GoDe: Gaussians on Demand for Backbone-Agnostic Progressive Compression
Authors: Francesco Di Sario, Riccardo Renzulli, Marco Grangetto, Akihiro Sugimoto, Enzo Tartaglione
Organizations: Computer Science, University of Turin, Corso Svizzera, Turin, 10149, Italy. · National Institute of Informatics, 2 Chome-1-2 Hitotsubashi, Tokyo, 101-8430, Japan. · LTCI, T´el´ecom Paris, Institut Polytechnique de Paris, 19 Pl. Marguerite Perey, Paris, 91120, France.
Splat-based radiance fields have rapidly diversified in primitive type, kernel support, and appearance parameterization. This diversity makes compression difficult: most codecs are single-rate, requiring a separately optimized model for each target bitrate, while progressive codecs remain tied to representation-specific assumptions that do not transfer across backbones. We introduce GoDe (Gaussians on Demand), a progressive compression framework whose central contribution is backbone agnosticism. It reorganizes any trained differentiable splat representation into a single scalable bitstream without modifying the backbone or re-deriving the compression structure for each new primitive type. GoDe builds a nested level-of-detail hierarchy via masked-gradient importance ranking, refines all levels with one quantization-aware fine-tuning stage, and stores the base layer and enhancement layers as progressive chunks compressed with shared entropy dictionaries. Any decoded prefix is directly renderable, so one training pipeline provides multiple rate-distortion operating points without per-rate retraining. Across five heterogeneous backbones and three standard benchmarks, GoDe achieves competitive rate-distortion performance while enabling faster rendering and substantially faster progressive decoding than existing methods. Project page: https://gaussians-on-demand.github.io/
Figures & tables
Figure 1: One training run, a full rate curve. GoDe constructs a progressive hierarchy from any trained splat representation; each decoded prefix yields a distinct quality–size–speed operating point with no per-rate retraining.
Method
Prog. render.
Pruning
Codec
Prog. comp.
Agnostic
Progressive rendering / LoD – no compressed bitstream
CLoD-GS
✓
✗
✗
✗
✗
PRoGS
✓
✗
✗
✗
✗
LapisGS
✓
✗
✗
✗
✗
Octree-GS
✓
✗
✗
✗
✗
Hierarchical-GS
✓
✗
✗
✗
✗
Table 1: Method positioning. Qualitative comparison of GoDe against existing approaches.
Figure 2: GoDe pipeline. From a trained representation: (1) primitives are organized into a nested LoD hierarchy via iterative gradient-informed ranking; (2) all LoDs are jointly fine-tuned under simulated quantization, sampling one LoD per iteration; (3) the base layer and each enhancement layer are entropy-coded as independent chunks.
Method
Rate
Mip-NeRF360
Tanks&Temples
DeepBlending
PSNR ↑
SSIM ↑
LPIPS ↓
Size [MB] ↓
FPS ↑
PSNR ↑
SSIM ↑
LPIPS ↓
Size [MB] ↓
FPS ↑
PSNR ↑
SSIM ↑
LPIPS ↓
Size [MB] ↓
FPS ↑
Non-scalable – Neural
HEMGS † [ 24 ]
Low
27.75
0.806
0.248
12.50
–
24.42
0.848
0.192
6.00
–
30.24
0.908
0.266
3.00
–
High
27.93
0.813
0.230
21.00
–
24.58
0.856
0.176
10.10
–
30.37
0.911
0.253
6.70
–
HAC++ [ 8 ]
Low
27.60
0.803
0.253
8.34
70
24.22
0.849
0.190
5.18
79
30.16
0.907
0.266
2.91
152
High
27.82
0.811
0.231
18.48
71
24.32
0.854
0.178
8.63
78
30.34
0.911
0.254
5.28
154
Table 2: Main quantitative comparison. Each row of a non-scalable method corresponds to an independently optimized operating point, whereas scalable methods obtain multiple rates from a single trained model. For scalable methods, we show three representative decoded prefixes spanning the range of competing operating points; rate labels denote the selected operating points, not LoD indices. GoDe uses 8 levels in the main experiments. † denotes methods whose public implementations were unavailable at submission time.
