Reconstructing accurate 3D models of large-scale real-world scenes from unstructured, in-the-wild imagery remains a core challenge in computer vision, especially when the input views have little or no overlap. In such cases, existing reconstruction pipelines often produce multiple disconnected partial reconstructions or erroneously merge non-overlapping regions into overlapping geometry. In this work, we propose a framework that grounds each partial reconstruction to a complete reference model of the scene, enabling globally consistent alignment even in the absence of visual overlap. We obtain reference models from dense, geospatially accurate pseudo-synthetic renderings derived from Google Earth Studio. These renderings provide full scene coverage but differ substantially in appearance from real-world photographs. Our key insight is that, despite this significant domain gap, both domains share the same underlying scene semantics. We represent the reference model using 3D Gaussian Splatting, augmenting each Gaussian with semantic features, and formulate alignment as an inverse feature-based optimization scheme that estimates a global 6DoF pose and scale while keeping the reference model fixed. Furthermore, we introduce the WikiEarth dataset, which registers existing partial 3D reconstructions with pseudo-synthetic reference models. We demonstrate that our approach consistently improves global alignment when initialized with various classical and learning-based pipelines, while mitigating failure modes of state-of-the-art end-to-end models.
Figures & tables
Figure 2: Scene Grounding via Semantic Feature-based Robust Optimization . Given a 3DGS reference model M (left) and a set of Internet images I (right), we propose an inverse optimization scheme that predicts a global 6DoF+scale alignment T while keeping the parameters of M fixed. We obtain an initial transformation T (in red) using a traditional SfM technique. During optimization, we calculate a semantic feature loss Lsem and backpropagate it to update T (converging to the rendered view in green after N steps).
Figure 3: Challenges of aligning internet photos to the reference model. Visualization of input Internet images (first and third columns) and views rendered from the reference model at the ground-truth locations (second and fourth columns). As illustrated above, high Lsem values (bottom row) often indicate outlier images, which our approach overcomes via a robust optimization scheme, as further detailed in Section 3 .
Figure 4: The WikiEarth Benchmark . Reconstruction of four landmarks from WikiEarth . The blue frustums depicts the rendered images from Google Earth Studio, and the red frustums the images from WikiScenes.
Figure 5: Qualitative Comparison. A visualization of the alignment results for our method compared to the three baselines. Each image shows the ground truth in the lower half and the rendered image from the reference model M after alignment in the top half. As demonstrated, our inverse optimization-based approach predicts precise transformations, even in the presence of challenging, inaccurate initializations.
Methods
ΔR↓
ΔT↓
MTA ↑
O%↓
#Failures
gDLS+++
2.86
0.12
78
6
1/32
Ours (gDLS+++ init)
2.69
0.13
84
3
-
SP+LG
3.74
0.25
74
15
5/32
Ours (SP+LG init)
3.13
0.24
81
7
-
COLMAP
4.99
0.12
66
12
0/32
Ours (COLMAP init)
2.48
0.12
81
0
-
Table 1: Comparison with Baselines . We compare performance over the WikiEarth benchmark against multiple baselines. We report performance of each baseline (top rows), and our method initialized with the baselines (bottom rows). #Failures denotes the number of meta-images for which the initialization method failed to produce an alignment; errors are computed only over successful instances. As shown, our approach can be paired with a range of initializations, yielding significant improvements in most cases.
Figure 6: Grounding Multiple Meta Images . Above we show three scenes containing two meta-images per scene (visualized in green and purple ), both grounded to the scene’s global reference model. We show both the COLMAP initialization, and our final result. Ground truth reconstructions are provided on the bottom.
Figure 7: Aligning a meta-image to a reference model with π3 . As illustrated above, while π3 successfully registers the Google Earth images, it struggles to correctly align the Internet images in this model; see, for instance, the ghost structure in the center of the red box on the bottom row. The top result, reconstructed from Google Earth images only, is shown for reference.
Methods
ΔRI↔M∘↓
ΔRI↔I∘↓
DUSt3R
54.40
29.27
MASt3R
24.18
12.52
VGGT
51.69
24.63
π3
68.46
45.80
Ours (COLMAP Init)
2.59
1.48
Table 2: Comparison with Feed-Forward 3D Models. We report geodesic rotation errors over two settings, comparing two meta-images directly ( ΔRI↔I ) and comparing a single meta-image with a reference model ( ΔRI↔M ). As illustrated below, our method significantly outperforms all recent feed-forward 3D models by an order of magnitude in both settings.
Figure 8: Generalization to Drone-Based Reference Models. We evaluate our method using a reference model reconstructed from drone video frames sourced from YouTube. As illustrated above, our approach significantly improves the alignment over the COLMAP baseline, which serves as our initialization.
Methods
ΔR∘↓
ΔT↓
MTA% ↑
O%↓
Ours (COLMAP init)
2.48
0.12
81
0
Semantic Features Ablations
Photometric Optimization
6.48
0.38
72
22
LSeg [ 29 ]
4.78
0.34
62
19
DINOv2 + DVT [ 65 ]
2.86
0.14
78
0
Robust Optimization Ablations
Table 3: Ablations . We provide several experiments ablating our semantic features (middle) and robust optimization scheme (bottom). All the ablations where initialized with the COLMAP baseline. Best results are marked in bold. As illustrated below, the full method consistently outperforms all alternatives.
ID
WikiScenes ID
Name
Meta Image ID
Baseline ΔTI
Baseline ΔRI
Our ΔTI
Our ΔRI
1
0
Milano Cathedral
3
0.216
4.114
0.348
4.822
2
0
Milano Cathedral
30
0.198
4.019
0.293
5.610
3
10
Sanfrancisco Cathedral
0
0.329
6.224
0.157
2.562
4
18
Lisbon Cathedral
0
0.064
1.835
0.135
1.973
5
20
Brussels Cathedral
16
0.008
1.687
0.024
0.518
6
20
Brussels Cathedral
15
0.051
1.669
0.076
0.924
Table 4: Performance Breakdown Per Meta-Image . Performance of our method (initialized with COLMAP) and the COLMAP baseline per meta-image, considering only meta-images where the baseline did not fail.
ID
WikiScenes ID
Name
Meta Image ID
Baseline ΔTI
Baseline ΔRI
Our ΔTI
Our ΔRI
1
0
Milano Cathedral
3
0.228
2.874
0.360
4.995
2
0
Milano Cathedral
30
0.197
4.102
0.299
5.691
3
10
Sanfrancisco Cathedral
0
0.237
4.710
0.159
2.551
4
18
Lisbon Cathedral
0
0.084
1.211
0.131
1.845
5
20
Brussels Cathedral
16
0.016
0.394
0.024
0.519
6
20
Brussels Cathedral
15
0.076
0.953
0.075
0.897
Table 5: Performance Breakdown Per Meta-Image gDLS+++ initialization . Performance of our method (initialized with gDLS+++) and the gDLS+++ baseline per meta-image
ID
WikiScenes ID
Name
Meta Image ID
Baseline ΔTI
Baseline ΔRI
Our ΔTI
Our ΔRI
1
0
Milano Cathedral
3
2
0
Milano Cathedral
30
3
10
Sanfrancisco Cathedral
0
0.146
3.367
0.161
2.612
4
18
Lisbon Cathedral
0
0.088
1.659
0.135
1.985
5
20
Brussels Cathedral
16
0.019
1.250
0.030
1.521
6
20
Brussels Cathedral
15
0.059
3.376
0.087
8.217
Table 6: Performance Breakdown Per Meta-Image SP+LG initialization . Performance of our method (initialized with SP+LG) and the SP+LG baseline per meta-image
Methods
MTA (3,0.1)
MTA (7,0.1)
MTA (10,0.1)
MTA (5,0.09)
MTA (5,0.15)
MTA (5,0.2)
Ours (Colmap init)
62
62
62
53
72
81
Colmap Baseline
56
59
59
59
59
66
Table 7: Performance over Different MTA Thresholds . Above, we report MTA scores over different threshold values for both the baseline and our model. Note that MTA (r,t) considers an image as accurately registered if ΔR<r and ΔT<t .
