Reinforcement learning (RL) for Text-to-3D (T23D) generation requires optimization across multiple quality dimensions such as semantic alignment and texture clarity. Existing methods typically optimize these dimensions simultaneously through multiple reward aggregation, without explicitly modeling inter-dimension dependencies. This can cause imbalanced optimization and persistent interference among conflicting dimensions. To address this limitation, we propose OuroReward, an interference-aware sequential reward scheduling strategy for T23D RL. OuroReward first estimates pairwise dependencies among dimensions and constructs a cyclic optimization path that minimizes cumulative interference. By incorporating the tail-to-head dependency, the cycle captures global compatibility across the entire schedule. Then, OuroReward converts the cycle into a one-pass sequence, and starts optimization from the dimension with the lowest aggregate interference. Rather than assigning a fixed optimization budget to each dimension-wise reward, training adaptively determines when to advance to the next reward according to the remaining optimization headroom of the current one. We further introduce AdaSelect, an adaptive prompt selection strategy that identifies reliable and informative prompts aligned with the model's current capability. By focusing policy updates on these prompts, AdaSelect effectively improves training stability. Extensive experiments across different T23D models and RL algorithms demonstrate that our framework consistently improves generation quality across multiple dimensions.
Figures & tables
Fig. 1 : (a) Representative failure cases produced by different T23D generation models. (b) Comparison of gradient discrepancy and reward-change conflict ratio between a conflicting dimension pair ( G ↔ T ) and a compatible dimension pair ( A ↔ O ) under the default reward-averaging strategy. A , G , T , and O denote four quality dimensions including Alignment , Geometry , Texture , and Overall , respectively.
Fig. 2 : The framework of the proposed AdaSelect strategy.
Fig. 3 : Comparison of Random and AdaSelect for Prompt Selection at Step t .
Fig. 4 : The framework of the proposed OuroReward strategy and the RL training policy.
Fig. 5 : Statistical analysis of the constructed large-scale prompt dataset. (a) Prompt composition, where the inner and outer circles represent interaction types and attribute categories, respectively. (b) Word cloud visualization of the prompt corpus. (c) Distribution of prompt lengths.
Model
Trained Tasks
Unseen Tasks
HyperScore
Rank2Score
CLIPScore
ImageReward
Uni3D
Qwen3-VL-8B- Instruct
Win Rate
TRELLIS
3.466
3.713
0.208
0.362
0.254
6.483
-
HyperScore Task
+ GRPO
3.782
3.696
0.205
0.364
0.252
6.479
0.007
+ DiffusionNFT
4.050
3.798
0.213
0.467
0.261
6.671
0.033
+ GRPO + Ours
4.278
3.861
0.219
0.598
0.260
6.710
0.337
TABLE I : Performance comparison of our method with representative baselines across proxy rewards and unseen evaluators. Our method comprises two components: AdaSelect and OuroReward. The proxy reward is marked in orange. The best result in each column is shown in bold , while the second is underlined .
Fig. 6 : Learning curves and dimension-wise proxy reward performance under different base models. (a) TRELLIS-base as the base model. (b) Hunyuan3D-2.1 as the base model.
Fig. 7 : Qualitative results generated by the proposed method and base RL algorithms across different prompts.
Base Model
Aggregation Strategy
Step
A ↔ G
A ↔ T
A ↔ O
G ↔ T
G ↔ O
T ↔ O
Mean Gradient Similarity
Mean Reward PLCC
TRELLIS
Average
100
0.361
0.384
0.734
0.310
0.595
0.697
0.514
0.817
FocalReward
100
0.407
0.438
0.716
0.391
0.629
0.681
0.544
0.837
OuroReward
100
0.513
0.527
0.741
0.484
0.692
0.723
0.613
0.865
Average
150
0.416
0.425
0.749
0.393
0.631
0.718
0.555
0.824
FocalReward
150
0.441
0.470
0.724
0.443
0.662
0.706
0.574
0.849
OuroReward
150
0.562
0.575
0.758
0.537
0.725
0.734
0.649
0.873
TABLE II : Comparison of inter-dimension gradient similarity and reward PLCC across training steps under different training strategies. Rank2Score as the proxy reward model and DiffusionNFT as the RL algorithm. The best result in each column is shown in bold , while the second is underlined .
