Can These Views Be One Scene? Evaluating Multiview 3D Consistency when 3D Foundation Models Hallucinate
This work addresses the reliability of 3D consistency evaluation for neural view synthesis and sparse-view reconstruction, which is critical for practitioners using these metrics.
The authors identify that multiview 3D consistency metrics can fail when inputs contain artifacts or unrelated scenes, and they introduce a benchmark and new metrics that improve robustness and correlation with human judgments by up to 4x over existing methods.
Multiview 3D evaluation assumes that the images being scored are observations of one static 3D scene. This assumption can fail in NVS and sparse-view reconstruction: inputs or generated outputs may contain artifacts, outlier frames, repeated views, or noise, yet still receive high 3D consistency scores. Existing reference-based metrics require ground truth, while ground-truth-free metrics such as MEt3R depend on learned reconstruction backbones whose failure modes are poorly characterized. We study this reliability problem by comparing neural reconstruction priors with classical geometric verification. We introduce \benchmark, a controlled robustness benchmark for multiview 3D consistency, and a parametric family that decomposes neural metrics into backbone, residual, and aggregation components. This family recovers MEt3R and yields variants up to $3\times$ more robust. Our analysis shows that VGGT, MASt3R, DUSt3R, and Fast3R can hallucinate dense geometry and cross-view support for unrelated scenes, repeated images, and random noise. We introduce COLMAP-based metrics that use matches, registration, dense support, and reconstruction failure as failure-aware consistency signals. On real NVS outputs and a structured human study, these metrics achieve up to $4\times$ higher correlation with human judgments than MEt3R.