Methods
O%(10,0.3)
O%(10,0.4)
O%(10,0.6)
O%(15,0.5)
O%(17,0.5)
O%(20,0.5)
Ours (Colmap init)
6
3
0
0
0
0
Colmap Baseline
16
12
12
12
9
9
Table 8: Performance over Different O% Thresholds . Above, we report outlier scores over different threshold values for both the baseline and our model. Note that O%(r,t) considers an image as an outlier if ΔR>r or ΔT>t .
Figure 9: Reconstructions of Feed-Forward Models . We visualize three reconstructions obtained by running DUSt3R [ 60 ] MASt3R [ 28 ] and VGGT [ 57 ] over images sampled from two meta-images (visualized in green and purple ). As illustrated above, all methods fail to reconstruct the Milan and Lincoln Cathedral, showing either broken or overlapping meta-images, while these cameras capture non-overlapping regions as as seen in the ground truth reconstructions (see illustration in the main paper).
Figure 10: Aligning a meta-image to a reference model with VGGT . Meta-image cameras are visualized in purple, while Google Earth images from the reference model are in blue. As illustrated above, VGGT failed to register the Murcia meta-image ( i.e. , the output contains two distinct regions, one for the Internet images and one for the Google Earth images) and also failed to reconstruct the reference model in the Freiburg Cathedral. For the Metz Cathedral, VGGT produced a slightly misaligned registration, as evident by the ghost structures near the top of the building.
Figure 11: Drone Reference model - Additional examples Results using a reference model from drone video frames are depicted above. The drone videos of the Freiburg Cathedral are taken from Youtube. As illustrated our approach significantly improves the alignment, in comparison to the COLMAP baseline, which serves as our initialization.
Figure 12: Qualitative Comparison on Different Scene Types A visualization of the alignment results for our method and the COLMAP baseline. The scenes are taken from the IMC-PT [ 22 ] dataset.
Figure 13: Additional Qualitative Comparison: A visualization of the alignment results for our method and the COLMAP baseline. Each image shows the ground truth in the lower half and the rendered image from the reference model M after alignment in the top half. As demonstrated, our inverse optimization-based approach predicts precise transformations, even in the presence of challenging, inaccurate initializations.
Figure 14: Additional Analysis of our Robust Optimization Framework . Our method uses LTS to ignore the images with loss values that are higher than the median image loss. In the figure, we show a sample of images in several bins. The image below the diagonal are the real-world Internet images, and above is the rendered image from the reference model (rendered at the end of the optimization). As illustrated by the rightmost bin, images there are typically outliers, i.e. , images with occlusions and images that resides behind floaters in the reference model. Further analysis is provided in Sec. 7.3 .
Figure 15: Robustness Analysis . Average errors ΔR and ΔT across the benchmark as a function of the meta-image size and the initialization noise (rotation). The graphs indicate that the error increases with smaller meta-images, reaching a plateau at a size of approximately 6 . Furthermore, the initialization graph demonstrate that the method aligns the images successfully once the noise is below a specific threshold ( 10∘ ) for each of the rotation parameters; see Section 8 for additional details.
Figure 16: Google Earth Studio UI: Screenshot of Google Earth Studio, showing the 3D model of the Geneva Cathedral. For each landmark we create a camera trajectory and rendered the images on the trajectory using the program
WikiScenes ID
Name
Required Matches
0
Milano Cathedral
13
10
San Francis
13
18
Lisbon Cathedral
30
20
Brussels Cathedral
12
21
Salamanca Cathedral
17
27
St John the Diving Cathedral
15
Table 9: COLMAP Parameters for WikiEarth Benchmark Creation . We run COLMAP mapper with two-view tracks, increased triangulation max transitivity (3), increased absolute pose maximal error (36), and increased bundle adjustment maximal refinement range (0.0015). Additionally we run the mapper with varying number of Required Matches described in the table.
