High-fidelity weather editing of 4D scenes can support end-to-end training and closed-loop simulation for autonomous driving. Combining generative image editing with dynamic Gaussian representations enables multi-weather scene reconstruction, but weather-edited images often contain structural distortions. Directly fitting their appearance may propagate errors from teacher images into the reconstructed 4D scene, compromising the original scene structure and temporal continuity. To address these challenges, we propose IGSW, a two-stage framework that combines intrinsic-decoupled 4D Gaussian scene modeling with structure-preserving weather refinement. In Stage I, background Gaussian appearance is decomposed into weather-shared albedo and normals and weather-specific irradiance and residuals. Weather teacher images generated by a diffusion-based image editing model and intrinsic maps estimated by a diffusion-based inverse renderer provide feature-level soft supervision for stable structure and illumination changes. In Stage II, a structure-preservation gate combines semantic conflicts with cross-weather intrinsic discrepancies to suppress unreliable teacher regions. Per-Gaussian weather transport variables and target-weather branches then strengthen the desired weather appearance over the intrinsic-decoupled scene. Experiments on nuScenes and Waymo show that IGSW achieves the highest content similarity and semantic consistency and the lowest temporal error among the compared methods, while retaining pronounced weather-dependent illumination and atmosphere. The project page is available at https://akaxi6.github.io/IGSW/ .
Figures & tables
Fig. 1: Teaser of IGSW. Given a driving-scene sequence, target-weather teacher images, and intrinsic maps (albedo, normal, and irradiance) estimated through inverse rendering, IGSW reconstructs a dynamic multi-weather urban scene in two stages: intrinsic-decoupled Gaussian appearance modeling and intrinsic-preserving weather refinement. The resulting Gaussian scene renders target-weather views while preserving the spatial structure of the original observations.
Method
Venue
Type
Intrinsic decomp
3D/4D scene
Temporal consist.
Qwen-Image
arXiv 2025
Frame editing
×
×
×
FRESCO
CVPR 2024
Video editing
×
×
✓
IntrinsicWeather
CVPR 2026
Intrinsic image editing
✓
×
×
WeatherEdit
AAAI 2026
3D/4D weather
×
✓
✓
WeatherCity
CVPR 2026
4D weather
×
✓
✓
IGSW (Ours)
–
Intrinsic 4DGS
✓
✓
✓
TABLE I: Method categories and representation capabilities.
Fig. 2: Overview of IGSW. (a) Qwen-Image produces target-weather teachers from the original driving observations. (b) A diffusion-based inverse renderer estimates albedo, normals, and irradiance for both original and teacher images. (c) Stage I constructs an intrinsic-decoupled 4D Gaussian scene with weather-shared albedo/normals and weather-specific irradiance/residuals. (d) Stage II uses a structure-preservation gate and per-Gaussian weather transport to suppress teacher-induced structural errors and strengthen target-weather illumination and atmosphere.
Fig. 3: Qualitative rain and snow comparisons on nuScenes. Rows show the original observations, Qwen-Image, FRESCO, IntrinsicWeather, WeatherEdit, WeatherCity, and IGSW. Columns use matched camera views and weather conditions.
Method
Rain
Snow
CLIP-S ↑
CLIP-DS ↑
Sem-CS ↑
Ewarp↓
CLIP-S ↑
CLIP-DS ↑
Sem-CS ↑
Ewarp↓
Qwen-Image
0.8248
0.2090
0.6748
0.0294
0.7648
0.2692
0.6253
0.0516
FRESCO
0.8070
0.0543
0.5693
0.0174
0.7885
0.0897
0.5443
0.0172
IntrinsicWeather
0.6682
0.1380
0.5497
0.0379
0.6437
0.1563
0.4969
0.0529
WeatherEdit
0.8443
0.1122
0.6863
0.0148
0.8269
0.1412
0.6839
0.0127
WeatherCity
0.8582
0.1289
0.7129
0.0023
0.8652
0.1876
0.6772
0.0038
TABLE II: Complete-sequence quantitative comparison on nuScenes. Results are averaged equally across ten scenes; higher is better for CLIP-S, CLIP-DS, and Sem-CS, while lower is better for Ewarp . Best values are bold.
Fig. 4: Qualitative rain and snow comparisons on Waymo. The method order matches Fig. 3 ; viewpoints and weather conditions are aligned across methods.
Method
Rain
Snow
CLIP-S ↑
CLIP-DS ↑
Sem-CS ↑
Ewarp↓
CLIP-S ↑
CLIP-DS ↑
Sem-CS ↑
Ewarp↓
Qwen-Image
0.8450
0.1942
0.5099
0.0547
0.7971
0.2007
0.4571
0.0672
FRESCO
0.8703
0.1487
0.6376
0.0195
0.8258
0.1557
0.6710
0.0184
IntrinsicWeather
0.6046
0.1601
0.3919
0.0224
0.7317
0.1929
0.5676
0.0273
WeatherEdit
0.9015
0.2095
0.8036
0.0118
0.8532
0.2055
0.8025
0.0106
WeatherCity
0.7773
0.1375
0.7398
0.0090
0.8002
0.0937
0.6633
0.0101
TABLE III: Complete-sequence quantitative comparison on the Waymo Open Dataset. Metric directions match Table II ; best values are bold.
Fig. 5: Temporal rain comparison on nuScenes at frames 49, 54, 59, 64, and 69. The samples are fixed across methods; quantitative evaluation uses all 297 adjacent frame pairs. The nuScenes snow and Waymo sequences are provided in the supplementary material.
Method
Rain Ewarp↓
Snow Ewarp↓
Qwen-Image
0.0294
0.0516
FRESCO
0.0174
0.0172
IntrinsicWeather
0.0379
0.0529
WeatherEdit
0.0148
0.0127
WeatherCity
0.0023
0.0038
IGSW (Ours)
0.0021
0.0028
TABLE IV: Temporal warping error on nuScenes. Lower is better.
Fig. 6: Structural comparison at one timestamp and three views. Rows show the original observations, Qwen-Image, WeatherCity, and IGSW. Clouds in the teacher incorrectly cover visible buildings; IGSW reduces this error while adapting the scene to rainy appearance.
Method
Rain
Snow
CLIP-S ↑
CLIP-DS ↑
Sem-CS ↑
Ewarp↓
CLIP-S ↑
CLIP-DS ↑
Sem-CS ↑
Ewarp↓
WeatherCity (baseline)
0.858270
0.128999
0.712923
0.002399
0.865202
0.187677
0.677263
0.003811
Stage I only
0.858933
0.132594
0.714228
0.002265
0.866956
0.188946
0.677516
0.003186
Stage II only
0.866129
0.127921
0.898980
0.001632
0.864229
0.220130
0.877846
0.002207
IGSW (Stage I + II)
0.871860
0.159925
0.899250
0.002152
0.878254
0.273236
0.879220
0.002844
TABLE V: Module ablations using complete 100-timestamp, three-view evaluation. Best values are bold.
Fig. 7: Module ablations for rain (left) and snow (right). Rows show the original observations, Qwen teachers, WeatherCity, Stage I only, Stage II only, and complete IGSW. Each row contains three matched camera views.
School of Automation and Intelligent Sensing, Shanghai Jiao Tong University; the State Key Laboratory of Avionics Integration and Aviation System-of-Systems Synthesis; and the Shanghai Key Laboratory of Navigation and Location Based Services, Shanghai 200240, China · Tsinghua University, Shenzhen, China · Chongqing Afari Intelligent Drive Co., Ltd., China +1