Forecasting dynamic scenes remains a fundamental challenge in computer vision, as limited observations make it difficult to capture coherent object-level motion and long-term temporal evolution. We present Motion Group-aware Gaussian Forecasting (MoGaF), a framework for long-term scene extrapolation built upon the 4D Gaussian Splatting representation. MoGaF introduces motion-aware Gaussian grouping and group-wise optimization to enforce physically consistent motion across both rigid and non-rigid regions, yielding spatially coherent dynamic representations. Leveraging this structured space-time representation, a lightweight forecasting module predicts future motion, enabling realistic and temporally stable scene evolution. Experiments on synthetic and real-world datasets demonstrate that MoGaF consistently outperforms existing baselines in rendering quality, motion plausibility, and long-term forecasting stability. Our project page is available at https://slime0519.github.io/mogaf
Figures & tables
Figure 2: Overall pipeline of MoGaF. Given a video, MoGaF generates future frames of the scene. To achieve realistic forecasting, our method builds on 4DGS representation and proceeds as follows: (1) Gaussian Grouping: Gaussians are clustered into motion-consistent object groups, with each group labeled as rigid or non-rigid using grounded 2D segmentation. (2) Group-wise Optimization: Grouped Gaussians are refined with rigidity-aware motion constraints: rigid groups are guided by a shared SE(3) transform, while non-rigid groups are regularized with local motion smoothness. (3) Group-wise Forecasting: For each group, a lightweight Transformer-based forecaster extrapolates Gaussian trajectories beyond the observed frames, enabling rendering at novel viewpoints for future timesteps.
Figure 3: Result of Gaussian grouping. Compared to a (a) simple extension of 3DGS grouping [ 26 ] and (b) single-frame mask–based region growing, our hybrid approach produces complete and reliable motion-aware Gaussian groups.
Obs. ratio
Scene
GSPred [ 50 ]
GSPred-SoM † [ 50 ]
ODE-GS-SoM † [ 36 ]
MoGaF (Ours)
mPSNR ↑
mSSIM ↑
mLPIPS ↓
mPSNR ↑
mSSIM ↑
mLPIPS ↓
mPSNR ↑
mSSIM ↑
mLPIPS ↓
mPSNR ↑
mSSIM ↑
mLPIPS ↓
80%
apple
15.75
0.5589
0.4338
17.22
0.8122
0.4806
16.35
0.8135
0.4803
17.97
0.8199
0.4341
block
12.61
0.5220
0.5363
12.20
0.5807
0.5352
12.07
0.5717
0.5583
12.62
0.5875
0.5352
paper-windmill
14.76
0.2244
0.4329
19.16
0.5573
0.2142
19.13
0.5512
0.2154
19.34
0.5552
0.2052
spin
14.54
0.4652
0.4002
15.12
0.6701
0.3166
15.69
0.6593
0.3354
15.96
0.6740
0.3236
teddy
11.15
0.5790
0.5752
11.26
0.5823
0.6942
10.06
0.5821
0.7093
11.99
0.5607
0.6157
Table 1: Forecasting results on the iPhone dataset. We forecast frames beyond the observed time window and evaluate the predicted frames rendered from held-out test viewpoints. The leftmost column ( Obs. ratio ) indicates the fraction of input training frames used by each model; 80% and 60% correspond to forecasting the remaining 20% and 40% of frames, respectively. † denotes methods that are re-implemented for the SoM-based 4DGS representation and retain their original forecasting scheme.
Figure 4: Qualitative results on iPhone dataset. We present forecasted frames from test camera views. (a) and (b) correspond to settings where the first 80% and 60% of frames are used for training, and the remaining 20% and 40% are forecasted, respectively.
Scene
GSPred [ 50 ]
Ours
PSNR ↑
SSIM ↑
LPIPS ↓
PSNR ↑
SSIM ↑
LPIPS ↓
Trex
20.63
0.9271
0.0627
20.80
0.9379
0.0551
Mutant
25.14
0.9375
0.0415
25.69
0.9246
0.0482
Jumpingjacks
19.84
0.9087
0.0924
19.86
0.9090
0.0920
Standup
21.99
0.9170
0.0796
22.32
0.9201
0.0756
Bouncingballs
23.68
0.9603
0.0540
25.03
0.9623
0.0436
Table 2: Forecasting results on D-NeRF dataset. We use 60% of the frames as training and predict the remaining 40%.