WikiScenes ID
Name
Meta Image ID
Meta Image Size
0
Milano Cathedral
3
19
0
Milano Cathedral
30
713
10
Sanfrancisco Cathedral
0
21
18
Lisbon Cathedral
0
289
20
Brussels Cathedral
16
8
20
Brussels Cathedral
15
12
Table 10: Benchmark Scenes . The WikiEarth benchmark consists of 32 meta-images from 23 different landmarks found in the WikiScenes [ 63 ] dataset, as detailed above.
We present Unravel, a training-free framework that turns a single image into an interactive 3D scene, where every object is an independent and movable asset. Existing generators either produce one entangled geometry in which no object can be moved, or predict all objects in one feed-forward pass, where a wrong guess cannot be detected or repaired. Unravel instead takes a different approach: it first takes the scene apart, and then puts it back together. Starting from the input image, an agentic harness that iteratively peels the image layer by layer, and adopts point cloud as major modality for spatial relationship recovery. Specifically, a vision-language model plans which objects are fully visible, an image editor removes them and restores the occluded regions. Every edit is verified before being incorporated into the reconstruction. This process gradually turns occluded parts of the scene into direct observation, allowing objects to be reconstructed when they are best exposed rather than hallucinated from the original image alone. The scene is then rebuilt in reverse removal order, so that the supporting objects are naturally placed before the objects they support. Since a single-view image only reveals part of an object, we treat the observed points as a lower bound on its size: an asset may grow to cover its points, but can not shrink away from them. Finally, we physically settle the reconstructed scene to remove floating objects and interpenetrations, followed by an agentic audit that corrects remaining placement errors. Extensive experiments on diverse indoor scenes show that Unravel recovers more objects, places them more faithfully, and produces scenes that are more physically-plausible than existing methods.
Hui Shan, Keyang Luo, Binjia Zhou +11
Zhejiang University · Shanghai Innovation Institute · Westlake University +5
The growing demand for Embodied AI and VR applications has highlighted the need for synthesizing high-quality 3D indoor scenes from sparse inputs. However, existing approaches struggle to infer massive amounts of missing geometry in large unseen areas while maintaining global consistency, often producing locally plausible but globally inconsistent reconstructions. We present Rein3D, a framework that reconstructs full 360-degree indoor environments by coupling explicit 3D Gaussian Splatting (3DGS) with temporally coherent priors from video diffusion models. Our approach follows a "restore-and-refine" paradigm: we employ a radial exploration strategy to render imperfect panoramic videos along trajectories starting from the origin, effectively uncovering occluded regions from a coarse 3DGS initialization. These sequences are restored by a panoramic video-to-video diffusion model and further enhanced via video super-resolution to synthesize high-fidelity geometry and textures. Finally, these refined videos serve as pseudo-ground truths to update the global 3D Gaussian field. To support this task, we construct PanoV2V-15K, a dataset of over 15K paired clean and degraded panoramic videos for diffusion-based scene restoration. Experiments demonstrate that Rein3D produces photorealistic and globally consistent 3D scenes and significantly improves long-range camera exploration compared with existing baselines.
Dehui Wang, Rong Wei, Yue Shi +9
Shanghai Jiao Tong University · Manycore Tech Inc. · The University of Hong Kong +1
Video diffusion models generate high-quality and diverse worlds; however, individual frames often lack 3D consistency across the output sequence, which makes the reconstruction of 3D worlds difficult. To this end, we propose a new method that handles these inconsistencies by non-rigidly aligning the video frames into a globally-consistent coordinate frame that produces sharp and detailed pointcloud reconstructions. First, a geometric foundation model lifts each frame into a pixel-wise 3D pointcloud, which contains unaligned surfaces due to these inconsistencies. We then propose a tailored non-rigid iterative frame-to-model ICP to obtain an initial alignment across all frames, followed by a global optimization that further sharpens the pointcloud. Finally, we leverage this pointcloud as initialization for 3D reconstruction and propose a novel inverse deformation rendering loss to create high quality and explorable 3D environments from inconsistent views. We demonstrate that our 3D scenes achieve higher quality than baselines, effectively turning video models into 3D-consistent world generators.