Organizations: Department of Electronic Engineering, Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, China · Key Laboratory of Marine Robotics, Shenyang 110169, China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 101408, China · Department of Electronic and Computer Engineering, The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, Hong Kong, China
Underwater monocular SLAM is a challenging problem with applications from autonomous underwater vehicles to marine archaeology. However, existing underwater SLAM methods struggle to produce maps with high-fidelity rendering. In this paper, we propose WaterSplat-SLAM, a novel monocular underwater SLAM system that achieves robust pose estimation and photorealistic dense mapping. Specifically, we couple semantic medium filtering into two-view 3D reconstruction prior to enable underwater-adapted camera tracking and depth estimation. Furthermore, we present a semantic-guided rendering and adaptive map management strategy with an online medium-aware Gaussian map, modeling underwater environment in a photorealistic and compact manner. Experiments on multiple underwater datasets demonstrate that WaterSplat-SLAM achieves robust camera tracking and high-fidelity rendering in underwater environments.
Figures & tables
Fig. 1: System overview of WaterSplat-SLAM: The system takes an RGB sequence as input and generates an online medium-aware Gaussian map. The RGB sequence is input into the segmentation model to generate semantic segmentation of images. The object regions are then fed into the Camera Tracking and Pointmap Estimation module to generate keyframe poses. Then, Gaussian primitives are initialized through keyframe poses and object parts. For each encoded ray vector, the Medium Network predicts the medium parameters. The Gaussian map is optimized using a semantic-guided photometric loss. Upon loop closure, we also perform adaptive adjustment and merging of Gaussian primitives.
Fig. 2: Illustration of medium-aware Gaussian mapping: Encoded ray vectors are passed through the Medium Network to predict three medium attributes: σattn (attenuation density), σbs (backscatter density), and cmed (medium color). During rendering, the contributions of the medium and objects are explicitly separated.
Fig. 3: Gaussian primitives merging pipeline: When consecutive keyframes k,k+1 detect loop closure with history frame j , we extract their anchored Gaussian primitives and establish a 3D voxel grid. All primitives falling within the same voxel are then merged into a single Gaussian primitive.
Fig. 4: Detailed comparison of reconstruction results for Curacao, JapRedSea, and Panama sequences on SeaThru-NeRF dataset. All three sequences exhibit the common challenge of turbid water and significant obscureness. We select a non-keyframe which is not included in training views across all methods in three sequences. Specific regions are zoomed in to highlight reconstruction details. WaterSplat-SLAM shows high-fidelity reconstruction and details, demonstrating its strong capability in clearly rendering both foreground and background objects despite the challenging underwater conditions.
Method
Type
Curasao
RedSea
JapRedSea
Panama
Avg
PSNR ↑
SSIM ↑
LPIPS ↓
PSNR ↑
SSIM ↑
LPIPS ↓
PSNR ↑
SSIM ↑
LPIPS ↓
PSNR ↑
SSIM ↑
LPIPS ↓
PSNR ↑
SSIM ↑
LPIPS ↓
GO-SLAM [ 33 ]
NeRF
18.70
0.353
0.795
11.89
0.131
0.791
15.72
0.294
0.841
16.63
0.289
0.898
15.74
0.267
0.831
GLORIE-SLAM [ 22 ]
21.79
0.567
0.558
16.02
0.415
0.575
16.11
0.446
0.494
18.79
0.452
0.523
18.18
0.470
0.538
MonoGS [ 9 ]
3DGS
20.83
0.613
0.643
Fail
Fail
Fail
14.76
0.465
0.553
18.54
0.597
0.557
18.04
0.558
0.584
HI-SLAM2 [ 12 ]
15.24
0.247
0.913
14.28
0.503
0.688
12.04
0.277
0.782
12.10
0.152
0.936
13.42
0.295
0.830
OpenGS-SLAM [ 24 ]
Fail
Fail
Fail
Fail
Fail
Fail
17.11
0.573
0.581
19.59
0.652
0.710
18.35
0.613
0.646
TABLE I: Rendering quality evaluations on SeaThru-NeRF dataset.
Fig. 5: Detailed reconstruction comparisons for Big_gate and Pipe_local and Pool_up2 sequences on our dataset. We select a non-keyframe which is not included in training views for all methods across three sequences. Specific regions are zoomed in to highlight reconstruction details.
