Video generation and feed-forward 3D reconstruction typically use separate representations, requiring RGB decoding and visual re-encoding to recover geometry from generated latents. We propose Latent Bridge, which connects video generative latent spaces with geometric feature spaces to directly predict 3D geometry from video latents. We develop representation-specific bridges for Wan2.1 and V-RAE, enabling feed-forward prediction of cameras, depth, and 3D point clouds without the intermediate RGB pathway. Each bridge is trained on RGB videos through feature distillation, while the video encoder and geometry model remain frozen. Training requires neither ground-truth geometry nor execution of the downstream geometric aggregator or prediction heads. At inference, the same video latents support both RGB decoding and geometry prediction. The same trained bridge can be reused for image-to-video and text-to-video generation within the same video latent space, without bridge retraining. Experiments on Co3Dv2 and WildRGB-D demonstrate competitive geometric reconstruction quality, efficient end-to-end generation and reconstruction, and faster latent-to-geometry decoding, highlighting latent alignment as a practical and reusable interface between video generation and 3D reconstruction. Our code is available at: https://github.com/hustvl/Latent-Bridge.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: Bypass the video decoder and directly align latent spaces to generate 3D outputs.
Figure 2: Overview of Latent Bridge, showing (a) feature alignment training, (b) video generation and geometry prediction from a shared latent, and (c) the architectures of bridges.
Method
Co3Dv2
WildRGB-D
Latency ↓
Accuracy ↓
Completeness ↓
CD ↓
Accuracy ↓
Completeness ↓
CD ↓
Aether ( Zhu et al., 2025 )
0.6982
0.5437
0.6209
0.0591
0.1340
0.0965
181.33
FantasyWorld ( Dai et al., 2026 )
0.5939
0.3698
0.4818
0.0440
0.1258
0.0849
448.63
Gen3R ( Huang et al., 2026 )
0.3820
0.1796
0.2808
0.0247
0.1129
0.0688
189.57
Ours (Wan2.1)
0.3536
0.1833
0.2685
0.0189
0.1209
0.0699
70.09
Ours (V-RAE)
0.3231
0.2093
0.2662
0.0237
0.1076
0.0657
165.57
Table 1: Geometry reconstruction results on Co3Dv2 and WildRGB-D. Geometry metrics are measured in meters and latency in seconds. The best and second-best results are highlighted in pink and yellow, respectively. Aether uses 41 frames, whereas the other methods use 49.
Figure 3: Visual comparison of generation and reconstruction results, including the generated videos, depth maps, and point clouds produced by each method.
Method
Co3Dv2
WildRGB-D
PSNR ↑
SSIM ↑
LPIPS ↓
I2V Subj. ↑
I2V BG ↑
I.Q. ↑
PSNR ↑
SSIM ↑
LPIPS ↓
I2V Subj. ↑
I2V BG ↑
I.Q. ↑
Aether
13.9595
0.5689
0.5942
90.64
92.13
38.46
12.4790
0.4466
0.5660
95.82
95.94
52.60
FantasyWorld
12.0307
0.4807
0.6741
89.08
91.27
46.20
12.9733
0.4385
0.5116
97.07
96.72
59.41
Gen3R
16.5289
0.6027
0.4405
94.79
96.05
45.20
15.2252
0.5075
0.4025
98.38
98.20
56.58
Ours (V-RAE)
16.3780
0.6025
0.4303
94.91
95.99
47.84
16.5769
0.5516
0.3217
97.87
97.60
56.85
Ours (Wan2.1)
17.0388
0.6166
0.4121
95.42
96.41
46.73
16.1703
0.5412
0.3394
98.44
98.24
59.67
Table 2: Video Generation Quality Comparison. All results are evaluated at 560×560 resolution. I2V Subj., I2V BG, and I.Q. are multiplied by 100.
Method
CO3Dv2
WildRGB-D
Time (s) ↓
Accuracy ↓
Completeness ↓
CD ↓
Accuracy ↓
Completeness ↓
CD ↓
Latent → RGB → VGGT- Ω (Wan2.1)
0.3559
0.1754
0.2657
0.0174
0.1227
0.0700
7.92
Latent → Bridge → VGGT- Ω (Wan2.1)
0.3536
0.1833
0.2685
0.0189
0.1209
0.0699
4.92
Latent → RGB → VGGT- Ω (VRAE)
0.3241
0.1925
0.2583
0.0209
0.1114
0.0661
5.76
Latent → Bridge → VGGT- Ω (VRAE)
0.3231
0.2093
0.2662
0.0237
0.1076
0.0657
4.64
Table 3: Comparison of RGB Decoding Solutions. Latency covers latent-to-geometry inference and excludes diffusion sampling. RGB decoding is included in the RGB baseline but bypassed by the Bridge.
Figure 4: Ablation study on the number of parameters.
Structural ablation
Norm. L1 ↓
Depth L1 ↓
AbsRel ↓
Loss ablation
Norm. L1 ↓
Depth L1 ↓
AbsRel ↓
w/o 2×2 PixelUnshuffle
0.18057
0.15849
0.10628
w/o Cosine loss
0.18823
0.16459
0.10851
w/o Causal Conv3D + phase rearrangement
0.19177
0.16593
0.10766
w/o Delta loss
0.18780
0.16235
0.10461
w/o Spatiotemporal mixing blocks
0.25196
0.22100
0.15228
w/o Relation loss
0.18412
0.15863
0.10313
Simple baseline (joint replacements)
0.31666
0.27490
0.19346
Full Bridge & loss
0.18133
0.15644
0.10163
Table 4: Ablations of the Wan Bridge at 50K optimization steps. All variants are evaluated on the same 64 clips of 49 frames.
Figure 5: The Bridge can adapt to generative models for different tasks that use the same VAE, without retraining.
Appendix figures & tables5 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
Method
Pretrained Checkpoint Reuse without Further Training
Trainable Modules and Token Overhead.
Cross-DiT checkpoint
T2V/I2V checkpoint
Pretrained task-head
Trainable components
Additional Geometry Tokens
FantasyWorld
No
No
No
Geometry branch & adapters
Yes
Gen3R
No
No
Yes
DiT & geometry adapter
Yes
Beyond Pixels
Yes
Yes
No
Alignment module, LoRA & heads
No
VIST3A
Yes
-
No
Stitching layer & geometry/DiT LoRA
No
Latent Bridge
Yes
Yes
Yes
Bridge only
No
Appendix
Table 5: Differences Between Our Method and Existing Approaches.
Supervision
Trainable modules
Params (M) ↓
Time (s) ↓
Memory (GiB) ↓
Feature (ours)
Bridge
35.65
0.166
3.17
Geometry
Bridge
35.65
5.896
31.27
Geometry
Bridge + geometry model
876.31
6.375
35.48
Appendix
Table 6: Computational cost of different supervision strategies. All settings use the same 6000 Pro GPU with a batch size of 1 and 49 frames at 560×560 resolution.
Figure 6: Downstream reuse with a frozen VGGT-S module. Given the same first-frame mask prompt, the RGB and Bridge routes propagate object masks across generated frames. Predicted geometry enables object-level 3D labeling.
Figure 7: Additional downstream reuse examples showing generated RGB frames, propagated object masks, and the corresponding label-colored 3D point clouds.
Large-scale video diffusion models often fail to preserve 3D structure over time, causing geometric drift and implausible motion under viewpoint changes. Existing methods usually enforce geometric consistency by using explicit geometry reconstructions, such as depth maps, point clouds, or reconstructed 3D structures, to define conditions, supervision, or reward signals, making the generator sensitive to errors from upstream geometry pipelines. We propose VideoWeave, a latent-space post-training framework that uses implicit geometry-model features to constrain the generative distribution, providing a more flexible and non-rigid form of guidance that mitigates the impact of reconstruction errors from geometry models. Specifically, VideoWeave adapts these features into geometry latents and jointly models them with video latents in a shared denoising space, allowing geometry to shape the generative distribution during training. To support this process, we build GeoVid-80K, an 80K-video dataset with paired appearance and geometry representations. Experiments on text-to-video and image-to-video generation show that VideoWeave improves geometric coherence while preserving strong visual quality. VideoWeave project page at https://videoweave.github.io/
Xunzhi Xiang, Zixuan Duan, Yabo Chen +8
1Nanjing University · Institute of Artificial Intelligence, China Telecom (TeleAI) · 3Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shenzhen
Recent video world models have increasingly adopted 3D memory mechanisms to integrate historical observations into a lightweight and persistent scene representation. This naturally raises a complementary question: if 3D representations can serve as an effective mechanism for memorizing observed scenes, can they also be directly used as the latent space for reconstructing and generating scenes? Motivated by this idea, we represent a scene as a compact and unstructured 3D-anchored latent space (SceneAE). Each latent combines an explicit 3D position with an implicit content feature and is spatially grounded to describe its local scene region, forming a sparse latent point cloud. Unlike conventional video-VAE latents that describe how a scene appears from particular viewpoints, our representation directly describes the scene itself, making it naturally applicable to both reconstruction and generation. For reconstruction, once the scene has been generated, our persistent 3D representation can be projected and decoded into RGB-D observations by different target cameras, without the need to regenerate a video for each new camera trajectory. For generation, we leverage the geometry-content separation to first generate camera-controlled 3D geometry and then synthesize content conditioned on it, reducing camera-appearance entanglement and improving camera controllability. Experiments show that this 3D latent achieves superior generation quality, computational cost, and camera controllability.
Shuofeng Sun, Wenzhao Zheng, Yunpeng Zhang +3
Beijing University of Posts and Telecommunications · University of California, Berkeley · PhiGent Robotics +1
Autoencoders are the core component of latent video generative models, compressing high-dimensional videos into compact latent spaces for downstream generation. However, existing video autoencoders are primarily optimized for pixel-level reconstruction, providing limited supervision for learning structured latent representations. We argue that videos should not be treated merely as signals to be reconstructed, but rather as 2D projections of dynamic 3D worlds that exhibit explicit and well-structured geometric properties. Building on this insight, we propose Video Geometry Grounded Autoencoder (VGGA), a geometry-aware video autoencoder that explicitly incorporates geometric constraints into the reconstruction process. Specifically, VGGA grounds the learned representations along three complementary geometric dimensions: Structural Depth, Motion Correspondence, and Projective Warping. These objectives are unified within a Video Geometry Decoder, which employs a shared spatio-temporal upsampling trunk to jointly optimize geometric learning and RGB reconstruction. Through these geometry-grounded objectives, VGGA encourages the latent representations to capture the underlying 3D structure and motion of dynamic scenes. VGGA consistently improves video generation across both geometry-centric and human-motion domains, reducing gFVD by 28.1% on RealEstate10K and 37.7% on Taichi-HD. Notably, these substantial generation improvements are achieved while maintaining comparable reconstruction quality, demonstrating that geometry-grounded representation learning yields a more effective latent space for video generation.
Chaofan Gan, Yian Zhao, Shijie Li +4
Shanghai Jiao Tong University · Monash University · Peking University