Organizations: College of Computer Science and Technology, Faculty of Information Science and Engineering, Ocean University of China, Qingdao 266100, China · New Laboratory of Pattern Recognition (NLPR), State Key Laboratory of Multimodal Artificial Intelligence Systems, Institute of Automation, Chinese Academy of Sciences (CASIA), and University of Chinese Academy of Sciences (UCAS), Beijing 100049, China
Dynamic 3D Gaussian Splatting (3DGS) provides an efficient framework for dynamic scene reconstruction. Most existing approaches model scene dynamics with deterministic deformation fields, assuming each Gaussian follows a distinct geometric trajectory over time. This assumption breaks down underwater, where light scattering, refraction, marine snow and low visibility create substantial physical ambiguity in captured images. We present PUGS, a physics-guided uncertainty model for underwater dynamic 3DGS. PUGS learns inherent uncertainty induced by underwater image formation and leverages it as a physical signal for dynamic scene modeling. Rather than estimating a single deterministic displacement, it parameterizes each Gaussian's motion as a probability distribution with expected deformation and physical uncertainty. We adopt stochastic deformation optimization to sample Gaussian trajectories via local reparameterization, exploring multiple physically plausible solutions during training. We further propose uncertainty stochastic annealing and a dual-path self-consistency distillation objective, converting stochastic exploration to deterministic reconstruction while preserving temporal coherence. Extensive experiments on underwater dynamic datasets and physics-aware benchmarks demonstrate superior rendering quality, temporal consistency and reconstruction robustness. Our method achieves 1.16 dB PSNR gain over the strongest baseline on UVEB and 3.99 dB on DRUVA.
Figures & tables
Fig. 1: We present PUGS, a method that explicitly models physical uncertainty in dynamic 3D Gaussian splatting. On the challenging underwater sequence, a deterministic deformation-based method (Row 1) entangles structural motion with optical interference, producing floaters, blur, distortion, and ghosting artifacts. In contrast, PUGS (Row 2) learns a per-pixel physical uncertainty signal Δσ (visualized as heatmaps) that captures where and when the optical medium degrades observation reliability. This uncertainty is annealed over time β(t):1→0 , enabling the model to progressively resolve physical ambiguity and produce clean, artifact-free renderings that closely match the ground-truth reference.
Fig. 2: Overview of the PUGS Pipeline for Underwater Dynamic Scene Reconstruction. Given a monocular video, SfM initializes a set of canonical Gaussians. To address the observational ambiguities caused by underwater physical disturbances, our deformation field predicts not only the displacement mean Δμ but also the positional uncertainty Δσ , yielding a complete characterization of the motion distribution. A deterministic rendering path (clean path) and an uncertainty-aware rendering path (uncertainty path) are then constructed in parallel and jointly optimized via a self-consistency distillation constraint. Meanwhile, Gaussians with high uncertainty are adaptively split to enhance local representation capacity, thereby improving the robustness of underwater reconstruction. In this way, underwater dynamics modeling addresses the failure of deterministic deformation fields under ambiguous observations, while uncertainty-guided optimization leverages the learned uncertainty to allocate representation capacity and stabilize training.
Boat
Streak
Fish
Cave
Method
PSNR ↑
SSIM ↑
LPIPS ↓
PSNR ↑
SSIM ↑
LPIPS ↓
PSNR ↑
SSIM ↑
LPIPS ↓
PSNR ↑
SSIM ↑
LPIPS ↓
3D-GS
24.03
0.829
0.309
24.53
0.897
0.096
24.75
0.815
0.230
28.53
0.928
0.344
Sea-splat
24.87
0.779
0.337
28.72
0.934
0.058
26.98
0.822
0.262
29.61
0.932
0.269
3D-4DGS
24.22
0.854
0.306
29.04
0.905
0.063
32.03
0.917
0.130
24.73
0.884
0.283
RobustGS
17.81
0.832
0.233
22.95
0.807
0.153
25.58
0.780
0.189
26.14
0.949
0.197
PSF-4D
25.05
0.812
0.320
32.41
0.953
0.044
27.13
0.903
0.242
35.45
0.966
0.139
TABLE I: Quantitative comparison on UVEB dataset. We compare our method to state-of-the-art approaches, including static 3D-GS, Sea-splat, 3D-4DGS, PSF-4D, Light-GS, RobustGS and Deformable-GS. We report PSNR, SSIM, and LPIPS. , , and backgrounds denote the best, second-best, and third-best results, respectively.
Fig. 3: Qualitative Comparison on UVEB dataset. We conduct comparisons across nine scenes and provide zoomed-in views for each scene to examine the rendered reconstruction details, with a particular focus on dynamic content and complex scene regions. Our method consistently produces higher-quality results in both dynamic and static regions.
A1
A2
A11
A12
Average
Method
PSNR ↑
SSIM ↑
LPIPS ↓
PSNR ↑
SSIM ↑
LPIPS ↓
PSNR ↑
SSIM ↑
LPIPS ↓
PSNR ↑
SSIM ↑
LPIPS ↓
PSNR ↑
SSIM ↑
LPIPS ↓
TiNeuVox
23.05
0.757
0.664
21.74
0.843
0.637
27.02
0.878
0.355
27.59
0.911
0.221
24.85
0.847
0.469
SeaThru-NeRF
26.27
0.778
0.336
20.23
0.694
0.481
27.62
0.916
0.254
26.13
0.883
0.282
25.06
0.818
0.338
4DGaussian
22.84
0.688
0.535
20.93
0.586
0.638
26.84
0.882
0.273
25.84
0.906
0.244
24.11
0.766
0.423
4DGS
20.75
0.736
0.449
19.54
0.678
0.516
24.09
0.938
0.173
25.79
0.956
0.128
22.54
0.827
0.317
WaterSplatting
28.71
0.830
0.376
26.33
0.809
0.406
32.33
0.962
0.207
30.86
0.958
0.201
29.56
0.890
0.298
TABLE II: Quantitative comparison on DRUVA dataset. We compare our method to state-of-the-art approaches, including TiNeuVox, SeaThru-NeRF, 4DGaussian, 4DGS, WaterSplatting and UDF. We report PSNR, SSIM, and LPIPS. , , and backgrounds denote the best, second-best, and third-best results, respectively.
Fig. 4: Qualitative Comparison on DRUVA dataset. We conduct comparisons across two scenes and provide zoomed-in views for each scene to examine the rendered reconstruction details, with a particular focus on dynamic content and complex scene regions. Our method consistently produces higher-quality results in both dynamic and static regions.
hanok
single flag
pisa
bouncing balls
Method
PSNR ↑
SSIM ↑
LPIPS ↓
PSNR ↑
SSIM ↑
LPIPS ↓
PSNR ↑
SSIM ↑
LPIPS ↓
PSNR ↑
SSIM ↑
LPIPS ↓
MoSca
14.80
0.590
0.420
15.30
0.560
0.500
16.70
0.540
0.570
19.90
0.810
0.120
STG
14.80
0.600
0.410
26.00
0.870
0.140
20.10
0.680
0.330
11.90
0.510
0.600
SOM
14.70
0.670
0.400
16.30
0.600
0.240
17.10
0.650
0.410
17.40
0.790
0.140
4DGS
15.50
0.740
0.320
18.00
0.650
0.290
19.30
0.670
0.260
22.70
0.860
0.100
Deformable-GS
16.30
0.780
0.280
18.30
0.680
0.240
20.70
0.720
0.260
19.80
0.770
0.150
TABLE III: Quantitative comparison on dynamic scenes. We compare our method to MoSca, STG, SOM, 4DGS and Deformable-GS. We report PSNR, SSIM, and LPIPS. , , and backgrounds denote the best, second-best, and third-best results, respectively.
