You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Hi, thank you for your excellent work! I'm curious about your implementation. It seems that your code of scene velocity is not the same as you mentioned in your paper. And you scaling t is implemented by activation equation torch.exp. Can you provide the reason behind this?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Hi, scene velocity only an estimator of point's motion, and we find that it is more effective to define it this way. I think that any scene velocity defination that is inversely proportional to $\rho$, equal to the instantaneous velocity at $\tau$ when $\rho=0$ and equal to 0 when $\rho \to \infty$ is appropriate. And in terms of opacity decay, i.e., scaling t, we just used the gaussian family in as the 3DGS do for scaling xyz. We will update our paper in arxiv.
Hi, thank you for your excellent work! I'm curious about your implementation. It seems that your code of scene velocity is not the same as you mentioned in your paper. And you scaling t is implemented by activation equation torch.exp. Can you provide the reason behind this?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: