Feed-forward 3D reconstruction models are efficient but rigid: once trained, they perform inference in a zero-shot manner and cannot adapt to the test scene. As a result, visually plausible reconstructions often contain errors, particularly under occlusions, specularities, and ambiguous cues. To address this, we introduce Free Geometry, a framework that enables feed-forward 3D reconstruction models to self-evolve at test time without any 3D ground truth. Our key insight is that, when the model receives more views, it produces more reliable and view-consistent reconstructions. Leveraging this property, given a testing sequence, we mask a subset of frames to construct a self-supervised task. Free Geometry enforces cross-view feature consistency between representations from full and partial observations, while maintaining the pairwise relations implied by the held-out frames. This self-supervision allows for fast recalibration via lightweight LoRA updates, taking less than 2 minutes per dataset on a single GPU. Our approach consistently improves state-of-the-art foundation models, including Depth Anything 3 and VGGT, across 4 benchmark datasets, yielding an average improvement of 3.73% in camera pose accuracy and 2.88% in point map prediction. Code is available at https://github.com/hiteacherIamhumble/Free-Geometry .
Figures & tables
Figure 1: Free Geometry enables feed-forward 3D reconstruction models to self-evolve at test time without any 3D ground truth and generalize on models and datasets.
# Views
ETH3D
7-Scenes
ScanNet++
HiRoom
AUC@3 ↑
F1 ↑
AUC@3 ↑
F1 ↑
AUC@3 ↑
F1 ↑
AUC@3 ↑
F1 ↑
8
0.445
0.536
0.315
0.439
0.733
0.436
0.827
0.787
8→4
0.424
0.188
0.302
0.285
0.747
0.306
0.857
0.682
4
0.318
0.142
0.254
0.239
0.586
0.231
0.700
0.561
Table 1: Long Sequence Provides Better Reconstruction Accuracy. Row 2 ( 8→4 ) uses 8 input views to compute encoder features and forwards only the corresponding 4-view features to the decoder. We report pose accuracy (AUC@3 ↑ ) and reconstruction quality (F1 ↑ ). Rankings are highlighted with first , second , and third within each column.
Figure 2: Long Sequence Provides Better Reconstruction Geometry. The left example shows a HiRoom bedroom scene reconstructed by using 8 input views in VGGT while forwarding only the corresponding 4-view features to the decoder. The right example shows the same scene reconstructed using only 4 input views.
Figure 3: Architecture of Free Geometry. The test sequence is processed in two configurations. Top : the full observation (all views, e.g. 8 views) passes through the Image Patch Embedding (e.g. DINOv2 [ 9 ] ), the Multi-view Transformer, a randomized camera token, and encodes the views into feature representations. All encoders are frozen ( gray ). Bottom : the partial observation (half of views masked, e.g. 4 views) passes through the same frozen backbone ( gray ) with LoRA applied to multi-view transformer and the camera token is trainable ( orange ). All feature tokens of decoder input are extracted from both branches.
Figure 4: Self-Supervised Geometric Losses of Free Geometry: Left illustrates the intra-frame consistency loss for aligning teacher and student features at corresponding image token locations. Right illustrates the cross-frame relational loss for preserving geometric relations between unmasked tokens and masked-frame anchors. The two losses jointly recalibrate the student representation to stronger full-observation features.
#View
Method
ETH3D
ScanNet++
7-Scenes
HiRoom
AUC3 ↑
F1 ↑
AUC3 ↑
F1 ↑
AUC3 ↑
F1 ↑
AUC3 ↑
F1 ↑
4
VGGT
0.157
0.102
0.408
0.171
0.238
0.196
0.421
0.276
VGGT+Free Geo
0.178
0.110
0.419
0.174
0.241
0.197
0.441
0.307
DA3
0.286
0.207
0.620
0.236
0.280
0.244
0.708
0.557
DA3+Free Geo
0.305
0.209
0.624
0.239
0.302
0.248
0.719
0.578
8
VGGT
0.207
0.301
0.496
0.326
0.252
0.329
0.516
0.502
Table 2: Free Geometry 3D Reconstruction Comparison: We report pose accuracy (AUC3 ↑ ) and reconstruction F1-score (F1 ↑ ). Each cell reports the mean over 3 seeds. Bold indicates the better result within each method pair.
Figure 5: Qualitative Results On Multi-view Depth. We extract the key frames from multi-view reconstruction depth outputs. In the error maps, red pixels mark regions where the model’s depth prediction deviates significantly from the ground truth, and gray pixels represent correctly reconstructed surfaces within threshold.
Figure 6: Qualitative Results on 3D Reconstruction. Free Geometry consistently improves geometry quality and reduce errors compared to baseline models. Red pixels mark regions where the model’s prediction deviates significantly from the ground truth, and gray pixels represent correctly reconstructed surfaces within threshold.
