Writing study: OLATverse: A Large-scale Real-world Object Dataset with Precise Lighting Control

CVPR overviewCorpus atlasBy contribution typeVisual galleryRules & templateWriting patternsPaper studies

← CVPR 2026 oral writing corpus

Xilong Zhou, Jianchun Chen, Pramod Rao, Timo Teufel, Linjie Lyu, Tigran Minasian, Oleksandr Sotnychenko, Xiaoxiao Long, Marc Habermann, Christian Theobalt · Official CVPR 2026 oral record

Observed writing choices, not acceptance rules. This study examines the inspected manuscript version. It does not establish why the paper was accepted or that its presentation choices should be copied unchanged.

Figure, table and section ledger

Editorial contribution type: Datasets, benchmarks & measurement (primary).

Layout extraction, not a required paper template. Counts are distinct caption labels; a multi-panel figure counts once. Section spans are estimated from heading positions, including floats and whitespace. Method and limitations.

Canonical PDF

12 physical pages

Before references / appendix

≈ 8.05 page-equivalents

Main figures / tables

7 / 3

Attached appendix figures / tables

0 / 0

Attached appendix span

Separate file recorded below; not in this PDF total

Before references / appendix: ≈ 67.08%References / intervening material: ≈ 32.92%Estimated layout envelopes, not text/artwork area. Unresolved appendix boundaries remain within the undivided post-body material.

Extraction notes: No attached appendix boundary detected. Zero means no recognized caption, not independently verified absence.

Section-by-section lengths and source pages

The title/abstract/front matter precede the first numbered heading. A span ends at the next detected top-level heading, not at the last sentence; end-page whitespace is included. References and statements are listed separately. These are not measurements of text-only or artwork area.

Top-level heading	Starts on PDF page	Estimated span	Share of entire PDF
1. Introduction	2	≈ 0.82 pp.	6.83%
2. Related Work	2	≈ 1.51 pp.	12.58%
3. OLATverse	4	≈ 3.38 pp.	28.17%
4. Application	7	≈ 0.9 pp.	7.5%
5. Limitations	8	≈ 0.1 pp.	0.83%
6. Conclusion and Discussion	8	≈ 0.24 pp.	2%
References	9	≈ 3.95 pp.	32.92%

All detected figure and table locations

Main text

• Figure 1 · p. 1
• Table 1 · p. 3
• Figure 2 · p. 4
• Figure 3 · p. 5
• Figure 4 · p. 5
• Figure 5 · p. 5
• Figure 6 · p. 6
• Figure 7 · p. 7
• Table 2 · p. 8
• Table 3 · p. 8

Attached appendix

No recognized caption labels.

Separate source files—excluded from canonical-PDF totals

A separate author version may repeat main text and references. Whole-file lengths and counts are not extra appendix material and are never added to the canonical PDF totals. Read the study's source scope for which sections received substantive reading versus layout inspection.

Additional source 1

Separate PDF (or ZIP containing it): whole-file layout of 13 physical pages; 13 detected figures and 1 tables. These may include overlapping main-text material.

Located appendix only: starts on physical p.1; ≈ 12.85 page-equivalents, 13 figure labels and 1 table labels. This interval is distinct from the whole file.

Detected heading	PDF page	Estimated span
Supplementary Material	1	≈ 0.15 pp.
7. Dataset Visualization	1	≈ 2.2 pp.
8. Capture Configuration	3	≈ 0.87 pp.
9. Applications	4	≈ 9.64 pp.

• Figure 8 · p. 1
• Figure 9 · p. 2
• Figure 10 · p. 2
• Figure 11 · p. 3
• Table 4 · p. 4
• Figure 12 · p. 5
• Figure 13 · p. 6
• Figure 14 · p. 7
• Figure 15 · p. 8
• Figure 16 · p. 9
• Figure 17 · p. 10
• Figure 18 · p. 11
• Figure 19 · p. 12
• Figure 20 · p. 13

Argument and organization

1. Coverage and capture validity

   Compare existing object datasets, then describe the material/category composition and calibrated lightstage capture.

2. Processing and applications

   Explain masks/normals before using them to evaluate relighting, inverse rendering and normal estimation.

Problem, claim and contribution

The gap is the combination of real-object scale and controlled illumination, rather than dataset size in isolation.

Abstract and Introduction · Main paper · Additional source 2

Argument and section order

Overview, capture setup and data processing precede separate application subsections, connecting acquisition decisions to downstream tasks.

Sections 3.1–3.3 and 4.1–4.3 · Main paper · Additional source 2

Figures, captions and visual explanation

Figure 2 combines material/category distributions with a direct dataset comparison; Figure 7 aligns input, pseudo-ground-truth and estimated normals over matching objects.

Figure 2, PDF p. 4; Figure 7, p. 7 · Main paper · Additional source 2

Tables, comparisons and evidence

Task-specific numerical tables distinguish inverse-rendering image metrics from angular normal metrics; pseudo-ground-truth is explicitly labeled in the visual comparison.

Tables 2–3, PDF p. 8; Figure 7, p. 7 · Main paper · Additional source 2

Appendix and reproducibility

The supplement separates capture configuration from application validation and supplies complete sample modalities plus illumination-conditioned comparisons.

Supplement §§7–9; Figures 9,13,19–20 · Main paper · Additional source 2

Clarity and writing conventions

Dataset attributes are named as concrete capture quantities—objects, views, lights and auxiliary modalities—before broad application claims.

Table 1 and Section 3.1 · Main paper · Additional source 2

What to reuse—and what not to infer

Transferable lesson: For capture-based datasets, illustrate coverage, calibrated acquisition and annotation quality as separate evidence layers before presenting application benchmarks.

Boundary: Photometric normals are pseudo-ground-truth, not error-free geometry. A diverse catalog still does not establish coverage of all real materials or uncontrolled illumination regimes.

Apply this lesson using the argument and evidence worksheet.

Inspection record and sources

Checked

2026-09-26

Reading status

Writing-focused manuscript scan + selected visuals inspected

Main text

Manuscript-wide writing scan of main PDF pp. 1–8: framing, section structure, method exposition, figure/table captions, evaluation organization and conclusions; not an exhaustive technical proof audit or reproduction.

Appendix / supplement

Scanned the 13-page official ZIP-member PDF for category statistics, capture and polarization configuration, validation meshes, complete sample modalities, relighting compositions, and additional baseline comparisons; videos/code were not executed.

Visually inspected PDF pages

4, 7

This is a writing-focused scan of the manuscript and the stated supplementary scope: framing, organization, visual explanation, evidence presentation and wording. It is not a line-by-line proof audit, reproduction of results or exhaustive scientific review.

• Official CVPR 2026 CVF proceedings PDF; retrieved 2026-09-26 · 12 pages
• Official CVPR 2026 supplementary PDF extracted from CVF ZIP archive member; retrieved 2026-09-26 · 13 pages