Geometry-Aware Online Mapping for 3D Gaussian Splatting SLAM
Authors: Thai Luu, Quan Tran, Hieu Phan, Tuan Dang
Organizations: Cognitive Robotics Lab, Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, University of Arkansas, USA. · Center for AI Research, VinUniversity, Ha Noi, Vietnam.
Recent 3D Gaussian Splatting (3DGS) has enabled efficient photorealistic view synthesis and is rapidly being adopted in simultaneous localization and mapping (SLAM) systems for online mapping. In these systems, a Gaussian map must be expanded and refined incrementally while tracking runs in real time, so initialization and density control directly determine where limited computation and iterations are spent. This contrasts with offline 3DGS reconstruction, where such heuristics can be amortized over long optimization schedules. However, most 3DGS-SLAM pipelines inherit initialization and density-control heuristics from offline reconstruction, which can become brittle under the strict per-keyframe optimization budgets and incremental map growth of online SLAM. In this work, we revisit these heuristics in a decoupled 3DGS-SLAM setting and propose three geometry-aware methods that operate in the mapping thread: transmittance-preserving densification, camera-aware scale initialization from depth and intrinsics, and error-guided densification that focuses new primitives on high-residual regions. Our results show consistent improvements in rendering quality with negligible overhead, highlighting the coupling between photometric residuals and pose uncertainty in online SLAM. We will open-source our code to the community to foster growth and validate reproducibility.
Figures & tables
Fig. 2: System overview. Our pipeline follows Photo-SLAM’s decoupled design: ORB-SLAM3 estimates poses and selects keyframes, while an asynchronous backend optimizes a 3D Gaussian Splatting map via differentiable rasterization. mapping modules: Camera-aware Scale initialization, Transmittance-Preserving Densification, and Error-guided Densification; the tracking frontend remains unchanged.
Fig. 3: Effect of Error-guided Densification under the same online mapping budget. For each example, we show the observed keyframe (left), the baseline gradient-based densification (middle), and ours with ED (right). The residual heatmaps is brighter indicates larger error), where ED reduces holes and over-smoothed regions.
Fig. 4: Scale initialization in online SLAM. (a) k-NN scale initialization depends on sparse point density, often producing considerable splats and blurry artifacts. (b) Camera-aware Scale initializes the Gaussian size from the metric pixel footprint at the observed depth, yielding consistent, sharper primitives independent of point density.
Fig. 5: Comparison over representative views between (a) the Photo-SLAM baseline [ 10 ] and (b) our geometry-aware online mapping; PSNR (dB) is overlaid on the renderings.
Fig. 6: Additional qualitative results on TUM RGB-D. Top row: fr3/office . Bottom row: fr1/desk . Left: Ground Truth rendering. Right: Ours, demonstrating a high visual fidelity that closely matches the ground truth under the same online mapping budget.
Scene
Baseline (Photo-SLAM)
Ours
PSNR ↑
SSIM ↑
LPIPS ↓
FPS ↑
PSNR ↑
SSIM ↑
LPIPS ↓
FPS ↑
TUM RGB-D
fr1/desk
20.87
.743
.239
58.4
21.44
.761
.216
79
fr2/xyz
22.09
.765
.169
52.9
23.27
.775
.145
72
fr3/office
22.74
.780
.154
43.7
22.70
.774
.152
52
Average
21.90
.763
.187
51.6
22.47
.770
.171
68
Replica
office0
38.48
.964
.050
48.6
38.41
.968
.046
58
TABLE I: Rendering quality and tracking efficiency. Evaluated on the full estimated trajectory (average of 3 runs). Our geometry-aware mapping consistently outperforms the baseline in rendering quality (PSNR, SSIM, LPIPS) across both datasets, while strictly maintaining real-time tracking performance (FPS). Best results are in bold .
Symbol
Value
Description
λ
1.0
CS coverage factor in Eq. ( 10 )
KED
100
ED update period (mapping iterations)
N
0.5∣Perr∣
ED samples per update (50% of error pixels)
τ
0.02
residual threshold for ED candidate pixels
δ
0.5
depth-edge threshold (finite differences)
α0
0.1
initial opacity for ED-inserted Gaussians
TABLE II: Hyperparameters used by our method.
Method
PSNR ↑
SSIM ↑
LPIPS ↓
FPS ↑
BundleFusion † [ 1 ]
23.84
0.822
0.197
8.6
Nice-SLAM † [ 2 ]
26.16
0.832
0.232
2.3
ESLAM † [ 3 ]
30.59
0.866
0.162
6.7
Co-SLAM † [ 4 ]
30.25
0.864
0.175
14.6
SplaTAM † [ 12 ]
34.11
0.970
0.100
∼ 0.5
GS-SLAM † [ 13 ]
34.27
0.975
0.082
∼ 8.0
TABLE III: Comparison with prior systems on Replica [ 23 ] , averaged over 8 scenes. Results marked with † are from prior work, while ‡ indicates our results.
Dataset
Scene
Baseline
Ours
TUM
fr1/desk
1.53±0.01
1.53±0.01
fr2/xyz
0.31±0.02
0.30±0.01
fr3/office
0.90±0.02
0.94±0.02
Average
0.91
0.92
Replica
office0
0.45±0.02
0.45±0.02
office1
0.44±0.09
0.37±0.02
TABLE IV: Tracking accuracy (ATE RMSE in cm, mean ± std over 3 runs). TPD and CS are mapping-only; differences from Baseline lie within ORB-SLAM3 run-to-run variance.
Dataset
+TPD+CS
+TPD+CS+ED
PSNR ↑
SSIM ↑
LPIPS ↓
PSNR ↑
SSIM ↑
LPIPS ↓
TUM RGB-D
21.91
.771
.182
21.85
.762
.184
Replica
34.72
.944
.055
34.39
.931
.055
Overall Avg
31.22
.891
.082
30.97
.874
.083
TABLE V: Rendering-quality ablation within our method (averages only), mean of 3 runs. Rendering metrics via Photo-SLAM-eval.
Iters / KF
PSNR ↑
SSIM ↑
LPIPS ↓
#Gaussians (K)
Base
Ours
Base
Ours
Base
Ours
Base
Ours
50
13.70
13.80
0.575
0.578
0.598
0.588
3.50
3.50
100
12.90
14.25
0.575
0.582
0.588
0.580
1.90
1.90
200
15.90
15.70
0.613
0.618
0.498
0.490
2.30
2.40
300
16.90
16.80
0.638
0.635
0.425
0.428
2.85
2.83
TABLE VI: Iteration ablation on TUM RGB-D (average of fr1/desk and fr2/xyz). Performance of the baseline versus our proposed mapping modifications under varying per-keyframe iteration budgets.
SLAM methods based on 3D Gaussian Splatting (3DGS) have demonstrated impressive tracking and mapping performance, but typically require additional geometric information from external depth sensors. Meanwhile, recent SLAM systems that leverage geometric priors from pre-trained feed-forward models enable real-time dense reconstruction, yet often discard original RGB information during optimization, thus degrading overall reconstruction quality. We present GeoGS-SLAM, an online monocular dense reconstruction system that combines the 3DGS-based map representation with learned geometric priors. Given uncalibrated RGB input, we first employ a feed-forward visual geometry model to predict camera and scene priors. The Gaussian scene map is then expanded by directly sampling Gaussian primitives from both RGB input and geometric priors. Camera poses and the scene map are jointly optimized through a coarse-to-fine strategy that minimizes both photometric and geometric losses. To ensure global consistency, we further incorporate online loop closure detection and pose graph optimization. Extensive experiments across indoor and outdoor benchmarks demonstrate that GeoGS-SLAM achieves superior rendering quality and tracking accuracy compared to state-of-the-art methods while maintaining online real-time performance. Project page: https://rlgao.github.io/geogs_slam.
Ruilan Gao, Letian Jin, Yu Zhang
State Key Laboratory of Industrial Control Technology, College of Control Science and Engineering, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China, 310027. · Key Laboratory of Collaborative Sensing and Autonomous Unmanned Systems of Zhejiang Province, Hangzhou, China, 310027.
SLAM systems based on 3D Gaussian Splatting (3DGS) have recently demonstrated promising reconstruction accuracy for dense 3D scene representations. However, current 3DGS systems struggle to meet the strict demands of real-world deployments due to severe limitations in operational performance and map adaptability. To this end, we propose LightSplat, a hybrid-representation RGB-D SLAM framework. It synergizes local sparse features for robust and fast tracking with a dual-thread backend that progressively constructs dense Gaussian submaps. Crucially, we enable online loop closure through feature-accelerated 3DGS registration, refining overall map consistency through pose graph optimization. Ultimately, LightSplat achieves the online reconstruction of high-fidelity Gaussian map. Extensive experiments on multiple datasets and real-world robotic platform demonstrate that our method achieves near state-of-the-art reconstruction quality and the capability to accommodate practical camera motions, maintaining an average framerate of 8 FPS. Overall, LightSplat provides an efficient and robust foundation for deploying high-fidelity 3DGS in real-world environments.
Junze Bao, Ye Gao, Yiming Huang +5
School of Automation Science and Electrical Engineering, Beihang University, Beijing 100191, P. R. China, and also with Zhejiang Key Laboratory of Industrial Big Data and Robot Intelligent Systems, Hangzhou Innovation Institute, Beihang University, Hangzhou 310051, P. R. China. · School of Mechanical Engineering, Zhejiang Sci-Tech University, Hangzhou 310018, P. R. China.
Dense visual SLAM is a fundamental problem in robotics. Recent advances in 3DGS have demonstrated its potential for dense SLAM. Existing 3DGS frameworks focus on both appearance and geometry modeling. However, scene geometry is typically more critical for SLAM than novel view synthesis because downstream robotic tasks, such as navigation and obstacle avoidance, rely primarily on accurate spatial geometry rather than photorealistic rendering. This observation raises a natural question: Is it feasible for 3DGS to perform 3D reconstruction without scene appearance modeling? Motivated by this, we propose Geometry-only Gaussian Splatting (GeoGS), which directly reconstructs scene geometry, and further present GeoGS-SLAM, a dense visual SLAM system built upon this representation. Specifically, GeoGS retains only spatial parameters to reduce the number of per-primitive parameters by over 80%. In contrast to existing 3DGS methods, GeoGS focuses solely on geometric reconstruction, which significantly reduces the number of Gaussian primitives, accelerates geometric convergence, and enhances robustness to illumination variations. In addition, we present an effective training framework that optimizes the Gaussian primitives via single-view and multi-view geometric and photometric supervision, and speeds up geometry convergence with a local-plane driven initialization that better aligns primitives with local structures. Furthermore, we introduce a map update strategy for loop closure that globally transforms the Gaussian map to align it with the corrected pose estimates, thereby preventing map tearing caused by inconsistent per-viewpoint pose corrections in existing methods. Extensive experiments on synthetic and real-world benchmarks demonstrate that our method outperforms SOTA methods in terms of online mapping efficiency and geometric reconstruction quality.
Lipu Zhou, Yaoyun Kang, Junxiang Pang +3
The authors are with the School of Instrument Science and Opto-electronics Engineering, Beihang University, Beijing 100191, China