Differentiable Voxelization Module

• The differentiable voxelization module is a computational tool that maintains analytic gradients while mapping 3D geometry to voxel grids.
• It employs control grids, affine transformations, and trilinear interpolation to convert continuous inputs into differentiable voxel representations.
• Its integration into neural networks enhances applications like 2D/3D registration, volumetric rendering, and medical imaging by enabling gradient-based optimization.

A differentiable voxelization module is a computational construct that enables the mapping between continuous 3D geometric representations (such as voxels, meshes, or parametric models) and voxelized (grid-based) representations in a manner that allows analytical gradients to propagate through the process. This differentiability supports integration into neural networks and end-to-end gradient-based optimization, addressing inverse problems where losses defined on 2D or 3D image domains must be backpropagated to 3D structures. Differentiable voxelization is foundational for modern volumetric rendering, 3D reconstruction, geometric deep learning, and medical imaging registration, and supports emerging workflows connecting geometry, topology, and physical simulation.

1. Fundamental Principles of Differentiable Voxelization

A differentiable voxelization module proceeds from the recognition that traditional voxelization—mapping 3D geometry into a regular grid—introduces quantization and is generally non-differentiable due to discrete binning. In contrast, the differentiable approach explicitly maintains gradient information with respect to geometric parameters, enabling optimization with respect to continuous parametric inputs or mesh vertices.

The core steps for differentiable voxelization and related differentiable projection are exemplified in projective geometry-based spatial transformers (Gao et al., 2020):

• Construction of a grid of control points along rays, aligned with imaging geometry (e.g., cone-beam for CT/X-ray).
• Application of differentiable transformations parameterized by pose or other geometric variables.
• Voxel sampling using interpolation (e.g., trilinear), ensuring smoothness.
• Reduction/integration (e.g., collapsing along rays or spatial axes) with fully differentiable operations.

This sequence supports analytic gradient propagation from loss functions defined on image evidence back to all underlying parameters, including pose, volume content, and geometry.

2. Mathematical Formalization and Differentiable Operations

Generalizing the mapping from a 3D volume $V$ to a 2D observation $I_m$—as in radiographic applications—the operation can be written as:

$I_m = A(\theta) V,$

where $A(\theta)$ is a system matrix dependent on pose parameters $\theta \in SE(3)$. Rather than materializing $A(\theta)$ explicitly, the differentiable voxelization module instead:

1. Constructs a spatial grid $G$ of control points, e.g., along rays.
2. Applies an affine transformation $T(\theta)$: $G_T = T(\theta) \cdot G$.
3. Samples/interpolates from $V$: $G_S = \text{interp}(V, G_T)$.
4. Integrates/collapses sampled values along domain-specific axes to yield projections or occupancy.
5. Ensures that, at each stage, variables are expressed as tensors supporting automatic differentiation.

Gradient computation is managed by leveraging tensor-based libraries (such as PyTorch), allowing for the efficient evaluation of the full chain rule:

$$\frac{\partial L}{\partial \theta} = \frac{\partial L}{\partial I_m} \cdot \frac{\partial I_m}{\partial G_S} \cdot \frac{\partial G_S}{\partial G_T} \cdot \frac{\partial G_T}{\partial T(\theta)} \cdot \frac{\partial T(\theta)}{\partial \theta}.$$

This analytic pipeline supports deep "double backward" strategies, such as comparing network-driven update directions with analytic geodesic gradients for robust optimization under large misalignments (Gao et al., 2020).

3. Architectures and Implementation Patterns

Differentiable voxelization modules are embedded in larger network architectures for tasks ranging from registration to unsupervised 3D decomposition. A canonical implementation architecture consists of:

• Grid Generator: Defines sampling loci—potentially rays or regular 3D grids.
• Transformation Layer: Applies differentiable rigid-body or projective transformations.
• Interpolation Layer: Most commonly trilinear interpolation, ensuring differentiability with respect to both coordinates and sampled values.
• Integration/Reduction: Sums or integrates samples along rays (for projection), or otherwise aggregates occupancy/density evidence.
• Tensor Management: Ensures that intermediate variables, often high-dimensional, are managed efficiently (e.g., via batched PyTorch tensors).

For radiographic registration, the ProST module (Gao et al., 2020) simulates radiographs via differentiable forward projection from a 3D CT volume, allowing the use of arbitrary image similarity losses and backpropagation to update pose parameters or, more generally, learnable transforms.

