High-fidelity 3D reconstruction of vehicle exteriors improves buyer confidence in online automotive marketplaces, but fixed multi-camera drive-through capture departs from standard Structure-from-Motion (SfM): static cameras observe a moving vehicle amid clutter, rotating wheels, fisheye distortion, and specular reflections. We present RigidDriveGS, an object-centric pipeline combining motion-gated tracking, bifurcated masks that exclude wheels for SfM while optionally retaining them for rendering, mask-guided dense correspondences on raw distorted images, rig-constrained global SfM, and clean object-centric neural rendering with trimap-aware opacity or density supervision and native-alpha white compositing. We evaluate 25 vehicles from 10 dealership installations and six phone-recorded vehicles, each captured from 14 independent handheld positions. Under a staggered per-camera temporal-block holdout, 3DGUT+MCMC achieves 30.42 dB PSNR, 0.90 SSIM, and 0.20 LPIPS, improving PSNR by 7.78 dB over undistorted 3D-GS; independently recorded reference LiDAR scans yield full/body Chamfer-L1 of 0.026/0.013 m and F1@5 cm of 0.703/0.885. These results support clutter-free, object-centric novel-view synthesis without controlled studio infrastructure.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: RigidDriveGS model pipeline. Raw frames are tracked and masked, dense matches are admitted on rigid vehicle endpoints, object-centric SfM estimates a vehicle-centric scaffold, and distortion-aware splatting reconstructs appearance. The synchronized fixed-rig branch uses CAD pose priors; the handheld branch replaces this block with rig-free global SfM over 14 independent passes.
Fixed rig
Handheld transfer
Acquisition
14 fixed, synchronized cameras
14 independent handheld passes
Intrinsics
ChArUco; 8-param. fisheye
ChArUco; k1+k2 , zero tangential
Extrinsics
CAD priors + bounded refinement
unknown; object-centric SfM
Shared stages
masks, matching, object-centric SfM, rendering
Reconstruction scale
CAD relative translations
global similarity gauge
Surface reference
none
LiDAR, evaluation only
Table 1: Calibration and capture geometry for synchronized fixed-rig and independent handheld acquisition.
Figure 2: Fixed-rig data acquisition. Fourteen synchronized wide-angle cameras on two pillars observe a vehicle traversing a cluttered capture volume. The three vertical tiers and front-, side-, and rear-facing orientations provide complementary exterior coverage in one pass.
Figure 3: Rigid vehicle isolation and tracking. Top: representative raw frames. Bottom: geometry-valid masks produced by motion-gated tracking. The masks retain the rigid vehicle body while suppressing clutter and rotating wheels for matching and SfM.
Figure 4: Mask-guided RoMA v2 correspondences on raw distorted images. Dense matches retain full-image context while endpoint admission restricts SfM evidence to the rigid vehicle body across wide viewpoint changes.
Fixed rig
Handheld
Method
R↑
E↓
Lˉ↑
N (M) ↑
R↑
E↓
Lˉ↑
N (M) ↑
SIFT
0.00
–
–
–
0.00
–
–
–
DISK+LG
0.00
–
–
–
0.00
–
–
–
LoFTR
0.00
–
–
–
0.63
1.11
3.77
0.38
RoMA v2
1.00
0.61
4.01
0.96
1.00
1.04
3.41
1.15
Table 2: Failure-aware full 14-view SfM comparison over 25 fixed-rig and six handheld vehicles. R : image-weighted valid registration coverage; E : reprojection error (px); Lˉ : mean track length; N : mean sparse points in millions. E , Lˉ , and N use valid reconstructions only; – denotes that no reconstruction satisfied the validity criteria.
Figure 5: Representative successful object-centric sparse reconstruction from multiple viewpoints. The coherent vehicle shell and camera poses provide the common geometric scaffold for downstream rendering.
Figure 6: Qualitative comparison of novel-view vehicle rendering across diverse scenes. The leftmost column shows ground truth images; remaining columns show vehicle-centric renders from the compared methods.
Fixed rig
Handheld
Method
PSNR ↑
SSIM ↑
LPIPS ↓
PSNR ↑
SSIM ↑
LPIPS ↓
3DGS
22.64
0.88
0.25
22.69
0.89
0.21
3DGUT
29.24
0.87
0.21
32.33
0.93
0.18
3DGUT+MCMC
30.42
0.90
0.20
32.71
0.94
0.17
2DGS
24.89
0.87
0.26
27.66
0.93
0.19
Fisheye-GS
20.50
0.86
0.28
22.33
0.88
0.23
Table 3: Held-out rendering on privacy-excluded rigid-body pixels using the shared staggered per-stream split. Metrics are averaged separately over the fixed-rig and handheld evaluations.
