atlas

Research map / 3D vision / 3D generation

Physically Compatible 3D Object Modeling from a Single Image

NeurIPS 2024 · 3D vision › 3D generation · approach: Monocular 3D object reconstruction · 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.

Proposes physical compatibility optimization that treats rest-shape geometry as the variable under a static-equilibrium FEM hard constraint, so single-image 3D reconstructions become stable and match the input image under gravity.

Problem

Single-image 3D reconstruction methods ignore physics, so reconstructed objects topple, sag, or deform under gravity and diverge from the depicted static geometry.

Approach

Decomposes an object's visual geometry into mechanical properties, external forces, and rest-shape geometry, and optimizes the rest shape (parameterized by a plastic deformation field) subject to static equilibrium enforced as a hard constraint via implicit differentiation, so the physical object matches the image or stays upright.

Key results

Measured effects reported in the paper

What was changedWhereMeasuredEffect
Apply physical compatibility optimizationWonder3D · Objaverse evaluation setMean Stress (kPa): 10.68 ± 17.47 -> 0.45 ± 0.96Helped
Apply physical compatibility optimizationLGM · Objaverse evaluation setMean Stress (kPa): 1.14 ± 2.03 -> 1.01 ± 1.34Helped
Apply physical compatibility optimizationMeshLRM · Objaverse evaluation setMean Stress (kPa): 0.54 ± 1.41 -> 0.38 ± 1.05Helped
Apply physical compatibility optimizationTripoSR · Objaverse evaluation setMean Stress (kPa): 0.29 ± 1.28 -> 0.22 ± 0.94Helped
Apply physical compatibility optimizationTetSphere · Objaverse evaluation setMean Stress (kPa): 0.22 ± 0.51 -> 0.19 ± 0.78Helped
Apply physical compatibility optimizationWonder3D · Objaverse evaluation setStandable (%): 6.9 -> 72.4Helped
Apply physical compatibility optimizationLGM · Objaverse evaluation setStandable (%): 20.3 -> 85.5Helped
Apply physical compatibility optimizationMeshLRM · Objaverse evaluation setStandable (%): 29.6 -> 74.5Helped
Apply physical compatibility optimizationTripoSR · Objaverse evaluation setStandable (%): 24.2 -> 80.6Helped
Apply physical compatibility optimizationTetSphere · Objaverse evaluation setStandable (%): 32.8 -> 92.2Helped
Apply physical compatibility optimizationWonder3D · Objaverse evaluation setImg. Loss: 0.073 ± 0.063 -> 0.069 ± 0.048Helped
Apply physical compatibility optimizationLGM · Objaverse evaluation setImg. Loss: 0.121 ± 0.091 -> 0.116 ± 0.065Helped

Limitations

Experimental setup

Datasets: Objaverse

Benchmarks: Objaverse-derived evaluation set of 100 shapes

Metrics: number of connected components mean stress standability image loss fracture rate

Baselines: Wonder3D LGM MeshLRM TripoSR TetSphere

Builds on: Neo-Hookean material model TetSphere TetWild Adam

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