Cao, and Ying Shan. Advances in 3d generation: A survey.arXiv preprint arXiv:2401.17807, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  10. [18]

    Dreammesh4d: Video-to-4d generation with sparse-controlled gaussian-mesh hybrid representation

    Zhiqi Li, Yiming Chen, and Peidong Liu. Dreammesh4d: Video-to-4d generation with sparse-controlled gaussian-mesh hybrid representation. InAdvances in Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS), 2024. 10

    2024

  11. [19]

    Diffusion4d: Fast spatial-temporal consistent 4d generation via video diffusion models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.16645, 2024

    Hanwen Liang, Yuyang Yin, Dejia Xu, Hanxue Liang, Zhangyang Wang, Konstantinos N Plataniotis, Yao Zhao, and Yunchao Wei. Diffusion4d: Fast spatial-temporal consistent 4d generation via video diffusion models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.16645, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  12. [20]

    Zero- 1-to-3: Zero-shot one image to 3d object

    Ruoshi Liu, Rundi Wu, Basile Van Hoorick, Pavel Tokmakov, Sergey Zakharov, and Carl V ondrick. Zero- 1-to-3: Zero-shot one image to 3d object. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF international conference on computer vision, pages 9298–9309, 2023

    2023

  13. [21]

    Wonder3d: Single image to 3d using cross-domain diffusion

    Xiaoxiao Long, Yuan-Chen Guo, Cheng Lin, Yuan Liu, Zhiyang Dou, Lingjie Liu, Yuexin Ma, Song-Hai Zhang, Marc Habermann, Christian Theobalt, et al. Wonder3d: Single image to 3d using cross-domain diffusion. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern...

    2024

  14. [22]

    Dynamic 3d gaussians: Tracking by persistent dynamic view synthesis.arXiv preprint arXiv:2308.09713, 2023

    Jonathon Luiten, Georgios Kopanas, Bastian Leibe, and Deva Ramanan. Dynamic 3d gaussians: Tracking by persistent dynamic view synthesis.arXiv preprint arXiv:2308.09713, 2023

    2023 arXiv

  15. [23]

    Mimo: Controllable character video synthesis with spatial decomposed modeling.arXiv preprint arXiv:2409.16160, 2024

    Yifang Men, Yuan Yao, Miaomiao Cui, and Liefeng Bo. Mimo: Controllable character video synthesis with spatial decomposed modeling.arXiv preprint arXiv:2409.16160, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  16. [24]

    Nerfies: Deformable neural radiance fields

    Keunhong Park, Utkarsh Sinha, Jonathan T Barron, Sofien Bouaziz, Dan B Goldman, Steven M Seitz, and Ricardo Martin-Brualla. Nerfies: Deformable neural radiance fields. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision, pages 5865–5874, 2021

    2021

  17. [25]

    Dreamfusion: Text-to-3d using 2d diffusion

    Ben Poole, Ajay Jain, Jonathan T Barron, and Ben Mildenhall. Dreamfusion: Text-to-3d using 2d diffusion. arXiv preprint arXiv:2209.14988, 2022

    2022 arXiv

  18. [26]

    D-nerf: Neural radiance fields for dynamic scenes

    Albert Pumarola, Enric Corona, Gerard Pons-Moll, and Francesc Moreno-Noguer. D-nerf: Neural radiance fields for dynamic scenes. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), pages 10318–10327, June 2021

    2021

  19. [27]

    Dreamgaussian4d: Generative 4d gaussian splatting.arXiv preprint arXiv:2312.17142, 2023

    Jiawei Ren, Liang Pan, Jiaxiang Tang, Chi Zhang, Ang Cao, Gang Zeng, and Ziwei Liu. Dreamgaussian4d: Generative 4d gaussian splatting.arXiv preprint arXiv:2312.17142, 2023

    2023 arXiv

  20. [28]

    High-resolution image synthesis with latent diffusion models

    Robin Rombach, Andreas Blattmann, Dominik Lorenz, Patrick Esser, and Björn Ommer. High-resolution image synthesis with latent diffusion models. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), pages 10684–10695, June 2022

    2022

  21. [29]

    Real-time single image and video super-resolution using an efficient sub-pixel convolutional neural network

    Wenzhe Shi, Jose Caballero, Ferenc Huszár, Johannes Totz, Andrew P Aitken, Rob Bishop, Daniel Rueckert, and Zehan Wang. Real-time single image and video super-resolution using an efficient sub-pixel convolutional neural network. InProceedings of the IEEE conference on computer...

