SplatLab: Autonomous Scientific Discovery for 3DGS Research
Organizations: University of California San Diego
Abstract
Reproducing a published 3DGS paper takes weeks of expert engineering before any extension can be proposed. Prior autonomous-research systems read papers, draft hypotheses, and write code, but are limited by short fixed templates, low executability, and weak traceability, and none has been demonstrated end-to-end in a live computer-vision subfield with intense activity. SplatLab is an autonomous research system for 3D Gaussian Splatting that addresses these limitations. Given a research prompt, a target-paper URL, or no input at all, it reproduces a published baseline, proposes an extension, trains and ablates across Mip-NeRF 360 and LLFF, writes the manuscript, and binds every reported number to a logged training run. Five design choices distinguish it: (i) candidates mutate plugins from a verified-reproduction backbone matched to published baselines; (ii) a cascade-weighted Elo tournament across eight islands scores candidates on measured GPU PSNR with verbal-gradient feedback; (iii) a standing falsifier subtracts Elo on failure, integrating stress-test survival into selection; (iv) every reported number is bound to a logged training run, and the run cannot terminate while any claim is unbacked; (v) a seven-category 3DGS taxonomy wraps EVOLVE-BLOCK markers in domain-aligned scaffolds transferable across 3DGS repositories. On PSNR-targeted runs, SplatLab's manuscripts beat their reproduced targets by +0.18 to +3.78 dB, including +3.78 dB on astrophotographic nebula rendering, for which no prior 3DGS method exists. The research cycle compresses from months of graduate-student time to days of mostly autonomous compute. Code, all manuscripts, experiment ledgers, and the cross-run paper store are available on the project page.
Figures & tables
| Setting | Method | Limitation attacked / fix | PSNR | SSIM | LPIPS |
| Novel scenes (vanilla 3DGS baseline) | |||||
| Nebula | 3DGS [ 19 ] | pinhole ignores OPENCV distortion; SfM gives stars | 32.58 | 0.914 | 0.278 |
| Nebula3DGS-v2 (ours) | 3DGS-MCMC sampler with saturation-driven star seeder | 36.36 | 0.945 | 0.201 | |
| Bubble | 3DGS [ 19 ] | SH can’t represent thin-film iridescence; densification stalls on emissive translucency | 27.40 | 0.857 | 0.337 |
| BubbleGS (ours) | 3DGS-MCMC chassis, Snell/Fresnel two-pass conditional shell renderer | 30.11 | 0.906 | 0.224 | |
| Improving published SOTA | |||||
| Capability | AIS-v2 [ 48 ] | A-Lab [ 35 ] | MLR [ 22 ] | AIGS [ 24 ] | Curie [ 20 ] | PaperOrch. [ 37 ] | CoSc [ 11 ] | AlE [ 30 ] | Ours |
| End-to-end executable (no human in loop) | X | ||||||||
| Produces a manuscript | X | X | X | X | X | ||||
| Real-experiment execution | X | X | |||||||
| Live-subfield domain backbone | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | |
| Verified baseline reproduction | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | |
| Idea ranking on real GPU metrics | X | X | X | X |
| Source | Novelty | Excitement | Feasibility | Effectiveness | Overall | |
| PhD students | 10 | |||||
| Accepted arXiv preprints | 10 | |||||
| SplatLab (Stage 2) | 20 |
| Pipeline | Citation Practices | Coverage & Completeness | Critical Analysis & Synthesis | Organisation & Writing | Positioning & Novelty | Relevance & Focus | Overall Score |
| Judge: Gemini-3.1-Pro | |||||||
| Human (GT) | 94 | 93 | 91 | 94 | 89 | 91 | 93 |
| SingleAgent | 52 | 48 | 42 | 65 | 70 | 70 | 38 |
| AI Scientist-v2 | 65 | 22 | 28 | 28 | 42 | 48 | 32 |
| GPT-5 ET | 14 | 24 | 29 | 22 | 38 | 42 | 17 |
| PaperOrchestra* | 75 | 81 | 74 | 81 | 76 | 83 | 79 |
| Judge | Source | Soundness | Presentation | Novelty | Overall (1–6) |
| Multi-agent reviewer | CVPR/NeurIPS 2025 (human GT) | 3.2 | 3.4 | 3.0 | 3.5 |
| SplatLab (top 5) | 3.4 | 3.6 | 3.4 | 3.6 | |
| Human reviewer | CVPR/NeurIPS 2025 (human GT) | 3.6 | 3.8 | 3.1 | 4.1 |
| SplatLab (top 5) | 3.2 | 3.0 | 3.5 | 3.5 |
| Component ablated | Without | With (full pipeline) |
| Stage 1: grounding (L/B-IDs) | 0/32 ideas cleared Stage 4 cascade | winner produced |
| Stage 2: Elo pre-selection | 24 GPU evals to winner | 6 GPU evals (20 rejected pre-GPU) |
| Stage 3: verified-plugin contract | 9/16 winners non-reproducible ( dB) | 0/16 non-reproducible |
| Stage 4: cascade weights (uniform ) | smoke-test winner picked, 5th on multi-scene | multi-scene leader picked |
| Stage 4: per- Elo (global) | global champ dB on Nebula vs. specialist | per-target winners |
| Stage 4: verbal gradients (Reflection off) | 5 generations to stabilize, tokens | 2 generations |
Autonomous Research Agents
Autonomous research agents use language models and tools to search literature, design and run experiments, analyze results, and support scientific discovery.
See all 319 papers