atlas

Research map / 3D vision / Gaussian splatting

HEIR: Learning Graph-Based Motion Hierarchies

NeurIPS 2025 · 3D vision › Gaussian splatting · approach: Monocular dynamic scene reconstruction · 0 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.

Learns graph-based motion hierarchies end-to-end via differentiable edge-weight learning on a k-NN proximity graph (Gumbel-Softmax parent sampling), decomposing absolute motion into parent-inherited and residual components, and applies it to 1D/2D synthetic motions and dynamic Gaussian splatting deformation.

Problem

Modeling motion hierarchies that decompose complex dynamics into coordinated simpler components, where existing methods rely on manually defined or heuristic hierarchies with fixed motion primitives that do not transfer across tasks.

Approach

Formulates hierarchy inference as differentiable graph learning: a GAT-based encoder learns parent-candidate edge weights on a k-NN proximity graph, Gumbel-Softmax samples a DAG parent assignment, and a Neumann-series decoder reconstructs absolute motion from parent-inherited plus residual relative motion, with a connectivity (algebraic connectivity) regularizer.

Key results

Measured effects reported in the paper

What was changedWhereMeasuredEffect
Use HEIR instead of Monte-Carlo hierarchy estimation1D hierarchical motion reconstruction · 1D hierarchical motion taskaccuracy: 5.0 \times 10^{-7} -> 73.0Helped
Add Gaussian noise (σ=0.05)HEIR rotational hierarchy reconstruction · Planetary Systemhierarchy reconstruction accuracy: 100% -> 73.6%Hurt
Use learned hierarchical deformation instead of SC-GSD-NeRF scene deformation · Excavator, Hook, Jumpingjacks, and WarriorPSNR: 21.56 vs 19.91; 18.3 vs 15.7; 21.54 vs 21.12; 16.17 vs 15.29Helped
Use learned hierarchical deformation instead of SC-GSD-NeRF scene deformation · Excavator, Hook, Jumpingjacks, and WarriorSSIM: 0.917 vs 0.88; 0.93 vs 0.92; 0.952 vs 0.944; 0.934 vs 0.926Helped
Use learned hierarchical deformation instead of SC-GSD-NeRF scene deformation · Excavator, Hook, Jumpingjacks, and WarriorCLIP-I: 0.978 vs 0.978; 0.971 vs 0.958; 0.975 vs 0.948; 0.985 vs 0.965Mixed
Use learned hierarchical deformation instead of SC-GSD-NeRF scene deformation · Excavator, Hook, Jumpingjacks, and WarriorLPIPS: 0.0383 vs 0.065; 0.0617 vs 0.0954; 0.0507 vs 0.0748; 0.0567 vs 0.089Helped

Limitations

Experimental setup

Datasets: D-NeRF synthetic 1D hierarchical motion synthetic planetary system

Benchmarks: D-NeRF

Metrics: PSNR SSIM CLIP-I LPIPS

Baselines: SC-GS Monte-Carlo estimate

Builds on: graph attention network Gumbel-Softmax 3D Gaussian splatting SC-GS as-rigid-as-possible deformation

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