Key considerations include:

• Efficient construction and transformation of sampling grids.
• High-throughput interpolation; in large volumes this is typically GPU-accelerated.
• Memory management, as computations along rays may produce high-dimensional intermediate representations.

4. Applications in 2D/3D Registration and Beyond

The prototype application of differentiable voxelization modules is in 2D/3D registration, particularly in medical image analysis. For example, aligning a preoperative CT with intraoperative radiographs involves optimizing pose parameters $\theta$ to minimize photo-similarity loss between observed image $I_f$ and a simulated radiograph $A(\theta) V$. The differentiability of $A(\theta)$ with respect to both $V$ and $\theta$ allows for gradient-based optimization, surpassing traditional hand-crafted similarity metrics that may have poor convexity or limited capture range, especially under substantial misalignment (Gao et al., 2020).

Potential and demonstrated research applications include:

• End-to-End Learnable Registration: Allowing neural networks to approximate convex similarity functions robust to initialization.
• Image-Guided Interventions: Supporting the accurate alignment of 3D anatomical models to intraoperative X-ray/fluoroscopic images.
• General 3D-to-2D Imaging: Extensible to augmented reality, computer-assisted surgery, robotics, and other fields requiring projection of 3D fields into planar or imaging domains.

Broader applications derive from the fact that full differentiability with respect to both pose and content parameters enables learning optimizable pipelines for 3D shape/model fitting, style transfer, and more.

5. Comparative Advantages and Distinguished Features

Key technical advantages and properties of differentiable voxelization modules in the projective spatial transformer framework (Gao et al., 2020) are:

• Full Differentiability: All intermediary steps (grid construction, transformation, interpolation, integration) are differentiable both analytically and in practical frameworks, facilitating integration with AD-based optimizers.
• Robustness to Large Misalignments: The combination of deep networks with the differentiable projection improves capture range (the range of initial conditions where the system converges correctly), overcoming failures of conventional similarity measures.
• Preservation of Volumetric Detail: Operates on 3D voxel grids, not surface mesh approximations, retaining anatomical and spatial fidelity critical in medical imaging.
• General Applicability: The techniques are agnostic to the particular nature of the 3D input (so long as it can be voxelized) and the image formation model, provided a projective transformation pipeline is defined.

These features distinguish this approach from mesh-focused or purely rasterization-based differentiable rendering, whose operating domains or semantics are not tailored for complex anatomical volumes or physics-based imaging processes.

6. Implementation Challenges and Limitations

While differentiable voxelization modules enable powerful new workflows, their design and deployment necessitate attention to:

• Computational Cost: High-resolution 3D volumes or dense sampling along rays can lead to significant memory and computation demand; efficient batching and GPU utilization are critical.
• Interpolation Artifacts: The non-exact alignment of transformed grid points with voxel centers may introduce approximation error; advanced interpolation mitigates but cannot completely eliminate these errors.
• Scaling to Large Volumes: For clinical-scale CT, reduction in system matrix size by analytic transformations is essential, but further reduction via sparsity exploitation or hierarchical processing may be necessary.

A further challenge is the need to balance the flexibility of the module (supporting arbitrary geometric transformations) with the maintenance of physical realism—e.g., in modeling the forward physics of projection in radiographic setups. Care must also be paid to maintaining numerical stability during gradient backpropagation, particularly in deep or high-parameter-count networks.

7. Impact and Future Directions

Differentiable voxelization modules as introduced in projective spatial transformer architectures (Gao et al., 2020) have had broad impact:

• They provide the technical foundation for learning-driven volumetric registration, enabling high-precision clinical applications.
• They serve as the computational backbone for subsequent work in differentiable rendering, unsupervised geometric learning, and geometry-aware neural networks.
• The approach has been adopted in broader contexts, including augmented reality, scene understanding, and learning-based shape optimization.

Anticipated future directions include leveraging more advanced differentiable physical models, scaling to multi-modal (e.g., multi-contrast, multi-modality) imaging, and unifying mesh, point, and voxel-based differentiable representations in hybrid systems.

---

In summary, the differentiable voxelization module enables a fully differentiable, projective bridge between high-dimensional volumetric data and observed image spaces, supporting robust, learnable, and physically meaningful gradient-based optimization in modern vision, graphics, and medical imaging pipelines (Gao et al., 2020).