Figure 5: Forecasting results on D-NeRF dataset. We render extrapolated future frames. Note that in Obs. Timesteps , the first and second columns show renderings reconstructed from training views at the first and last observed timesteps, respectively.
Figure 6: Long-term forecasting results on iPhone dataset. (a) shows GT views from test cameras at the observed timesteps, and (b) presents the forecasted renderings for timesteps beyond the observations. Note that t denotes the timestep of the last observed frame.
Table 3: Ablation results. (Top) Tracking performance on iPhone dataset. (Bottom) Masking performance on D-NeRF dataset.
Figure 7: Effect of masking. Applying contiguous-span masking during training enhances the robustness of motion forecasting.
Figure 8: Gaussian grouping results. We present Gaussian grouping results of our method and Gaga-4D on iPhone dataset [ 10 ] , trained on the full sequence.
Figure 9: Overview of the forecaster. (a) Training stage: The forecaster is trained for each Gaussian group G(k) by minimizing the loss Lgroup(k) between the predicted x^t and the observed xt at time T . We randomly apply contiguous masking to the inputs and gradually reduce the masking ratio later in training. (b) Inference stage: Future motion is generated via autoregressive rollout for each G(k) , where the input sequence is iteratively updated with each newly predicted frame. Note that the input length is always T−1 , the same as in training.
Obs. ratio
Scene
GSPred
GSPred-SoM
MoGaF (Ours)
mPSNR ↑
mSSIM ↑
mLPIPS ↓
mPSNR ↑
mSSIM ↑
mLPIPS ↓
mPSNR ↑
mSSIM ↑
mLPIPS ↓
70%
apple
13.21
0.5562
0.6942
16.58
0.7339
0.5007
16.45
0.7220
0.5329
block
13.11
0.5333
0.5240
13.47
0.6192
0.4900
14.10
0.6110
0.5030
paper-windmill
14.67
0.2168
0.4410
18.73
0.5221
0.2191
18.98
0.5197
0.2108
spin
15.67
0.4738
0.3975
16.00
0.6797
0.3049
15.87
0.6618
0.3438
teddy
11.46
0.5886
0.5708
10.84
0.5666
0.6555
11.87
0.5562
0.5578
Table 4: Forecasting results on the iPhone dataset. We forecast frames beyond the observed time window and evaluate the predicted frames rendered from held-out test viewpoints. The leftmost column ( Obs. ratio ) indicates the fraction of input training frames used by each model.
Scene
GSPred [ 50 ]
Ours
PSNR ↑
SSIM ↑
LPIPS ↓
PSNR ↑
SSIM ↑
LPIPS ↓
Trex
21.09
0.9406
0.0461
20.60
0.9405
0.0499
Mutant
28.16
0.9560
0.0256
28.72
0.9552
0.0218
Jumpingjacks
20.51
0.9184
0.0760
20.12
0.9220
0.0734
Standup
25.96
0.9403
0.0481
30.38
0.9544
0.0335
Bouncingballs
26.63
0.9714
0.0361
26.82
0.9728
0.0367
Table 5: Forecasting results on D-NeRF dataset. We use 80% of the frames as input and predict the remaining 20%.
Methods
3D tracking
2D tracking
Photometric
EPE ↓
δ3D.10↑
δ3D.05↑
AJ ↑
δavg↑
OA ↑
MPSNR ↑
mSSIM ↑
mLPIPS ↓
SoM [ 37 ]
0.1016
70.62
46.59
37.61
49.17
86.99
16.72
0.6462
0.3914
MoGaF (Ours)
0.0989
70.63
47.64
38.54
49.93
86.85
16.75
0.6462
0.3887
Table 6: Quantitative evaluation results on scene interpolation. We compare tracking and photometric performance against SoM [ 37 ] on iPhone dataset [ 10 ] .
Table 7: Ablation studies on group-wise design and region growing. We analyze the contribution of each component in our method across 3D/2D motion tracking and novel view synthesis.
Figure 10: Qualitative evaluation results on scene interpolation. We report NVS performance of SoM [ 37 ] and MoGaF on iPhone dataset [ 10 ] , evaluated on test camera viewpoints over the full training sequence.
Figure 11: Long-term forecasting results on iPhone dataset. (a) shows GT views from test cameras at the observed timesteps, and (b) presents the forecasted renderings for timesteps beyond the observations. Note that t denotes the timestep of the last observed frame.