Method
Type
Big_gate
Pipe_local
Pool_up
Pool_up2
Pool_loop
Avg
PSNR ↑
SSIM ↑
LPIPS ↓
PSNR ↑
SSIM ↑
LPIPS ↓
PSNR ↑
SSIM ↑
LPIPS ↓
PSNR ↑
SSIM ↑
LPIPS ↓
PSNR ↑
SSIM ↑
LPIPS ↓
PSNR ↑
SSIM ↑
LPIPS ↓
GO-SLAM [ 33 ]
NeRF
17.76
0.348
0.616
14.20
0.269
0.743
10.97
0.144
0.824
19.83
0.510
0.609
10.02
0.192
0.779
14.56
0.293
0.714
GLORIE-SLAM [ 22 ]
19.51
0.643
0.556
21.54
0.682
0.597
Fail
Fail
Fail
20.48
0.649
0.519
Fail
Fail
Fail
20.51
0.658
0.557
MonoGS [ 9 ]
3DGS
25.97
0.765
0.672
23.71
0.860
0.649
23.21
0.864
0.629
26.44
0.897
0.572
17.25
0.747
0.719
23.32
0.827
0.648
HI-SLAM2 [ 12 ]
24.01
0.650
0.575
25.61
0.820
0.451
21.39
0.762
0.591
26.09
0.834
0.460
22.41
0.746
0.618
23.90
0.762
0.539
OpenGS-SLAM [ 24 ]
Fail
Fail
Fail
Fail
Fail
Fail
23.01
0.752
0.585
24.76
0.880
0.570
Fail
Fail
Fail
23.89
0.816
0.578
TABLE II: Rendering quality evaluations on WaterSplat-SLAM dataset.
Method
Big_gate
Pipe_local
Pool_up
Pool_up2
Pool_loop
Avg
WaterSplatting [ 28 ]
27.49
28.37
30.62
31.74
26.16
28.88
WaterSplat-SLAM
29.55
30.20
30.29
33.22
27.69
30.19
TABLE III: PSNR comparison between WaterSplatting and WaterSplat-SLAM on WaterSplat-SLAM dataset.
Method
Big_gate
Pipe_local
Pool_up
Pool_up2
Pool_loop
Avg
ORB-SLAM3 [ 35 ]
0.091
2.768
Fail
Fail
Fail
×
GO-SLAM [ 33 ]
0.041
0.292
2.532
0.205
3.231
1.260
GLORIE-SLAM [ 22 ]
0.036
0.236
Fail
0.086
Fail
×
MonoGS [ 9 ]
1.729
3.472
2.899
2.578
3.240
2.784
HI-SLAM2 [ 12 ]
0.034
0.135
2.533
1.213
2.343
1.252
OpenGS-SLAM [ 24 ]
Fail
Fail
2.063
2.249
Fail
×
TABLE IV: Tracking accuracy (ATE(m) ↓ ) on WaterSplat-SLAM dataset.
Dataset
Method
PSNR ↑
SSIM ↑
LPIPS ↓
Panama
w/o Water Mask
24.85
0.701
0.357
w/o Primitives Adjustment
25.63
0.705
0.326
WaterSplat-SLAM
25.95
0.723
0.270
Pool_loop
w/o Water Mask
27.21
0.797
0.353
w/o Primitives Adjustment
26.56
0.790
0.376
WaterSplat-SLAM
27.69
0.808
0.326
TABLE V: Ablation study of different modules in Panama and Pool_loop on rendering performance
Big_gate
Pipe_local
Pool_up
Pool_up2
Pool_loop
Avg
w/o Water mask
0.077
0.160
0.323
0.274
0.375
0.242
WaterSplat-SLAM
0.066
0.164
0.289
0.224
0.353
0.219
TABLE VI: Water Mask module in WaterSplat-SLAM dataset on ATE(m) ↓
Fig. 6: NVS result w/o Water Mask module.
Method
Primitives Size
Reconstruction Quality
PSNR ↑
SSIM ↑
LPIPS ↓
w/o Primitives Merge
137657
27.59
0.807
0.303
WaterSplat-SLAM
104264
27.69
0.808
0.326
TABLE VII: Ablation study on primitives merge strategy in Pool_loop
Method
Big_gate
Pipe_local
Pool_up
Pool_up2
Pool_loop
MonoGS [ 9 ]
0.88 ± 0.24
0.84 ± 0.20
1.02 ± 0.20
1.12 ± 0.37
0.67 ± 0.41
HI-SLAM2 [ 12 ]
0.24 ± 2.31
0.17 ± 1.57
0.24 ± 2.02
0.39 ± 3.33
0.39 ± 1.74
WaterSplat-SLAM
0.21 ± 0.29
0.22 ± 0.25
0.31 ± 0.37
0.30 ± 0.43
0.47 ± 1.50
TABLE VIII: Per-frame runtime analysis (second) on WaterSplat-SLAM dataset.
Recent monocular 3D Gaussian Splatting (3DGS) streaming reconstruction methods have achieved impressive performance by balancing reconstruction quality and efficiency. However, extending these frameworks to underwater scenes remains challenging due to severe visual degradation, such as light attenuation and scattering, which degrades camera pose tracking and distorts scene geometry. To address these challenges, we propose AquaFlow, a monocular Gaussian Splatting streaming reconstruction framework for efficient and high-fidelity underwater reconstruction. Specifically, AquaFlow fine-tunes a 3D vision foundation model on large-scale underwater data for robust pose and pointmap estimation, and introduces a medium-guided incremental Gaussian initialization strategy for streaming mapping. Furthermore, we develop a streaming-compatible hybrid scene representation that integrates structured, distance-conditioned neural Gaussians with a physics-inspired optical model to compensate for underwater image formation effects, enabling accurate scene reconstruction. We evaluate AquaFlow on a comprehensive dataset of 62 diverse underwater trajectories, collected from both public benchmarks and in-the-wild web videos across various scales. Extensive experiments demonstrate that AquaFlow achieves state-of-the-art tracking and rendering performance, reducing average localization error by 13.2% and improving PSNR by 4.74 dB compared to WaterSplat-SLAM.
Yingxiang Xu, Kerui Ren, Wenqi Guo +4
Zhejiang University · Shanghai AI Laboratory · Shanghai Jiao Tong University +3
Localization and mapping are core perceptual capabilities for underwater robots. Stereo cameras provide a low-cost means of directly estimating metric depth to support these tasks. However, despite recent advances in stereo depth estimation on land, computing depth from image pairs in underwater scenes remains challenging. In underwater environments, images are degraded by light attenuation, visual artifacts, and dynamic lighting conditions. Furthermore, real-world underwater scenes frequently lack rich texture useful for stereo depth estimation and 3D reconstruction. As a result, stereo estimation networks trained on in-air data cannot transfer directly to the underwater domain. In addition, there is a lack of real-world underwater stereo datasets for supervised training of neural networks. Poor underwater depth estimation is compounded in stereo-based Simultaneous Localization and Mapping (SLAM) algorithms, making it a fundamental challenge for underwater robot perception. To address these challenges, we propose a novel framework that enables sim-to-real training of underwater stereo disparity estimation networks using simulated data and self-supervised finetuning. We leverage our learned depth predictions to develop SurfSLAM, a novel framework for real-time underwater SLAM that fuses stereo cameras with IMU, barometric, and Doppler Velocity Log (DVL) measurements. Lastly, we collect a challenging real-world dataset of shipwreck surveys using an underwater robot. Our dataset features over 24,000 stereo pairs, along with high-quality, dense photogrammetry models and reference trajectories for evaluation. Through extensive experiments, we demonstrate the advantages of the proposed training approach on real-world data for improving stereo estimation in the underwater domain and for enabling accurate trajectory estimation and 3D reconstruction of complex shipwreck sites.
Onur Bagoren, Seth Isaacson, Sacchin Sundar +6
Department of Robotics, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109, USA
Extreme subsea environments often cause severe feature de-gradation and estimator divergence in underwater visual-inertial SLAM. Although sensors like Doppler Velocity Logs (DVL) and pressure gauges provide auxiliary constraints, robust multi-sensor fusion during intermittent visual failure remains challenging. To address this, we present APVI-SLAM, a real-time multi-sensor fusion SLAM system that achieves both accurate underwater localization and photorealistic mapping. Our approach introduces a reliability-aware localization framework that dynamically reweights sensor estimators and employs a sliding-window freezing strategy to recover from tracking failures, substantially enhancing system robustness. Furthermore, for high-fidelity scenes reconstruction, we propose an efficient quadtree-guided mapping module that facilitates incremental water-medium modeling and 3D Gaussian optimization. Recognizing the lack of benchmark for underwater mapping evaluation, we also contribute a coral reef surveying dataset with synchronized multi-modality data. Extensive experiments on public and our proposed benchmarks demonstrate that APVI-SLAM achieves state-of-the-art localization and reconstruction quality at real-time speeds.
Hanwen Zhang, Yipeng Zhu, Xiaopeng Guo +2
Division of Integrative Systems and Design, Hong Kong University of Science and Technology · School of Interdisciplinary Science, Beijing Institute of Technology · Division of Integrative Systems and Design, the Department of Computer Science and Engineering, and the Department of Ocean Science, Hong Kong University of Science and Technology