3DGS.zip: A survey on 3D Gaussian Splatting Compression Methods

TL;DR

This survey reviews various compression and compaction techniques for 3D Gaussian Splatting, aiming to improve its practicality by reducing storage and memory demands while maintaining rendering quality.

Contribution

It provides a comprehensive classification, analysis, and a unified evaluation framework for existing 3DGS compression methods, which was lacking before.

Findings

Classified existing methods into compression and compaction categories.

Established a unified framework for comparing 3DGS compression techniques.

Provided a publicly accessible website with ongoing updates on emerging methods.

Abstract

3D Gaussian Splatting (3DGS) has emerged as a cutting-edge technique for real-time radiance field rendering, offering state-of-the-art performance in terms of both quality and speed. 3DGS models a scene as a collection of three-dimensional Gaussians, with additional attributes optimized to conform to the scene's geometric and visual properties. Despite its advantages in rendering speed and image fidelity, 3DGS is limited by its significant storage and memory demands. These high demands make 3DGS impractical for mobile devices or headsets, reducing its applicability in important areas of computer graphics. To address these challenges and advance the practicality of 3DGS, this survey provides a comprehensive and detailed examination of compression and compaction techniques developed to make 3DGS more efficient. We classify existing methods into two categories: compression, which focuses on reducing file size, and compaction, which aims to minimize the number of Gaussians. Both methods aim to maintain or improve quality, each by minimizing its respective attribute: file size for compression and Gaussian count for compaction. We introduce the basic mathematical concepts underlying the analyzed methods, as well as key implementation details and design choices. Our report thoroughly discusses similarities and differences among the methods, as well as their respective advantages and disadvantages. We establish a consistent framework for comparing the surveyed methods based on key performance metrics and datasets. Specifically, since these methods have been developed in parallel and over a short period of time, currently, no comprehensive comparison exists. This survey, for the first time, presents a unified framework to evaluate 3DGS compression techniques. We maintain a website that will be regularly updated with emerging methods: https://w-m.github.io/3dgs-compression-survey/ .