Figure 12: Qualitative results on iPhone dataset. We present forecasted frames from test camera views. (a) and (b) correspond to settings where the first 80% and 60% of frames are used for training, and the remaining 20% and 40% are forecasted, respectively.
Figure 13: Qualitative results on D-NeRF dataset. We present forecasted frames from test camera views. (a) and (b) correspond to settings where the first 80% and 60% of frames are used for training, and the remaining 20% and 40% are forecasted, respectively.
Volumetric video seeks to model dynamic scenes as temporally coherent 4D representations. While recent Gaussian-based approaches achieve impressive rendering fidelity, they primarily emphasize appearance but are largely agnostic to instance-level structure, limiting stable tracking and semantic reasoning in highly dynamic scenarios. In this paper, we present Director, a unified spatio-temporal Gaussian representation that jointly models human performance, high-fidelity rendering, and instance-level semantics. Our key insight is that embedding instance-consistent semantics naturally complements 4D modeling, enabling more accurate scene decomposition while supporting robust dynamic scene understanding. To this end, we leverage temporally aligned instance masks and sentence embeddings derived from Multimodal Large Language Models to supervise the learnable semantic features of each Gaussian via two MLP decoders, enabling language-aligned 4D representations and enforcing identity consistency over time. To enhance temporal stability, we bridge 2D optical flow with 4D Gaussians and finetune their motions, yielding reliable initialization and reducing drift. For the training, we further introduce a geometry-aware SDF constraints, along with regularization terms that enforces surface continuity, enhancing temporal coherence in dynamic foreground modeling. Experiments demonstrate that Director achieves temporally coherent 4D reconstructions while simultaneously enabling instance segmentation and open-vocabulary querying.
Reconstructing dynamic 3D scenes from monocular videos is a fundamental yet highly challenging task, as real-world motions often involve both long-term smooth transformations and short-term complex deformations. Existing methods either struggle to maintain temporal consistency or fail to capture high-frequency dynamics due to limited motion modeling capacity. In this work, we present Rigid-aware 4D Gaussian Splatting (RiGS), which simultaneously captures motions across multiple temporal scales. Specifically, RiGS introduces three types of Gaussian primitives: static, rigid, and transient, which represent static backgrounds, long-term low-frequency motions, and short-term high-frequency dynamics, respectively. An object-wise dynamic mask is proposed to aggregate long-range spatiotemporal motion information and guide the decomposition of static and dynamic regions. To jointly model motion across scales, rigid Gaussians are allowed to transition into transient Gaussians based on their temporal duration, and both are optimized under scene flow guidance, providing dense 3D motion supervision. Extensive experiments demonstrate that RiGS achieves state-of-the-art performance on novel view synthesis benchmarks. Code is available at \hyperlink{https://github.com/ladvu/RiGS}{https://github.com/ladvu/RiGS}.
Chenyu Wu, Wanhua Li, Zhu-Tian Chen +1
Harvard University · Zhejiang University · Nanyang Technological University +1
Dynamic Gaussian Splatting provides an explicit representation of evolving 3D scenes, but existing approaches are primarily optimized for reconstruction, future-state generation, or rendering rather than for learning reusable predictive dynamics. We propose 4DGS-JEPA, a Gaussian-native joint-embedding predictive architecture for causal multi-horizon prediction over dynamic Gaussian scenes. The model uses a hierarchical scene-, motion-group-, and Gaussian-level representation together with a horizon-conditioned transition operator that supports both direct prediction and recursive rollout. Its central principle is temporal composition: different chronological transition paths reaching the same future endpoint should produce compatible predictive states. Endpoint and multi-horizon path supervision anchor these predictions to future target embeddings, while a selective geometry decoder and geometry-level composition ground the learned dynamics in consistent group motion and Gaussian geometry without requiring complete future appearance reconstruction. We further introduce a hybrid correspondence mechanism that combines persistent canonical identity with residual optimal-transport matching under reordering and topology change. We characterize zero-loss path agreement and finite-error rollout accumulation theoretically. Three controlled experiments provide mechanism-level evidence that temporal composition reduces latent path dependence while retaining predictive accuracy, geometry-level composition improves consistency of decoded motion, and hybrid correspondence preserves reliable identity while remaining robust when correspondence becomes ambiguous. Together, 4DGS-JEPA provides a predictive, temporally compositional formulation of dynamic Gaussian worlds.