Method
Full C-L1 ↓
Body C-L1 ↓
Full F1 ↑
Body F1 ↑
3DGS
0.030
0.028
0.545
0.568
3DGUT
0.024
0.021
0.699
0.680
3DGUT+MCMC
0.026
0.013
0.703
0.885
2DGS
0.029
0.027
0.516
0.560
Fisheye-GS
0.027
0.014
0.694
0.877
Instant-NGP
0.214
0.212
0.262
0.253
Table 4: Full 14-view handheld surface comparison. Chamfer-L1 is in meters; F1 uses a 5-cm threshold.
Fixed rig
Handheld
SfM variant
R↑
E↓
Lˉ↑
N (M) ↑
R↑
E↓
Lˉ↑
N (M) ↑
Full pipeline
1.00
0.61
4.01
0.96
1.00
1.04
3.41
1.15
w/o motion gate
0.55
1.03
2.69
1.60
1.00
1.04
3.22
1.12
w/o rigid endpoint masks
0.00
–
–
–
0.00
–
–
–
w/o rig priors
0.00
–
–
–
N/A
SIFT+COLMAP
0.00
–
–
–
0.00
–
–
–
Table 5: Full 14-view component ablations. R is image-weighted valid registration coverage. E , Lˉ , and N use valid reconstructions only; – denotes that no reconstruction satisfied the validity criteria, and N/A denotes an inapplicable ablation. The handheld pipeline has no rig-pose prior. Rendering-mask variants are compared using held-out LPIPS.
Driving video captured through a windshield violates the world-space consistency assumed by 3D Gaussian Splatting (3DGS): the road scene exhibits parallax while cabin reflections remain attached to the camera, causing standard 3DGS to embed reflected content into the reconstructed scene. We introduce RIDE-Splat, a pipeline for reflection-free 3D reconstruction from posed driving video without clean images, reflection masks, or pretrained networks. RIDE-Splat assigns world-consistent transmission through the windshield to a 3DGS scene and the dominant camera-attached reflection to one shared, signed RGB image. It builds the clean reconstruction in two passes. First, it learns the 3D geometry and the signed reflection image, representing both added radiance and transmission attenuation. Then, it uses the reflection-removed training images to fit a clean 3DGS model. At inference, the reflection image is discarded, preserving the standard 3DGS rendering path. We also introduce the RIDE-Splat Dataset, the first 3D reconstruction benchmark for reflection removal from driving video -- with real driving scenes, physical windshield reflections in training views, and separately captured non-reflective evaluation images. Across the RIDE-Splat Dataset, XLD, and Wayve, RIDE-Splat outperforms 3DGS, DC-Gaussian, and RobustSplat on all nine aggregate metrics, improving PSNR by up to 3.59 dB and reducing LPIPS by up to 0.0876. We achieve the highest metrics in 38 out of 42 per-scene comparisons and removes windshield reflections that remain visible in the baselines while preserving the transmitted scene.
Feedforward 3D Gaussian Splatting (3DGS) often struggles in trajectory-based sparse-view driving scenes. Existing Gaussian repair methods mainly target optimization-based 3DGS, while diffusion-based repair is typically restricted to iterative refinement near observed viewpoints, leaving feedforward 3DGS repair underexplored. We propose ConFixGS, a plug-and-play method that learns to fix feedforward 3DGS with confidence-aware diffusion priors. Starting from a pretrained feedforward model, ConFixGS generates diffusion-enhanced local pseudo-targets and validates them through reprojection-based cross-checking against support views. The resulting dense confidence maps guide refinement, enhancing reliable details while suppressing hallucinated or inconsistent evidence. On Waymo, nuScenes, and KITTI, ConFixGS improves challenging novel view synthesis, with PSNR gains of up to 3.68 dB and FID reduced by nearly half. Our results highlight confidence-aware fusion of generative priors and support-view consistency as a key principle for robust feedforward 3D driving scene reconstruction.
Rui Song, Tianhui Cai, Markus Gross +5
University of California, Los Angeles · Technical University of Munich · University of Cambridge
High-fidelity reconstruction of driving scenes is crucial for autonomous driving. While recent feedforward 3D Gaussian Splatting (3DGS) methods enable fast reconstruction, their per-pixel Gaussian prediction paradigm often suffers from multi-view inconsistency and layering artifacts. Moreover, existing methods often model dynamic instances via dense flow prediction, which lacks explicit cross-view correspondence and instance-level consistency. In this paper, we propose PointForward, a feedforward driving reconstruction framework through point-aligned representations. Unlike pixel-aligned methods, we initialize sparse 3D queries in world space and aggregate multi-view image information via spatial-temporal fusion onto these queries, enforcing explicit cross-view consistency in a single feedforward pass. To handle scene dynamics, we introduce scene graphs that explicitly organize moving instances during reconstruction. By leveraging 3D bounding boxes, our method enables instance-level motion propagation and temporally consistent dynamic representations. Extensive experiments demonstrate that PointForward achieves state-of-the-art performance on large-scale driving benchmarks. The code will be available upon the publication of the paper.
Cheng Chi, Xianqi Wang, Hongcheng Luo +9
Xiaomi EV · Huazhong University of Science and Technology · Zhejiang University