Pose-free feed-forward 3D Gaussian Splatting enables novel view synthesis from uncalibrated multi-view images. Although more views should improve performance, existing methods often degrade with dense-view inputs because global aggregation spreads attention over many tokens, and naive voxel fusion averages many Gaussians into overly smooth representations. We present AVSplat, a framework that turns additional views into reliable signals for both aggregation and representation. Before global attention, each view performs a single lightweight interaction with a small set of Assist Views chosen for relevance and diversity, and the cached features provide a focused scene context that stabilizes correspondence. For representation, we use adaptive temperature-aware voxel fusion that sharpens attribution under high occupancy, guided by occupancy and point confidence. Crucially, AVSplat restores positive view scaling where performance remains stable or improves as more input views are added, instead of degrading in the dense-view regime. Ablations show that Assist View Preconditioning is primarily responsible for preventing dense-view degradation, while Occupancy-guided Voxel Fusion contributes most of the single-point image-quality gains.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: Overview of the AVSplat pipeline. The encoder converts each input image into patch embeddings (image tokens) and aggregates them into per-view tokens. Assist-View Preconditioning (AVP) computes a descriptor for each view and injects scene context before global aggregation. Decoder heads then predict camera parameters, depth, and Gaussian primitives. Occupancy-guided Voxel Fusion (OVF) forms voxel-level attributes and modulates them by voxel occupancy, followed by differentiable Gaussian rasterization to produce the final rendering.
Sparse inputs
3
6
16
Method
PSNR ↑
SSIM ↑
LPIPS ↓
PSNR ↑
SSIM ↑
LPIPS ↓
PSNR ↑
SSIM ↑
LPIPS ↓
Mip-NeRF 360 [ 1 ]
NoPoSplat [ 22 ]
16.36
0.430
0.453
15.92
0.416
0.541
15.47
0.361
0.606
Flare [ 26 ]
13.52
0.350
0.601
15.35
0.407
0.573
13.21
0.348
0.695
AnySplat [ 5 ]
17.29
0.429
0.433
17.51
0.446
0.412
17.81
0.448
0.382
Table 1: Quantitative results on Mip-NeRF 360 [ 1 ] , VR-NeRF [ 20 ] , and DL3DV [ 9 ] under sparse and dense inputs with metrics PSNR ↑ , SSIM ↑ [ 17 ] , LPIPS ↓ [ 25 ] . The best result in each group is highlighted in red and the second best in orange. AVSplat attains rendering quality comparable to the strongest baselines and avoids the dense-view degradation observed in prior pose-free pipelines. Our performance remains stable or improves as more input views are added, instead of oscillating or degrading at high view counts.
Figure 2: Qualitative comparison between AVSplat and AnySplat [ 5 ] under dense-view inputs. We focus on the dense-view setting, where the artifacts we target primarily occur, and therefore omit sparse-view results. Red boxes highlight that our method preserves more fine-grained surface details with fewer artifacts and less oversmoothing-induced blur, while the rightmost column shows more accurate global matching.
Figure 3: Cross-view attention at layer 15 for a fixed frame pair under 16-view inputs. The maps are extracted from the full attention matrix after removing self-frame blocks and special tokens, and are displayed with identical normalization. AVSplat produces more concentrated cross-view responses and the geometric consistency is quantified in Tab. 3 .
Figure 4: Performance versus input count with 3, 6, 16, 32, 48, 64, and 72 input views. The vertical axis reports PSNR and the horizontal axis shows the number of input views. Shaded regions indicate the standard deviation across multiple trials. In the dense-view setting, AVSplat consistently outperforms AnySplat [ 5 ] . The inset in the lower right zooms into the dense-view region and shows that AnySplat begins to oscillate as the number of input views increases, whereas AVSplat maintains stable or improving performance without degradation.
Variant
PSNR ↑
SSIM ↑
LPIPS ↓
Baseline
21.14
0.684
0.282
+ Fusion only
21.57
0.692
0.272
+ Assist + Fusion
21.67
0.717
0.265
Table 2: Ablations on the DL3DV [ 9 ] in the 64 views setting. Occupancy-guided Voxel Fusion contributes most of the single-point image-quality improvement at 64 views, while Assist-View Preconditioning mainly targets the dense-view scaling failure mode by stabilizing global matching as the input count grows.
