Novel view synthesis is a challenging and ill-posed inverse rendering problem. Neural rendering techniques have recently achieved photorealistic image quality for this task. State-of-the-art (SOTA) neural volume rendering approaches, however, are slow to train and require minutes of inference (i.e., rendering) time for high image resolutions. We adopt high-capacity neural scene representations with periodic activations for jointly optimizing an implicit surface and a radiance field of a scene supervised exclusively with posed 2D images. Our neural rendering pipeline accelerates SOTA neural volume rendering by about two orders of magnitude and our implicit surface representation is unique in allowing us to export a mesh with view-dependent texture information. Thus, like other implicit surface representations, ours is compatible with traditional graphics pipelines, enabling real-time rendering rates, while achieving unprecedented image quality compared to other surface methods. We assess the quality of our approach using existing datasets as well as high-quality 3D face data captured with a custom multi-camera rig.

Electroencephalography (EEG)-based brain–computer interfaces (BCIs) for motor rehabilitation aim to “close the loop” between attempted motor commands and sensory feedback by providing supplemental information when individuals successfully achieve specific brain patterns. Existing EEG-based BCIs use various displays to provide feedback, ranging from displays considered more immersive (e.g., head-mounted display virtual reality (HMD-VR)) to displays considered less immersive (e.g., computer screens). However, it is not clear whether more immersive displays improve neurofeedback performance and whether there are individual performance differences in HMD-VR versus screen-based neurofeedback. In this pilot study, we compared neurofeedback performance in HMD-VR versus a computer screen in 12 healthy individuals and examined whether individual differences on two measures (i.e., presence, embodiment) were related to neurofeedback performance in either environment. We found that, while participants’ performance on the BCI was similar between display conditions, the participants’ reported levels of embodiment were significantly different. Specifically, participants experienced higher levels of embodiment in HMD-VR compared to a computer screen. We further found that reported levels of embodiment positively correlated with neurofeedback performance only in HMD-VR. Overall, these preliminary results suggest that embodiment may relate to better performance on EEG-based BCIs and that HMD-VR may increase embodiment compared to computer screens.

No abstract