Base Model
Aggregation Strategy
Rank2 Score
CLIP Score
Image Reward
Uni3D
TRELLIS
Average
4.374
0.221
0.567
0.258
FocalReward
4.410
0.224
0.582
0.259
OuroReward
4.525
0.233
0.678
0.267
Hunyuan3D-2.1
Average
4.428
0.239
0.651
0.271
FocalReward
4.457
0.240
0.684
0.270
OuroReward
4.508
0.248
0.783
0.278
TABLE III : Comparison of multi-dimensional aggregation strategy. The proxy reward is marked in orange. The best result in each column is shown in bold , while the second is underlined .
Fig. 8 : Illustration of dimension-inconsistent failure cases under different RL optimization strategies. Rank2Score as the proxy reward model and DiffusionNFT as the RL algorithm.
Ada- Select
Ouro- Reward
Rank2Score
CLIPScore
Image Reward
Uni3D
✗
✗
4.253
0.216
0.483
0.253
✓
✗
4.374
0.221
0.567
0.258
✗
✓
4.496
0.230
0.635
0.262
✓
✓
4.525
0.233
0.678
0.267
TABLE IV : Ablation on AdaSelect and OuroReward. The proxy reward is marked in orange. The best result in each column is shown in bold , while the second is underlined .
Gradient Similarity
Reward PLCC
Rank2Score
CLIPScore
Image Reward
Uni3D
✗
✗
4.374
0.221
0.567
0.258
✓
✗
4.482
0.228
0.629
0.264
✗
✓
4.435
0.224
0.596
0.260
✓
✓
4.525
0.233
0.678
0.267
TABLE V : Ablation on dependency score criteria. The proxy reward is marked in orange. The best result in each column is shown in bold , while the second is underlined .
Type
Path Order
Rank2Score
CLIP Score
Image Reward
Uni3D
Baseline
Average
4.374
0.221
0.567
0.258
Random
O → G → A → T
4.435
0.224
0.596
0.260
O → A → T → G
4.482
0.228
0.629
0.264
Reversed
T → G → A → O
4.361
0.218
0.501
0.253
Shifted
A → G → T → O
4.469
0.226
0.613
0.259
Ours
O → A → G → T
4.525
0.233
0.678
0.267
TABLE VI : Ablation on sequential optimization order. The proxy reward is marked in orange. The best result in each column is shown in bold , while the second is underlined .
Proxy Reward
Uni3D
Qwen3-VL- 8B-Instruct
Hyper Score
Rank2 Score
Uni3D
0.540
6.501
3.578
3.732
Qwen3-VL-8B-Instruct
0.263
7.851
3.637
3.870
HyperScore
0.266
6.835
4.483
3.937
Rank2Score
0.267
6.982
3.654
4.525
TABLE VII : Ablation on proxy reward model. The proxy reward is marked in orange. The best result in each column is shown in bold , while the second is underlined .
Appendix figures & tables3 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
Type
Metric
MATE-3D
T23D-CompBench
Time
Alignment
Geometry
Texture
Overall
Alignment
Geometry
Texture
Overall
(s / sample)
Projection-based
CLIPScore [ 78 ]
0.494
0.496
0.537
0.510
0.552
0.501
0.536
0.562
∼10−1
ImageReward [ 74 ]
0.658
0.673
0.686
0.679
0.616
0.774
0.821
0.832
∼10−1
HyperScore [ 69 ]
0.739
0.782
0.811
0.792
0.728
0.828
0.889
0.860
∼10−1
Rank2Score [ 70 ]
0.868
0.898
0.894
0.897
0.907
0.888
0.932
0.934
∼10−1
Model-based
ULIP-T (Unit) [ 79 ]
0.435
0.467
0.472
0.469
0.634
0.657
0.661
0.663
∼10−1
Appendix
TABLE S8 : Performance comparison for different reward models on MATE-3D and T23D-CompBench benchmarks. The top two performance results are marked in boldface and underline .
Fig. S9 : Qualitative results generated by the proposed method and base RL algorithms across different prompts.