#View
VGGT w/. Free Geo
DA3 w/. Free Geo
AUC3 ↑
AUC30 ↑
F1 ↑
CD ↓
AUC3 ↑
AUC30 ↑
F1 ↑
CD ↓
4
+5.33%
+4.73%
+4.51%
-8.15%
+2.74%
+1.03%
+2.85%
-4.03%
8
+2.19%
+1.35%
+4.32%
-3.53%
+1.82%
+0.57%
+0.21%
-0.35%
16
+3.93%
+1.33%
+3.03%
-5.35%
+2.61%
+0.89%
+0.70%
-7.67%
32
+3.73%
+1.03%
+2.88%
-4.34%
+2.89%
+0.94%
+0.78%
-8.73%
Table 3: Free Geo cross-view relative improvements (%): Each entry is the relative change of Free Geo over the corresponding baseline, averaged over seeds 43/44/45 across 4 datasets. We report pose accuracy (Auc3 ↑ and Auc30 ↑ ) and reconstruction F1-score (F1 ↑ ) and Chamfer Distance (CD ↓ ).
Configuration
AUC3 ↑
AUC30 ↑
F1 ↑
CD ↓
w/o Consistency Loss
35.87
72.12
0.2324
3.6976
w/o Relational Loss
36.37
72.22
0.2190
3.9567
Full Loss (Free Geo)
37.88
72.32
0.2475
3.5473
Table 4: Ablations for Loss Components. We run the identical test-time adaptation settings over same scenes on ETH3D dataset and selected images with loss difference only. Benchmark results illustrate both loss components are critical for optimizing feature representations.
VGGT
DA3
Method
MSE ↓
Cosine ↑
MSE ↓
Cosine ↑
Base Model
0.9039
0.8581
45.9079
0.8605
Base Model + free Geo
0.8384
0.8684
42.8949
0.8679
Table 5: Feature Consistency Comparison: We evaluate encoder’s last-layer feature consistency over ETH3D datasets. Reference features are the unmasked 4 view features of full observation (8 views reconstruction); reported values are scene means for VGGT layer 23 and DA3 layer 39.
Dataset
Samples/scene
Training Epochs
Learning Rate Range
ETH3D
10
3
[ 1e -7, 1e -4]
7Scenes
20
3
[ 1e -8, 5e -5]
ScanNet++
10
3
[ 1e -8, 1e -5]
HiRoom
5
5
[ 1e -7, 1e -4]
Table 1: Free Geometry test-time adaptation settings for four datasets.
Selection Strategy
Pose Results
Recon Results
AUC@3 ↑
AUC@30 ↑
F-score ↑
Overall ↓
Top selection
36.87
72.22
0.2474
3.4653
Random selection
37.37
72.32
0.2418
3.5775
Mixed selection (Free Geo)
37.88
72.32
0.2475
3.5473
Table 2: Cross-frame Relational Loss Selection Strategy Comparison: We report the results on ETH3D with default training settings, where only the cross-frame patch selection strategy differs. Top selection uses top K most similar patches from masked frames. Mixed selection uses top- K/2 most similar and top- K/2 least similar patches from masked frames. he best results for each metrics are bold .
Variant
Trainable
Pose Results
Reconstruction Results
Auc3 ↑
Auc30 ↑
F1 ↑
CD ↓
Baseline
0
0.514
0.906
0.730
0.634
LoRA r=8
5.311M
0.566
0.919
0.747
0.622
LoRA r=16
10.620M
0.563
0.920
0.732
0.644
LoRA r=32
21.237M
0.581
0.923
0.755
0.625
LoRA r=64
42.470M
0.556
0.922
0.698
0.637
Table 3: LoRA Rank Comparison. We compare the baseline model and LoRA variants with different ranks trainable parameter sizes on pose and reconstruction metrics on ETH3D dataset on Depth Anything 3. The best results for each metrics are bold .
View
Method
ETH3D
ScanNet++
7-Scenes
HiRoom
Auc3 ↑
Auc30 ↑
Auc3 ↑
Auc30 ↑
Auc3 ↑
Auc30 ↑
Auc3 ↑
Auc30 ↑
4
VGGT
0.157
0.538
0.408
0.805
0.238
0.828
0.421
0.738
VGGT+Free Geo
0.178
0.557
0.419
0.812
0.241
0.829
0.441
0.802
DA3
0.286
0.675
0.620
0.798
0.280
0.817
0.708
0.925
DA3+Free Geo
0.305
0.687
0.624
0.799
0.302
0.819
0.719
0.939
8
VGGT
0.207
0.666
0.496
0.886
0.252
0.822
0.516
0.864
Table 4: Free Geometry Pose Comparison: We report pose accuracy with AUC@3 ↑ and AUC@30 ↑ . Bold are the better result within baseline/Free Geo pair.
View
Method
ETH3D
ScanNet++
7-Scenes
HiRoom
F1 ↑
CD ↓
F1 ↑
CD ↓
F1 ↑
CD ↓
F1 ↑
CD ↓
4
VGGT
0.102
3.624
0.171
0.536
0.196
0.351
0.276
0.420
VGGT+Free Geo
0.110
4.097
0.174
0.535
0.197
0.351
0.307
0.331
DA3
0.207
2.742
0.236
0.546
0.244
0.471
0.557
0.176
DA3+Free Geo
0.209
2.754
0.239
0.543
0.248
0.481
0.578
0.157
8
VGGT
0.301
1.460
0.326
0.337
0.329
0.226
0.502
0.142
Table 5: Free Geometry Reconstruction Comparison: We report reconstruction F1-score ↑ and Chamfer Distance (CD) ↓ . Bold indicates the better result within each baseline/Free Geo pair.
Figure 1: Qualitative Results on 3D Reconstruction. In the error maps, red pixels denote regions whose reconstructed geometry deviates significantly from the ground truth, while gray pixels indicate regions that fall within the evaluation threshold.
Figure 2: Qualitative Results on Multi-view Depth. We visualize representative key frames from multi-view depth reconstruction. In the error maps, red pixels mark regions where the predicted depth deviates significantly from the ground truth, and gray pixels indicate pixels whose depth agrees with the ground truth within threshold.
Recent advances in vision foundation models have revolutionized geometry reconstruction and semantic understanding. Yet, most of the existing approaches treat these capabilities in isolation, leading to redundant pipelines and compounded errors. This paper introduces FF3R, a fully annotation-free feed-forward framework that unifies geometric and semantic reasoning from unconstrained multi-view image sequences. Unlike previous methods, FF3R does not require camera poses, depth maps, or semantic labels, relying solely on rendering supervision for RGB and feature maps, establishing a scalable paradigm for unified 3D reasoning. In addition, we address two critical challenges in feedforward feature reconstruction pipelines, namely global semantic inconsistency and local structural inconsistency, through two key innovations: (i) a Token-wise Fusion Module that enriches geometry tokens with semantic context via cross-attention, and (ii) a Semantic-Geometry Mutual Boosting mechanism combining geometry-guided feature warping for global consistency with semantic-aware voxelization for local coherence. Extensive experiments on ScanNet and DL3DV-10K demonstrate FF3R's superior performance in novel-view synthesis, open-vocabulary semantic segmentation, and depth estimation, with strong generalization to in-the-wild scenarios, paving the way for embodied intelligence systems that demand both spatial and semantic understanding.
Chaoyi Zhou, Run Wang, Feng Luo +4
Microsoft · Clemson University · Texas A&M University
In this paper, we introduce NAS3R, a self-supervised feed-forward framework that jointly learns explicit 3D geometry and camera parameters with no ground-truth annotations and no pretrained priors. During training, NAS3R reconstructs 3D Gaussians from uncalibrated and unposed context views and renders target views using its self-predicted camera parameters, enabling self-supervised training from 2D photometric supervision. To ensure stable convergence, NAS3R integrates reconstruction and camera prediction within a shared transformer backbone regulated by masked attention, and adopts a depth-based Gaussian formulation that facilitates well-conditioned optimization. The framework is compatible with state-of-the-art supervised 3D reconstruction architectures and can incorporate pretrained priors or intrinsic information when available. Extensive experiments show that NAS3R achieves superior results to other self-supervised methods, establishing a scalable and geometry-aware paradigm for 3D reconstruction from unconstrained data. Code and models are publicly available at https://ranrhuang.github.io/nas3r/.
Recent feed-forward networks have achieved remarkable progress in sparse-view 3D reconstruction by predicting dense point maps directly from RGB images. However, they often suffer from geometric inconsistencies and limited fine-grained accuracy due to the absence of explicit multi-view constraints. We introduce the Geometry-Grounded Point Transformer (GGPT), a framework that augments feed-forward reconstruction with reliable sparse geometric guidance. We first propose an improved Structure-from-Motion pipeline based on dense feature matching and lightweight geometric optimisation to efficiently estimate accurate camera poses and partial 3D point clouds from sparse input views. Building on this foundation, we propose a geometry-guided 3D point transformer that refines dense point maps under explicit partial-geometry supervision using an optimised guidance encoding. Extensive experiments demonstrate that our method provides a principled mechanism for integrating geometric priors with dense feed-forward predictions, producing reconstructions that are both geometrically consistent and spatially complete, recovering fine structures and filling gaps in textureless areas. Trained solely on ScanNet++ with VGGT predictions, GGPT generalises across architectures and datasets, substantially outperforming state-of-the-art feed-forward 3D reconstruction models in both in-domain and out-of-domain settings.