Generating compact and geometrically faithful 3D meshes directly from point clouds remains a fundamental challenge. Point clouds are unordered and sparse, whereas meshes exhibit irregular structure and varying topology. As a result, many existing approaches rely on implicit representations followed by surface extraction or reconstruction. Although effective, these pipelines can produce dense or over-smoothed meshes, often requiring computationally expensive post-processing and simplification. We present OptimusMesh, a framework for direct compact triangle mesh generation from point clouds using sparse latent pivot conditioning. Our key idea is to compress 2,048 oriented input points into only 16 sparse latent pivots, reducing the geometric conditioning set by 128×. These pivots provide a compact structural representation shared across a two-stage autoregressive framework that first generates mesh vertices and then predicts triangular faces conditioned on the generated vertices and the same pivots. Compared with the evaluated recent point-cloud-conditioned autoregressive methods, which use 257 decoder-conditioning tokens, OptimusMesh uses only 16, yielding a 16.1× shorter conditioning sequence. Experiments show that OptimusMesh produces the most compact outputs among the compared recent autoregressive methods, using 25.7%--94.1% fewer faces while maintaining competitive geometric fidelity and distributional quality.
Figures & tables
Figure 2 : OptimusMesh pipeline. Given 2,048 oriented input points, the point-cloud encoder extracts K=16 sparse latent pivots with D=48 features, reducing the geometric conditioning sequence by 128× . The vertex model first generates V∈RN×3 , followed by a face model conditioned on the generated vertices and the same pivots to produce a compact triangle mesh with F≤800 .
Figure 3 : Sparse latent pivot encoder. The SLIDE-style point-cloud encoder progressively downsamples 2,048 oriented input points to K=16 sparse latent pivots with feature dimension D=48 .
Figure 4 : Qualitative comparison on ShapeNet. Representative point-cloud-conditioned mesh generation results from OptimusMesh and the evaluated baselines. Face counts (#F) are reported below each generated mesh. OptimusMesh produces compact meshes while preserving the overall structure of the input shapes.
Method
MMD ↓
COV ↑
1-NNA ↓
#V ↓
#F ↓
PSR
0.0849
0.4989
0.1203
5,980
11,563
SAP
0.0863
0.4855
0.1392
20,957
41,912
NKSR
0.0831
0.4922
0.1025
8,904
17,694
MeshAnything
0.0659
0.6347
0.1492
182
335
MeshAnythingV2
0.0689
0.6125
0.1192
463
858
FastMesh-V1K
0.0660
0.6659
0.1481
609
3,888
Table 1 : Distribution-level quality and mesh compactness on the ShapeNet test subset. Best results are shown in bold and second-best results are underlined .
Method
CD-L1 ↓
HD ↓
F1@2% ↑
NC ↑
MeshAnything
0.2123
0.3617
0.3881
0.5233
MeshAnythingV2
0.2059
0.3546
0.3985
0.5367
FastMesh-V1K
0.1878
0.3323
0.4151
0.5690
MeshRipple-10K
0.1994
0.3448
0.4245
0.5608
Ours
0.1421
0.2705
0.3570
0.5956
Table 2 : Paired geometric fidelity on 450 common ShapeNet test objects. Best results are shown in bold and second-best results are underlined .
Method
Input pts.
Cond. tokens ↓
Time (s) ↓
MeshAnything
4,096
257
35.61
MeshAnythingV2
8,192
257
63.40
FastMesh-V1K
8,192
257
8.58
MeshRipple-10K
16,384
257
379.50
Ours
2,048
16
15.75
Table 3 : Conditioning and inference efficiency of recent point-cloud-conditioned autoregressive mesh generators. Best results are shown in bold and second-best results are underlined .
Figure 5 : Qualitative results on Toys4K. Representative input point clouds and meshes generated by OptimusMesh across objects with diverse geometry and aspect ratios.
Condition
Tok. ↓
CD-L1 ↓
F1@2% ↑
NC ↑
#F ↓
Time ↓
32×48 pivots
32
0.1789
0.3012
0.5423
307.3
28.10
Dense 2048×48
2,048
0.1647
0.3026
0.5584
317.2
34.66
16×48 pivots
16
0.1417
0.3571
0.5741
249.5
15.81
Table 4 : Ablation of sparse and dense geometric conditioning.
Figure 6 : Additional meshes generated by OptimusMesh. Left: example output meshes generated by our method. Right: corresponding generated vertex sets before face prediction, illustrating how the predicted vertices are converted into final triangle meshes.
Point-cloud encoder
Mesh decoders
Dataset
Train
Val.
Test
Total
Train
Val.
Test
Total
ShapeNet
30,465
4,342
8,710
43,517
11,675
1,617
3,286
16,578
Objaverse
13,834
782
1,655
16,271
13,834
782
1,655
16,271
Toys4K
2,596
153
309
3,058
2,596
153
309
3,058
Total
46,895
5,277
10,674
62,846
28,105
2,552
5,250
35,907
Table 5 : Dataset composition for sparse-pivot encoder and mesh-decoder training.
Figure 7 : Visualization of sparse latent pivots. Representative objects are shown from multiple viewpoints. Orange markers denote the extracted pivot locations distributed across the input geometry.
Figure 8 : Representative failure cases of OptimusMesh. Examples include early termination, incomplete connectivity, and distorted local geometry.