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
While I read your nerf++ paper, I coudn't fully understand shape-radiance ambiguity (Section 3 of nerf++ paper).
Is the purpose of Figure 2 experiment illustrating the ambiguity to show that NERF model can fit to arbitrary 3d shape setting of training data ?
And if it were correct (verified by Figure 2 experiment), how this fact is related to the Factor 1 ("c" must become a high-frequency function as "sigma" deviates from the correct shape) ?
Why the Factor 2 (NERF MLP structure implicitly regularize to make "c" have smooth BRDF prior w.r.d. "d") helps NERF to avoid the shape-radiance ambiguity ?
How the Factor 1 and 2 is logically related ? It seems unrelated since the Factor 1 argues NERF MLP has a limited capacity to model high complexity given incorrect shape, and the Factor 2 argues NERF MLP model implictly regularize to make "c" smooth w.r.d "d" at any given "x"
Thanks you.
Best regards,
YJHong.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Dear author,
While I read your nerf++ paper, I coudn't fully understand shape-radiance ambiguity (Section 3 of nerf++ paper).
Is the purpose of Figure 2 experiment illustrating the ambiguity to show that NERF model can fit to arbitrary 3d shape setting of training data ?
And if it were correct (verified by Figure 2 experiment), how this fact is related to the Factor 1 ("c" must become a high-frequency function as "sigma" deviates from the correct shape) ?
Why the Factor 2 (NERF MLP structure implicitly regularize to make "c" have smooth BRDF prior w.r.d. "d") helps NERF to avoid the shape-radiance ambiguity ?
How the Factor 1 and 2 is logically related ? It seems unrelated since the Factor 1 argues NERF MLP has a limited capacity to model high complexity given incorrect shape, and the Factor 2 argues NERF MLP model implictly regularize to make "c" smooth w.r.d "d" at any given "x"
Thanks you.
Best regards,
YJHong.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: