atlas

Research map / 3D vision / NeRF and radiance fields

InNeRF360: Text-Guided 3D-Consistent Object Inpainting on 360-degree Neural Radiance Fields

CVPR 2024 · 3D vision › NeRF and radiance fields · approach: Sparse-input NeRF regularization · 4 citations (OpenAlex)

Read the paperCheck your idea against 108,967 papers

AI-extracted summary. Written by AI from the paper's full text. Numbers and claims can be wrong or missing context, so check the paper before you cite or build on it.

Text-guided removal and inpainting of objects in 360-degree NeRFs using depth-warped SAM segmentation refinement plus 3D diffusion geometric priors and LPIPS-based appearance priors.

Problem

Removing text-specified objects from unbounded 360-degree NeRF scenes while producing view-consistent inpainting without floater artifacts; existing NeRF inpainting methods are limited to frontal-facing scenes.

Approach

Refines text-grounded SAM masks across views by warping rendered NeRF depth to generate point prompts, then retrains an inpainted NeRF with a 3D DDPM-based density score distillation geometric prior to remove floaters and a patch-based LPIPS appearance prior.

Key results

Measured effects reported in the paper

What was changedWhereMeasuredEffect
Use InNeRF360 instead of Per-Frame360-degree NeRF inpainting · Cup and StarbucksLPIPS: 0.6149 -> 0.5377; 0.5981 -> 0.4523Helped
Use InNeRF360 instead of SPN-360360-degree NeRF inpainting · Cup and StarbucksFID: 252.34 -> 159.76; 215.28 -> 153.46Helped
Add Lin appearance prior (ablation)Nerfacto · Cup and StarbucksLPIPS: 0.7328 -> 0.7137; 0.6832 -> 0.6658Helped
Add Lgeom geometric prior (ablation)Nerfacto · Cup and StarbucksFID: 271.56 -> 189.57; 258.39 -> 166.45Helped
Add both Lin and Lgeom (ablation)Nerfacto · Cup and StarbucksLPIPS: 0.6197 -> 0.5377; 0.5795 -> 0.4523Helped
Add both Lin and Lgeom (ablation)Nerfacto · Cup and StarbucksFID: 189.57 -> 159.76; 166.45 -> 153.46Helped
Use InNeRF360 instead of per-frame inpainting360-degree NeRF inpainting · Garden, Room, Vasedeck, Bulldozer, Bearuser preference for temporal consistency: 89% vs 11%; 71% vs 29%; 81% vs 19%; 83% vs 17%; 92% vs 8%Helped

Limitations

Experimental setup

Datasets: MipNeRF-360 MipNeRF NeRFStudio scenes SPIn-NeRF IBRNet ShapeNet

Benchmarks: captured 360-degree scenes with and without object (Cup, Starbucks) user study on view consistency

Metrics: LPIPS FID user preference rate

Baselines: SPIn-NeRF segmentation (SPN) SPN-360 Dino video segmentation per-frame image inpainting Instruct-NeRF2NeRF

Builds on: Nerfacto SPIn-NeRF Segment Anything Model GLIP DSDS

Closest papers by meaning

Writing a paper in this area? scime draft is a free LaTeX editor with AI included, real-time co-authors and a check of your references and venue rules before you submit. It also imports OpenAI Prism projects.

Open scime draft

Get the next scime Dispatch and a monthly field update

Free. We send a confirmation link first; every email has a one-click unsubscribe. Privacy