Figure 3: Rate–distortion and speed–distortion curves. Each point is averaged over the dataset; solid lines denote scalable methods, dashed lines denote non-scalable ones.
Method
Scalable
Train ↓
Encoding ↓
Decoding ↓
Per run
All
Low
Medium
High
Low
Medium
High
Context-GS
✗
1.3
4.0
52.7
87.8
97.2
53.1
82.5
88.1
HAC++
✗
1.3
3.9
8.9
10.1
16.4
12.3
13.4
19.0
RDO
✗
1.3
3.9
1.1
2.9
4.8
2.2
7.4
19.0
Comp-GS
✗
1.6
4.9
10.8
10.8
10.9
9.1
9.0
8.8
PCGS †
✓
1.83
1.83
74.49
42.3
46.3
52.1
Table 3: Training, encoding, and decoding time. Training is in hours; coding is in seconds. † PCGS uses one shared scalable encoding for all bitrate levels.
Figure 4: Cross-backbone transfer on Mip-NeRF360. GoDe and independently optimized same-backbone models matched by primitive count. Results are averaged over the nine scenes.
Figure 5: Level-of-detail progression. High-resolution crops show how coarse levels preserve global structure while enhancement layers progressively restore fine geometry and view-dependent appearance.
Figure 6: Smooth level transitions. Opacity interpolation progressively activates an enhancement layer, reducing visible popping between adjacent LoDs.
Figure 7: Importance-criterion ablation on Mip-NeRF360. Our criterion consistently preserves higher reconstruction quality at matched active primitive counts than established Gaussian-pruning criteria.
Figure 8: Cost of scalability. BD-PSNR on Mip-NeRF360 comparing scalable GoDe with a matched-budget non-scalable variant.
Mask only
+ Fine-tuning
+ Compression (GoDe)
Rate
Retained
PSNR ↑
Size [MB] ↓
PSNR ↑
Size [MB] ↓
PSNR ↑
Size [MB] ↓
0
0.13
23.45
70.95
27.06
70.95
26.97
11.31
1
0.16
24.22
91.57
27.41
91.57
27.32
14.29
2
0.19
25.05
119.42
27.60
119.42
27.50
18.16
3
0.24
25.88
157.32
27.70
157.32
27.60
23.21
4
0.30
26.67
209.19
27.77
209.19
27.66
29.77
Table 4: Impact of multi-level fine-tuning and compression on Mip-NeRF360 with 3DGS. Top: masked LoDs before and after joint fine-tuning. Bottom: quantitative results and final compression. Retained indicates the fraction of Gaussians relative to the full model; GoDe denotes the final compressed representation.
Figure S1 : Score-normalization ablation on Mip-NeRF360. PSNR at matched active primitive counts for the proposed normalized multi-parameter score, its unnormalized counterpart, and single-attribute criteria.
Figure S2 : Number of levels. PSNR versus active primitive count on the Mip-NeRF360 bonsai scene for L∈{4,8,16,32} .
Figure S3 : Lower hierarchy bound. PSNR versus active primitive count on Mip-NeRF360 for different values of nmin .
Retained
1.00
0.90
0.80
0.75
0.65
0.60
0.55
0.50
0.45
0.40
0.35
0.30
0.25
0.20
0.63 (Adaptive)
PSNR ↑
27.82
27.82
27.82
27.82
27.81
27.79
27.72
27.59
27.37
27.03
26.53
25.85
24.97
23.83
27.82
SSIM ↑
0.830
0.830
0.830
0.830
0.830
0.829
0.827
0.824
0.819
0.812
0.802
0.789
0.771
0.746
0.830
LPIPS ↓
0.239
0.239
0.239
0.240
0.240
0.242
0.244
0.248
0.254
0.261
0.272
0.285
0.304
0.329
0.239
Table S1 : Adaptive upper-bound analysis on Mip-NeRF360. Dataset-averaged reconstruction quality after retaining a fixed fraction of the pretrained Gaussians, compared with the proposed scene-adaptive criterion. The adaptive rule retains 62.864% of primitives on average while preserving full-model quality at the reported precision.