Fig. S10 : The framework of the proposed Adaptive Curriculum Prompt Selection Strategy.
Human preference alignment presents a critical yet underexplored challenge for diffusion models in text-to-3D generation. Existing solutions typically require task-specific fine-tuning, posing significant hurdles in data-scarce 3D domains. To address this, we propose Preference Score Distillation (PSD), an optimization-based framework that leverages pretrained 2D reward models for human-aligned text-to-3D synthesis without 3D training data. Our key insight stems from the incompatibility of pixel-level gradients: due to the absence of noisy samples during reward model training, direct application of 2D reward gradients disturbs the denoising process. Noticing that similar issue occurs in the naive classifier guidance in conditioned diffusion models, we fundamentally rethink preference alignment as a classifier-free guidance (CFG)-style mechanism through our implicit reward model. Furthermore, recognizing that frozen pretrained diffusion models constrain performance, we introduce an adaptive strategy to co-optimize preference scores and negative text embeddings. By incorporating CFG during optimization, online refinement of negative text embeddings dynamically enhances alignment. To our knowledge, we are the first to bridge human preference alignment with CFG theory under score distillation framework. Experiments demonstrate the superiority of PSD in aesthetic metrics, seamless integration with diverse pipelines, and strong extensibility.
Reward models guide text-to-image (T2I) systems toward outputs aligned with human preferences. However, typical reward models such as HPSv3 are trained on pre-annotated data from earlier T2I models, without accounting for quality discriminative shifts arising from evolving model capabilities and reinforcement learning (RL) iterations, limiting their broader applicability. In this work, we propose HPSv3++, a reward model framework that elevates the HPSv3 model for varying T2I model capabilities and their RL iteration changes across the full capability-iteration spectrum. Specifically, we first introduce HPDv3++, a 212K dual-dimension preference dataset annotated for text fidelity and aesthetic quality using a recent high-capability (Qwen-Image) model with human supervision. We then propose a two-stage training framework. Stage 1 employs data-aware orthogonal gradient projection to incorporate diverse aesthetic perception from HPDv3++ while preserving the original effective human preference knowledge in HPSv3. Stage 2 further leverages unlabeled data from T2I models spanning different capability levels and RL iterations, and introduces a joint capability-iterations conditioned signal for the reward model together with a standard deviation-driven unsupervised guidance mechanism, strengthening reward model across the capability-iteration spectrum. HPSv3++ achieves state-of-the-art preference prediction, outperforming HPSv3 9.8% on HPDv3, 5.5% on GenAI-Bench, while achieving 79.1%/88.1% on our proposed HPDv3++. When used for T2I RL training, it consistently improves GenEval scores across diverse T2I models, demonstrating its wide-range capabilities. The code is available at https://github.com/PlantPotatoOnMoon/HPSv3-PlusPlus.
Yijun Liu, Jie Huang, Zeyue Xue +5
Tsinghua University · JD Explore Academy · Peking University +1
Continual learning enables models to acquire new knowledge over time while retaining previously learned capabilities. However, its application to text-to-3D generation remains unexplored. We present ReConText3D, the first framework for continual text-to-3D generation. We first demonstrate that existing text-to-3D models suffer from catastrophic forgetting under incremental training. ReConText3D enables generative models to incrementally learn new 3D categories from textual descriptions while preserving the ability to synthesize previously seen assets. Our method constructs a compact and diverse replay memory through text-embedding k-Center selection, allowing representative rehearsal of prior knowledge without modifying the underlying architecture. To systematically evaluate continual text-to-3D learning, we introduce Toys4K-CL, a benchmark derived from the Toys4K dataset that provides balanced and semantically diverse class-incremental splits. Extensive experiments on the Toys4K-CL benchmark show that ReConText3D consistently outperforms all baselines across different generative backbones, maintaining high-quality generation for both old and new classes. To the best of our knowledge, this work establishes the first continual learning framework and benchmark for text-to-3D generation, opening a new direction for incremental 3D generative modeling. Project page is available at: https://mauk95.github.io/ReConText3D/.
Muhammad Ahmed Ullah Khan, Muhammad Haris Bin Amir, Didier Stricker +1