3DCodeVerse and Claude Code, Codex, Gemini CLI
3DCodeVerse makes the same model write better 3D code than Claude Code, Codex or Gemini CLI
Yipeng Gao, Ziyao Zeng, Jinfa Huang, Yijiang Li and 15 others · University of Southern California, Yale, Rochester, UC San Diego, Google DeepMind and more
3DCodeVerse is a harness for building 3D objects as code. With the same model inside, people preferred its objects over those from Claude Code, Codex and Gemini CLI. It comes from the University of Southern California, Google DeepMind and others.
People preferred the harness
People picked the harness’s object in 7 to 9 of every 10 pairs
Each model built the same objects in its usual coding agent and inside the harness. Shown both, people picked the harness version about four times in five. Claude Code with Opus 5.5 won about one pair in five.
The build, check and fix loop
It builds the object, measures it, renders it, judges it, then fixes the code
A planner splits the request into parts and sub-agents code each one. The harness runs the code, measures the parts for gaps and collisions, renders it, and a vision model judges the render. A fix agent edits the code, and the loop repeats.
Against Claude Design
On Claude Opus 5.5, the harness beat Claude Design
Claude Design was scored from its released reference programs.
Claude Design runs on the same Claude Opus 5.5. People preferred the harness's object nine times in ten. On the rubric that grades every object out of 100, Claude Design's objects scored less than half as much.
3DCodeVerse-2M
3DCodeVerse-2M holds about two million 3D programs that run on their own
The team also released the training data. 3DCodeVerse-2M is about two million 3D programs that each run on their own, in Blender, CadQuery, OpenSCAD, shader code and Three.js. The license allows non-commercial research only.
Fine-tuned open models
After fine-tuning, most of Qwen’s Blender scripts run
Share of 212 3DCodeBench tasks that execute. Shape match to the target stays low: F@0.05 of 0.32 and 0.37 after training (Table 3).
Before training, every Blender script Qwen3.5 9B wrote failed, mostly by calling a scene-clearing command Blender 5 no longer has. After LoRA fine-tuning, about 85 percent ran. The shapes they make still match their targets only loosely.
Claude Sonnet 5
Claude Sonnet 5 gained little from the harness
Graphics: 5.4 points lower, 6 prompts won and 5 lost. Scenes: level, 3 won and 6 lost.
Claude Sonnet 5 is the exception. On shader graphics the harness scored it slightly below Sonnet working alone, and on scenes about the same. Those runs used one round of the loop.
One pass against a loop
Claude Code, Codex and Gemini CLI each wrote the object in one pass
Claude Code, Codex and Gemini CLI each wrote the object in one pass, without measurements or render feedback, while the harness checked and fixed its work. Each comparison used 30 to 60 prompts, and the count of human raters isn't stated.
What the loop costs
An object costs dollars in the harness and cents in one pass
The loop costs more. Gemini 3.8 Flash in one pass cost about 4 cents an object, and inside the harness about 3 dollars 30. On hard prompts, GPT-6 Sol went from about 30 cents a run to almost 7 dollars.
Code, dataset and paper
The harness, the dataset and the recipes are released
Baselines wrote in one pass · about 95× the cost per object for Gemini 3.8 Flash (Table 8)
The harness code is on GitHub under Apache 2.0, and the dataset is on Hugging Face. Every win came against agents writing in one pass, and for Gemini 3.8 Flash the loop cost about a hundred times as much per object.