Dataset
Method
Wall-clock time (s)
Ranking time (s)
PSNR ↑
SSIM ↑
LPIPS ↓
Mip-NeRF360
PUP
361
16
26.55
0.784
0.271
GoDe
315
9
26.88
0.795
0.263
Tanks&Temples
PUP
215
17
22.45
0.797
0.251
GoDe
183
6
22.88
0.804
0.247
DeepBlending
PUP
313
15
29.57
0.904
0.260
GoDe
279
9
29.58
0.902
0.262
Table S2 : Comparison under the PUP-3DGS protocol. Both methods use the same pretrained checkpoints, 90% total pruning, and a 10 k-iteration optimization budget.
Figure S4 : Multi-level convergence on Mip-NeRF360. PSNR across the eight decoded prefixes at different optimization iterations, averaged over the nine scenes.
Rate
PSNR ↑
SSIM ↑
LPIPS ↓
0
26.963±0.015
0.7812±0.0003
0.3219±0.0002
1
27.329±0.016
0.7969±0.0002
0.3021±0.0002
2
27.493±0.014
0.8071±0.0001
0.2858±0.0003
3
27.606±0.008
0.8129±0.0001
0.2742±0.0003
4
27.653±0.011
0.8171±0.0002
0.2650±0.0001
5
27.697±0.010
0.8188±0.0003
0.2581±0.0001
Table S3 : Seed robustness on Mip-NeRF360. Mean and standard deviation over five independent runs of GoDe (3DGS) across all eight decoded levels.
Figure S5 : Cross-backbone transfer across datasets. Rate–distortion comparison of GoDe with independently optimized same-backbone models for BS+SV, Triangle Splatting, and Octree-GS on Mip-NeRF360, Tanks&Temples, and DeepBlending. Independent models are shown before and after the same quantization and compression pipeline used by GoDe; the original model is included with and without lossless Zstandard compression for reference.
Dataset
Rate
GoDe (BS+SV)
Independent training w/ compression
Independent training w/o compression
PSNR ↑
SSIM ↑
LPIPS ↓
Size [MB] ↓
PSNR ↑
SSIM ↑
LPIPS ↓
Size [MB] ↓
PSNR ↑
SSIM ↑
LPIPS ↓
Size [MB] ↓
Mip-NeRF360
2
27.53
0.785
0.323
10.01
27.87
0.798
0.310
11.11
27.90
0.799
0.307
73.97
4
28.23
0.818
0.269
23.54
28.35
0.821
0.259
24.26
28.38
0.822
0.257
183.58
7
28.38
0.826
0.239
64.63
28.47
0.827
0.231
67.32
28.57
0.829
0.227
569.66
Tanks&Temples
2
24.37
0.841
0.240
8.00
24.53
0.847
0.230
9.42
24.60
0.849
0.228
64.03
4
24.69
0.856
0.204
15.57
24.75
0.859
0.198
16.42
24.82
0.862
0.193
131.43
Table S4 : Cross-backbone transfer with BS+SV. Independent reference models are separately trained for 30 k iterations at the primitive counts corresponding to GoDe levels R2, R4, and R7, and are reported before and after applying the same quantization and compression pipeline used by GoDe.
