mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

A Cross-Model VLM-Judge Protocol for Single-Image 3D Mesh Quality (and Why Cheap Proxies Fall Short)

arXiv 2606.18451 ↗First posted 16 Jun 2026cs.LGcited by 2

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Single-image-to-3D generators are improving quickly, but there is no agreed, human-free way to tell whether one generated mesh is better than another. Practitioners commonly rely on cheap automatic proxies (render-space CLIP similarity and mesh geometry-validity statistics), yet how well these track perceived quality is unestablished. We make two contributions. First, we propose and validate a reproducible VLM-judge evaluation protocol: a fixed 24-view headless render rig, two independent vision-language judge families, and a mandatory position-bias correction that queries both presentation orders and keeps only order-consistent verdicts. The two judge families agree substantially with each other (Cohen's kappa = 0.66), well above the chance-agreement floor. Second, using this protocol as the reference, we show the cheap proxies do not substitute for it. Geometry validity is only a weak signal on average (because, as we show, it is bimodal) and stays below our pre-registered target, while render-CLIP is at chance. A learned Bradley-Terry head collapses onto a single manifoldness statistic (giving render-CLIP a negative weight) and matches geometry-only exactly, so learning the feature weights buys nothing. The proxy is also bimodal: it is significantly above chance on contrasts with visible geometric defects but at chance on ambiguous contrasts, consistent with geometry validity tracking the judge only when the defect is visually salient. We therefore recommend the VLM-judge protocol as a reliable, reproducible evaluator under the conditions tested (two feed-forward generators on Google Scanned Objects, with a face-drop degradation regime) and advise against geometry/CLIP proxies as optimization targets.

Key facts. Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 22 of its 29 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 16 Jun 2026.

Builds on

22 of 29 references.

References · 22

  1. 2021Learning Transferable Visual Models From Natural Language Supervisioncited by 33,744
  2. 2023Judging LLM-as-a-Judge with MT-Bench and Chatbot Arenacited by 8,626
  3. 2025InternVL3: Exploring Advanced Training and Test-Time Recipes for Open-Source Multimodal Modelscited by 1,834
  4. 2023Large Language Models are not Fair Evaluatorscited by 1,085
  5. 2022Google Scanned Objects: A High-Quality Dataset of 3D Scanned Household Itemscited by 612
  6. 2024TripoSR: Fast 3D Object Reconstruction from a Single Imagecited by 232
  7. 2024Unique3D: High-Quality and Efficient 3D Mesh Generation from a Single Imagecited by 135
  8. 2024SF3D: Stable Fast 3D Mesh Reconstruction with UV-unwrapping and Illumination Disentanglementcited by 65
  9. 2025DreamDPO: Aligning Text-to-3D Generation with Human Preferences via Direct Preference Optimizationcited by 27
  10. 2025DSO: Aligning 3D Generators with Simulation Feedback for Physical Soundnesscited by 25
  11. 2026ShapeR: Robust Conditional 3D Shape Generation from Casual Capturescited by 22
  12. 2025Objaverse++: Curated 3D Object Dataset with Quality Annotationscited by 20
10 more
  1. 2025Nabla-R2D3: Effective and Efficient 3D Diffusion Alignment with 2D Rewardscited by 11
  2. 2025MVGBench: Comprehensive Benchmark for Multi-view Generation Modelscited by 9
  3. 2026ImagenWorld: Stress-Testing Image Generation Models with Explainable Human Evaluation on Open-ended Real-World Taskscited by 7
  4. 2026ManiTwin: Scaling Data-Generation-Ready Digital Object Dataset to 100Kcited by 5
  5. 2026MJ1: Multimodal Judgment via Grounded Verificationcited by 3
  6. 2025Low-Rank Adaptation of Neural Fieldscited by 2
  7. 2025Rethinking Metrics and Diffusion Architecture for 3D Point Cloud Generationcited by 2
  8. 2026Realiz3D: 3D Generation Made Photorealistic via Domain-Aware Learningcited by 2
  9. 2025Unifi3D: A Study on 3D Representations for Generation and Reconstruction in a Common Frameworkcited by 1
  10. 2025Memorization in 3D Shape Generation: An Empirical Studycited by 1

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 2.

2 papers.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2026DB-3DME: From Dataset to Benchmark for Human-aligned Automatic 3D Mesh Evaluation
  2. 20263D-DefectBench: A Controlled Factorial Study of Vision-Language Model Evaluation Pipelines for Fine-Grained 3D Generation Defects
  3. 2025Eval3D: Interpretable and Fine-grained Evaluation for 3D Generation
  4. 2025Revisiting 3D LLM Benchmarks: Are We Really Testing 3D Capabilities?
  5. 20263DCodeBench: Benchmarking Agentic Procedural 3D Modeling Via Code
  6. 2026Separating perception from reasoning in vision-language models: a model-free render ceiling for crystal structures
  7. 2026MeshQuery: Agentic Seam Planning for UV Parametrization
  8. 2026ShapeCodeBench: A Renewable Benchmark for Perception-to-Program Reconstruction of Synthetic Shape Scenes