Attention diagnostics
ACID overlap stress test
Method
Entropy ↓
GeoMass ↑
Method
48 views
72 views
AnySplat
0.693
0.286
AnySplat
23.12
22.45
AVSplat
0.642
0.374
AVSplat
23.15
23.24
Table 3: Additional dense-view diagnostics. Left: cross-view attention analysis on DL3DV with 16 input views. GeoMass@1patch measures the attention assigned to a one-patch-width epipolar band. Right: PSNR (dB) on the overlap-heavy ACID evaluation. Ground-truth poses are used only to compute the diagnostic metric and are never provided to either model.
Feed-forward 3D Gaussian Splatting (3DGS) has emerged as a highly effective solution for novel view synthesis. Existing methods predominantly rely on a \emph{pixel-aligned} Gaussian prediction paradigm, where each 2D pixel is mapped to a 3D Gaussian. We rethink this widely adopted formulation and identify several inherent limitations: it renders the reconstructed 3D models heavily dependent on the number of input views, leads to view-biased density distributions, and introduces alignment errors, particularly when source views contain occlusions or low texture. To address these challenges, we introduce VolSplat, a new multi-view feed-forward paradigm that replaces pixel alignment with voxel-aligned Gaussians. By directly predicting Gaussians from a predicted 3D voxel grid, it overcomes pixel alignment's reliance on error-prone 2D feature matching, ensuring robust multi-view consistency. Furthermore, it enables adaptive control over density based on 3D scene complexity, yielding more faithful Gaussians, improved geometric consistency, and enhanced novel-view rendering quality. Experiments on widely used benchmarks demonstrate that VolSplat achieves state-of-the-art performance, while producing more plausible and view-consistent results. The video results, code and trained models are available on our project page: https://lhmd.top/volsplat.
Weijie Wang, Yeqing Chen, Zeyu Zhang +9
Zhejiang University · GigaAI · The Chinese University of Hong Kong +4
Feed-forward 3D Gaussian Splatting now reconstructs renderable scenes from unposed, uncalibrated images. Yet, most models supervise only photometric consistency and predict Gaussians pixel by pixel, which leaves global structure fragile and ties primitive count to image resolution and view count. To this end, GrapeSplat amalgamates multi-view cues into a voxel-aligned scene representation and decodes Gaussians directly from the learned grid, requiring no per-scene optimization or post-processing. An Atlas Encoder lifts all views into pixel-wise geometry-and-appearance features anchored at predicted 3D points. PEACH-Vox compands the unbounded scene into a bounded sparse grid through a smooth per-axis map with an exact closed-form inverse. The Sparse Decoder then consolidates the grid with sparse convolutions and decodes the full scene as multiple Gaussians per occupied cell. This amalgamated representation exploits sparse voxel occupancy, where the Gaussian count follows the occupied cells and saturates as views cover the scene, while grid resolution sets its ceiling. GrapeSplat turns unposed images into a renderable Gaussian scene in a single forward pass. Trained with 2D and 3D supervision on 8-view sequences, it generalizes zero-shot from 4 to 64 views across indoor and unbounded scenes. Code and trained weights are available at https://github.com/VAISR/GrapeSplat
Si-Yu Lu, Yung-Yao Chen, Yi Jan Chen +3
National Taiwan University · National Taiwan University of Science and Technology · NTU AI Center of Research Excellence (NTU AI-CoRE) +1
Feed-forward Gaussian splatting models have demonstrated remarkable effectiveness in reconstructing three-dimensional (3D) objects from a few two-dimensional (2D) images, even if they are unseen. As existing methods typically predict Gaussian primitives uniformly across the 3D space, most primitives are placed in non-object regions. This may hinder the representation of fine object details. This paper proposes a Voxel-Selective Gaussian Splatting model (VS-Splat), a new end-to-endfeed-forward Gaussian splatting framework that predicts many primitives only within selected voxels that are likely to belong to an object, without 3D structural supervision. To achieve this, we propose a new learnable voxel selection approach that identifies object-centric voxels only with 2D rendering supervision. Our sparse-view rendering experiments with three benchmark datasets show that proposed VS-Splat outperforms several state-of-the-art methods. We further demonstrate its effectiveness as a backbone for an existing densification method and show that anoptional extension improves its robustness to inaccurate camera pose estimates.
Yunsu Jeong, Hyuk Heo, Youngsang Kwak +2
Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering (ECE), Sungkykwan University (SKKU), Suwon 16419, South Korea · Department of Display Convergence Engineering (DCE), SKKU, Suwon 16419, South Korea · AiM Future, Seoul 06804, South Korea +1