mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Rethinking Amortized Neural Representations for High-Resolution Terrain Elevation Data

arXiv 2606.00404 ↗First posted 29 May 2026cs.CV cs.LGcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Implicit neural representations (INRs) model a signal as a continuous coordinate-to-value function. For terrain elevation data, this supports analytic derivatives, arbitrary-resolution decoding, and a smooth surface model of the underlying heightfield. However, fitting and storing a separate INR for every tile does not scale to large terrain datasets. Amortized neural representations reduce this cost with a shared network: a new tile is mapped to a compact per-tile payload, and a shared decoder reconstructs the heightfield from it. Most such methods are hypernetworks that predict the payload in a single forward pass, while others recover it through a short per-tile optimization. These methods were developed primarily for natural images, and their suitability for terrain heightfields remains unclear. We introduce a controlled benchmark on a 1 m/pixel terrain dataset and evaluate three representative methods under a unified protocol. Observing a clear cross-domain gap, we propose HUVR+SIREN, a hypernetwork that adapts the strongest benchmarked method (HUVR) by replacing its coordinate decoder with a smooth, analytically differentiable one. It attains the best height and derivative fidelity on the benchmark with no additional per-tile storage and lower decode cost, and tolerates aggressive post-training quantization with negligible quality loss, giving a compact terrain neural format. Ablations and diagnostics further identify which design choices transfer to terrain and show that the per-tile bottleneck is already near its useful limit, leaving the remaining gap in the shared hypernetwork's architectural design.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 17 of its 33 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 29 May 2026.

Builds on

17 of 33 references.

References · 17

  1. 2017Model-Agnostic Meta-Learning for Fast Adaptation of Deep Networkscited by 4,861
  2. 2019DeepSDF: Learning Continuous Signed Distance Functions for Shape Representationcited by 2,682
  3. 2017FiLM: Visual Reasoning with a General Conditioning Layercited by 2,286
  4. 2020Implicit Neural Representations with Periodic Activation Functionscited by 2,214
  5. 2020Fourier Features Let Networks Learn High Frequency Functions in Low Dimensional Domainscited by 2,170
  6. 2016HyperNetworkscited by 1,003
  7. 2019Scene Representation Networks: Continuous 3D-Structure-Aware Neural Scene Representationscited by 864
  8. 2020Learned Initializations for Optimizing Coordinate-Based Neural Representationscited by 240
  9. 2021COIN: COmpression with Implicit Neural representationscited by 232
  10. 2022From data to functa: Your data point is a function and you can treat it like onecited by 183
  11. 2021Implicit Neural Representations for Image Compressioncited by 161
  12. 2022Transformers as Meta-Learners for Implicit Neural Representationscited by 79
5 more
  1. 2022COOL-CHIC: Coordinate-based Low Complexity Hierarchical Image Codeccited by 50
  2. 2022Generalizable Implicit Neural Representations via Instance Pattern Composerscited by 38
  3. 2023INCODE: Implicit Neural Conditioning with Prior Knowledge Embeddingscited by 31
  4. 2024ImplicitTerrain: a Continuous Surface Model for Terrain Data Analysiscited by 3
  5. 2026Implicit Neural Representation Facilitates Unified Universal Vision Encodingcited by 1

Built on by

Not cited yet.