Dataset
Rate
GoDe (Triangle-Splatting)
Independent training w/ compression
Independent training w/o compression
PSNR ↑
SSIM ↑
LPIPS ↓
Size [MB] ↓
PSNR ↑
SSIM ↑
LPIPS ↓
Size [MB] ↓
PSNR ↑
SSIM ↑
LPIPS ↓
Size [MB] ↓
Mip-NeRF360
2
24.68
0.685
0.425
9.75
25.41
0.718
0.385
10.21
25.42
0.718
0.384
79.00
4
25.91
0.743
0.348
24.83
26.15
0.756
0.328
23.15
26.17
0.756
0.327
186.79
7
26.42
0.772
0.304
87.91
26.76
0.783
0.276
86.73
26.75
0.783
0.275
691.51
Tanks&Temples
2
21.97
0.786
0.301
9.44
22.03
0.793
0.303
8.04
22.04
0.793
0.301
68.44
4
22.43
0.811
0.265
18.14
22.52
0.817
0.256
16.68
22.55
0.818
0.254
138.91
Table S5 : Cross-backbone transfer with Triangle Splatting. Independent reference models are separately trained for 30 k iterations at the primitive counts corresponding to GoDe levels R2, R4, and R7, and are reported before and after applying the same quantization and compression pipeline used by GoDe.
Dataset
Rate
GoDe (Octree-GS)
Independent training w/ compression
Independent training w/o compression
PSNR ↑
SSIM ↑
LPIPS ↓
Size [MB] ↓
PSNR ↑
SSIM ↑
LPIPS ↓
Size [MB] ↓
PSNR ↑
SSIM ↑
LPIPS ↓
Size [MB] ↓
Mip-NeRF360
2
26.75
0.779
0.309
11.21
27.51
0.806
0.283
13.61
27.67
0.808
0.279
53.78
4
27.77
0.815
0.265
21.72
27.82
0.817
0.262
21.90
27.91
0.819
0.259
87.60
7
27.84
0.819
0.257
36.22
27.91
0.819
0.253
36.10
28.04
0.821
0.250
149.80
Tanks&Temples
2
23.45
0.830
0.288
8.16
23.36
0.828
0.284
6.93
23.35
0.829
0.280
27.18
4
24.14
0.862
0.232
14.69
24.01
0.858
0.236
12.72
24.04
0.859
0.231
50.32
Table S6 : Cross-backbone transfer with Octree-GS. Independent reference models are separately trained for 30 k iterations at the primitive counts corresponding to GoDe levels R2, R4, and R7, and are reported before and after applying the same quantization and compression pipeline used by GoDe.
Mip-NeRF360
Tanks&Temples
DeepBlending
Backbone
LoD
PSNR ↑
SSIM ↑
LPIPS ↓
Size [MB] ↓
FPS ↑
PSNR ↑
SSIM ↑
LPIPS ↓
Size [MB] ↓
FPS ↑
PSNR ↑
SSIM ↑
LPIPS ↓
Size [MB] ↓
FPS ↑
Scaffold-GS
0
27.29
0.792
0.310
9.81
104
23.17
0.812
0.281
4.13
171
30.00
0.901
0.351
3.92
183
1
27.62
0.802
0.297
11.93
96
23.68
0.829
0.259
5.10
160
30.27
0.905
0.343
4.63
178
2
27.79
0.808
0.288
14.57
89
23.98
0.840
0.242
6.30
148
30.40
0.908
0.337
5.48
171
3
27.87
0.811
0.282
17.85
83
24.16
0.847
0.229
7.80
137
30.49
0.909
0.332
6.49
166
4
27.92
0.813
0.278
21.95
78
24.25
0.851
0.220
9.66
125
30.53
0.910
0.329
7.70
159
Table S7 : Full per-LoD results of GoDe. Dataset-averaged results for all eight decoded levels and all five backbones. Size is cumulative and includes all chunks required to decode the corresponding level.
Figure S6 : Full LoD progression on DeepBlending. All eight decoded levels using the 3DGS-MCMC backbone.
Progressive transmission of 3D Gaussian Splatting (3DGS) requires each completed transmission stage to be decodable from received data and directly renderable. This work presents ProGS, a progressive codec that organizes anchor-based 3DGS as parent-closed octree prefixes. ProGS combines parent-causal entropy coding, level-balanced anchor growth, bounded multi-prefix training, and lightweight parent-anchor refinement to improve early-prefix quality without altering the complete-model rendering path. One fixed-λ training run yields five deployable rate--quality points from a single bitstream. Experiments on 17 scenes from three datasets evaluate rate--distortion performance, rendering speed, and transmission efficiency against progressive and single-rate baselines. On one representative scene per dataset, ProGS reaches a common quality target with 30.7 ∼ 60.7% fewer bytes than HAC-Rand and 22.6 ∼ 53.4% fewer bytes than HAC++-Rand. Across the three dataset averages, ProGS-LR uses 4.7 ∼ 6.1% fewer bytes than HAC-high while improving SSIM by 0.002 ∼ 0.041 and reducing LPIPS by 4.8 ∼ 51.2%. The parent-closed syntax makes every prefix causally decodable and directly renderable without future topology. ProGS-HR also yields higher endpoint SSIM and lower LPIPS than PCGS across all three dataset averages, and all five prefixes render in real time. Code is available at https://github.com/ZhiyeTang/ProGS-Official
Zhiye Tang, Lingzhuo Liu, Shengjie Jiao +4
College of Computer Science and Software Engineering, Shenzhen University, Shenzhen, 518060, China · Department of Computer Science, City University of Hong Kong, Kowloon, Hong Kong SAR, China · School of Electronic Information and Communications, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, 430074, China
While feed-forward 3D Gaussian splatting reconstructs renderable Gaussian primitives from sparse context views without per-scene optimization, existing pipelines do not provide a compact scene representation for storage or transmission. A natural solution is to apply existing 3DGS compression methods to the generated Gaussian primitives. However, this approach operates on the final irregular 3D representation and is decoupled from the internal feature-to-Gaussian generation process, which limits compression efficiency. To address this, we introduce CodecSplat, an ultra-compact latent coding framework for feed-forward 3D Gaussian splatting. CodecSplat first encodes an intermediate 2D Gaussian-generation feature into an entropy-coded scene bitstream. At the decoder, the latent feature is reconstructed and used to predict depth and Gaussian parameters, which are then mapped to 3D Gaussian primitives. By integrating compression into the feed-forward Gaussian generation pipeline, CodecSplat avoids inefficient compression over irregular 3D Gaussian primitives and allows the codec to exploit the structured intermediate feature representation. We instantiate CodecSplat on a feed-forward Gaussian splatting backbone with depth-guided multi-view feature refinement and a hierarchical learned feature codec. On DL3DV and RealEstate10K datasets, CodecSplat achieves 23.56-26.36 dB and 24.76-27.05 dB PSNR with only 20.00-107.77 KiB and 3.37-12.51 KiB per scene, respectively. This is roughly one order of magnitude smaller than compressing feed-forward generated Gaussian primitives, while preserving controllable rate-distortion behavior. Code is available at https://github.com/pengpeng-yu/CodecSplat.
Pengpeng Yu, Runqing Jiang, Qi Zhang +3
1Sun Yat-sen University, China · 3Pengcheng Laboratory, China · 2Peking University, China
Existing 3D Gaussian Splatting (3DGS) codecs report reconstruction quality after compression, and give users little control over the distortion of individual primitives. We present PLEDGE, a training-free, progressive, error-bounded codec that translates four user-declared tolerances into per-primitive quantization bounds: screen-space position, footprint deformation due to rotation and scale, view-dependent color, and opacity. The bounds apply throughout a declared camera domain, including previously unseen viewpoints. Position and opacity are bounded directly; footprint deformation is bounded under the rasterizer's affine projection model, and color is bounded over all viewing directions. PLEDGE organizes quantized residuals into a progressive bitstream with explicit error bounds for every valid prefix. Experiments across thirteen scenes verify all declared per-mechanism bounds and demonstrate competitive rate-distortion performance. The four tolerances incur substantially different rate costs, so users can spend rate where their application needs it.
Mingze Xia, Yuxiao Li, Baixi Sun +6
Oregon State University · The Ohio State University · Argonne National Laboratory +1