Underwater 3D scene reconstruction is crucial for multimedia applications in adverse environments, such as underwater robotic perception and navigation. However, the complexity of interactions between light propagation, water medium, and object surfaces poses significant difficulties for existing methods in accurately simulating their interplay. Additionally, expensive training and rendering costs limit their practical application. Therefore, we propose Tensorized Underwater Gaussian Splatting (TUGS), a compact underwater 3D representation based on physical modeling of complex underwater light fields. TUGS includes a physics-based underwater Adaptive Medium Estimation (AME) module, enabling accurate simulation of both light attenuation and backscatter effects in underwater environments, and introduces Tensorized Densification Strategies (TDS) to efficiently refine the tensorized representation during optimization. TUGS is able to render high-quality underwater images with faster rendering speeds and less memory usage. Extensive experiments on real-world underwater datasets have demonstrated that TUGS can efficiently achieve superior reconstruction quality using a limited number of parameters. The code is available at https://liamlian0727.github.io/TUGS
Shijie Lian, Ziyi Zhang, Hua Li +4
1Huazhong University of Science and Technology · 2Zhongguancun Academy · 3The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shenzhen +3
Underwater scene reconstruction is essential for immersive exploration of aquatic environments, yet remains challenging due to complex participating-media effects such as absorption and scattering, as well as the limited field of view (FoV) of conventional cameras. Although combining panoramic imaging with 3D Gaussian Splatting (3DGS) offers a promising direction for photorealistic underwater rendering, traditional 3DGS struggles with both spherical projection distortion and underwater medium degradation. In this paper, we propose Underwater360, a physics-informed omnidirectional 3DGS framework for underwater panoramic scene reconstruction. First, we introduce an Omnidirectional Gaussian Splatting module that performs ray casting directly in spherical camera space instead of relying on 2D projection approximations, thereby reducing geometric distortions under 360∘ FoV. Second, we design a physics-based appearance-medium modeling architecture with pose-conditioned appearance embeddings to explicitly decouple intrinsic scene radiance from depth-dependent backscatter and attenuation, enabling physically grounded scene appearance restoration. Finally, we establish a new panoramic underwater benchmark dataset containing both synthetic and real-world scenes. Extensive experiments demonstrate that Underwater360 achieves superior performance in underwater novel view synthesis and scene appearance restoration, delivering improved rendering quality and cross-view consistency in complex underwater environments. The code and datasets are released at https://github.com/SwcK423/Underwater360
Jiangbei Hu, Weichao Song, Shibo Yu +8
School of Software, Dalian University of Technology · College of Computing and Data Science, Nanyang Technological University
Reconstructing realistic underwater scenes from underwater video remains a meaningful yet challenging task in the multimedia domain. The inherent spatiotemporal degradations in underwater imaging, including caustics, flickering, attenuation, and backscattering, frequently result in inaccurate geometry and appearance in existing 3D reconstruction methods. While a few recent works have explored underwater degradation-aware reconstruction, they often address either spatial or temporal degradation alone, falling short in more real-world underwater scenarios where both types of degradation occur. We propose MarineSTD-GS, a novel 3D Gaussian Splatting-based framework that explicitly models both temporal and spatial degradations for realistic underwater scene reconstruction. Specifically, we introduce two paired Gaussian primitives: Intrinsic Gaussians represent the true scene, while Degraded Gaussians render the degraded observations. The color of each Degraded Gaussian is physically derived from its paired Intrinsic Gaussian via a Spatiotemporal Degradation Modeling (SDM) module, enabling self-supervised disentanglement of realistic appearance from degraded images. To ensure stable training and accurate geometry, we further propose a Depth-Guided Geometry Loss and a Multi-Stage Optimization strategy. We also construct a simulated benchmark with diverse spatial and temporal degradations and ground-truth appearances for comprehensive evaluation. Experiments on both simulated and real-world datasets show that MarineSTD-GS robustly handles spatiotemporal degradations and outperforms existing methods in novel view synthesis with realistic, water-free scene appearances.
Shaohua Liu, Ning Gao, Zuoya Gu +3
School of Astronautics Beihang University Beijing, China · Shen Yuan Honors College, Beihang University · School of Artificial Intelligence Beihang University Beijing, China +3