Paper Reading AI Learner

Two-View Accumulation as the Primary Training Lever for Hybrid-Capture Gaussian Splatting: A Variance-Decomposition View of When Gradient Surgery Helps

2026-04-29 17:45:51
Sungjun Cho
       

Abstract

Hybrid-capture novel view synthesis combines images at substantially different camera distances (e.g., aerial drone and ground-level views). Standard 3D Gaussian Splatting (3DGS), trained for 30K iterations with one rendered view per optimizer step, under-fits the minority regime by 1-3 dB on five hybrid-capture benchmarks. We isolate the lever that closes this gap. Among compute-matched alternatives -- vanilla 60K iterations, magnitude corrections (GradNorm), direction-aware near/far gradient surgery, projective preconditioning, confidence-gated sample-level surgery, and a random two-view-per-step control -- the simplest structural change wins: rendering two views per optimizer step. The pairing rule (geometry-defined near/far, random, or active loss-disparity) does not change PSNR beyond seed variance on any of the five scenes; the structural change of having two views per step does. We propose a variance-decomposition framework that predicts and explains this finding: under bimodal camera regimes, between-regime gradient variance turns out to be small relative to within-regime variance in 3DGS, so structured and random pairings are variance-equivalent in expectation, and the variance halving from two-view accumulation itself is the dominant effect. We verify the framework on five scenes whose camera-altitude bimodality coefficients span [0.55, 1.00], and we report the negative result that direction-aware projection, magnitude correction, confidence gating, and an active loss-disparity pairing all fall within seed variance of random two-view pairing. The two-view structural lever transfers cleanly to the Scaffold-GS and Pixel-GS backbones. We position this work as an honest characterization of which training-side axes do and do not move PSNR for hybrid-capture 3DGS, together with the framework that explains why.

Abstract (translated)

URL

https://arxiv.org/abs/2605.00052

PDF

https://arxiv.org/pdf/2605.00052.pdf


Tags
3D Action Action_Localization Action_Recognition Activity Adversarial Agent Attention Autonomous Bert Boundary_Detection Caption Chat Classification CNN Compressive_Sensing Contour Contrastive_Learning Deep_Learning Denoising Detection Dialog Diffusion Drone Dynamic_Memory_Network Edge_Detection Embedding Embodied Emotion Enhancement Face Face_Detection Face_Recognition Facial_Landmark Few-Shot Gait_Recognition GAN Gaze_Estimation Gesture Gradient_Descent Handwriting Human_Parsing Image_Caption Image_Classification Image_Compression Image_Enhancement Image_Generation Image_Matting Image_Retrieval Inference Inpainting Intelligent_Chip Knowledge Knowledge_Graph Language_Model LLM Matching Medical Memory_Networks Multi_Modal Multi_Task NAS NMT Object_Detection Object_Tracking OCR Ontology Optical_Character Optical_Flow Optimization Person_Re-identification Point_Cloud Portrait_Generation Pose Pose_Estimation Prediction QA Quantitative Quantitative_Finance Quantization Re-identification Recognition Recommendation Reconstruction Regularization Reinforcement_Learning Relation Relation_Extraction Represenation Represenation_Learning Restoration Review RNN Robot Salient Scene_Classification Scene_Generation Scene_Parsing Scene_Text Segmentation Self-Supervised Semantic_Instance_Segmentation Semantic_Segmentation Semi_Global Semi_Supervised Sence_graph Sentiment Sentiment_Classification Sketch SLAM Sparse Speech Speech_Recognition Style_Transfer Summarization Super_Resolution Surveillance Survey Text_Classification Text_Generation Time_Series Tracking Transfer_Learning Transformer Unsupervised Video_Caption Video_Classification Video_Indexing Video_Prediction Video_Retrieval Visual_Relation VQA Weakly_Supervised Zero-Shot