    2016

  22. [30]

    Mvdream: Multi-view diffusion for 3d generation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2308.16512, 2023

    Yichun Shi, Peng Wang, Jianglong Ye, Mai Long, Kejie Li, and Xiao Yang. Mvdream: Multi-view diffusion for 3d generation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2308.16512, 2023

    2023 arXiv

  23. [31]

    Make-a-video: Text-to-video generation without text-video data.arXiv preprint arXiv:2209.14792, 2022

    Uriel Singer, Adam Polyak, Thomas Hayes, Xi Yin, Jie An, Songyang Zhang, Qiyuan Hu, Harry Yang, Oron Ashual, Oran Gafni, et al. Make-a-video: Text-to-video generation without text-video data.arXiv preprint arXiv:2209.14792, 2022

    2022 arXiv

  24. [32]

    Text-to-4d dynamic scene generation

    Uriel Singer, Shelly Sheynin, Adam Polyak, Oron Ashual, Iurii Makarov, Filippos Kokkinos, Naman Goyal, Andrea Vedaldi, Devi Parikh, Justin Johnson, and Yaniv Taigman. Text-to-4d dynamic scene generation. arXiv:2301.11280, 2023

    2023 arXiv

  25. [33]

    Sv3d: Novel multi-view synthesis and 3d generation from a single image using latent video diffusion

    Vikram V oleti, Chun-Han Yao, Mark Boss, Adam Letts, David Pankratz, Dmitry Tochilkin, Christian Laforte, Robin Rombach, and Varun Jampani. Sv3d: Novel multi-view synthesis and 3d generation from a single image using latent video diffusion. InEuropean Conference on Computer Vi...

    2025

  26. [34]

    Sv4d: Dynamic 3d content generation with multi-frame and multi-view consistency.arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.17470, 2024

    Yiming Xie, Chun-Han Yao, Vikram V oleti, Huaizu Jiang, and Varun Jampani. Sv4d: Dynamic 3d content generation with multi-frame and multi-view consistency.arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.17470, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  27. [35]

    Grm: Large gaussian reconstruction model for efficient 3d reconstruction and generation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2403.14621, 2024

    Yinghao Xu, Zifan Shi, Wang Yifan, Hansheng Chen, Ceyuan Yang, Sida Peng, Yujun Shen, and Gordon Wetzstein. Grm: Large gaussian reconstruction model for efficient 3d reconstruction and generation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2403.14621, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  28. [36]

    Stag4d: Spatial-temporal anchored generative 4d gaussians

    Yifei Zeng, Yanqin Jiang, Siyu Zhu, Yuanxun Lu, Youtian Lin, Hao Zhu, Weiming Hu, Xun Cao, and Yao Yao. Stag4d: Spatial-temporal anchored generative 4d gaussians. InEuropean Conference on Computer Vision, pages 163–179. Springer, 2025. 11

    2025

  29. [37]

    3dshape2vecset: A 3d shape representation for neural fields and generative diffusion models.ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG), 42(4):1–16, 2023

    Biao Zhang, Jiapeng Tang, Matthias Niessner, and Peter Wonka. 3dshape2vecset: A 3d shape representation for neural fields and generative diffusion models.ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG), 42(4):1–16, 2023

    2023

  30. [38]

    Magicpose4d: Crafting articulated models with appearance and motion control.arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.14017, 2024

    Hao Zhang, Di Chang, Fang Li, Mohammad Soleymani, and Narendra Ahuja. Magicpose4d: Crafting articulated models with appearance and motion control.arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.14017, 2024. 12

    2024 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.