Which agents work with it?

Any agent that reads skills from a directory. Claude Code, Codex and Gemini CLI read it natively; Cursor and VS Code connect over MCP.

The voice runs on your own machine, so there is nothing to meter. The first run downloads it, about 340 MB.

Yes. The skill is MIT-licensed and the authoring format is public.

Create

3DCodeVerse makes the same model write better 3D code than Claude Code, Codex or Gemini CLI

4 weeks ago

@ai-papers Subscribe

3DCodeVerse is a harness that builds 3D objects as code: it plans the parts, runs the code, measures and renders the result, has a vision model judge it, and fixes the code. With the same model inside, people preferred its objects over Claude Code, Codex and Gemini CLI in 7 to 9 of every 10 pairs, at many times the cost per object. The paper also releases 3DCodeVerse-2M, about two million runnable 3D programs, and fine-tuned Qwen models whose Blender scripts mostly run. Paper (arXiv 2610.22341v1, 15 Oct 2026): https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.22341 Code: https://github.com/gaoypeng/3dcodeverse Dataset: https://huggingface.co/datasets/ilabai/3dcodeverse

Ask about this presentation

Chapters

0:003DCodeVerse and Claude Code, Codex, Gemini CLI
0:20People preferred the harness
0:36The build, check and fix loop
0:52Against Claude Design
1:073DCodeVerse-2M
1:24Fine-tuned open models
1:41Claude Sonnet 5
1:54One pass against a loop
2:10What the loop costs
2:27Code, dataset and paper

Show transcript

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.
Slide text

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

Gao et al. · 3DCodeVerse: Exploring 3D Worlds as Code · arXiv 2610.22341v1 · 15 Oct 2026
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.
Slide text
01 02 03 The result

People picked the harness’s object in 7 to 9 of every 10 pairs

model’s own harness 3DCodeVerse Harness

Gemini 3.8 Flashvs Gemini CLI

13%

87%

Claude Opus 5.5vs Claude Code

21%

79%

GPT-6 Astravs Codex

31%

69%

GPT-6 Lunavs Codex

11%

89%

Gao et al. · 3DCodeVerse: Exploring 3D Worlds as Code · arXiv 2610.22341v1 · Figure 4a, Table 14 · human preference on text-to-3D objects · 60 prompts for Flash and Opus, 30 for GPT-6 (App. C.3)
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.
Slide text
01 02 03 The pieces

It builds the object, measures it, renders it, judges it, then fixes the code

Gao et al. · 3DCodeVerse: Exploring 3D Worlds as Code · arXiv 2610.22341v1 · Figure 3, Section 4
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.
Slide text
01 02 03 The result

On Claude Opus 5.5, the harness beat Claude Design

90% vs 10% human preference, harness against Claude Design

88 vs 37 Gemini 3.1 Pro rubric score out of 100

Claude Design was scored from its released reference programs.
Gao et al. · 3DCodeVerse: Exploring 3D Worlds as Code · arXiv 2610.22341v1 · Figure 4a, Table 14, Appendix C.3
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.
Slide text
01 02 03 The pieces

3DCodeVerse-2M holds about two million 3D programs that run on their own

Blender Python · CadQuery · OpenSCAD · GLSL · Three.js objects, moving parts, scenes and graphics

On Hugging Face, for non-commercial research CC BY-NC-SA 4.0, plus each source’s own license

Gao et al. · 3DCodeVerse: Exploring 3D Worlds as Code · arXiv 2610.22341v1 · Section 3 · huggingface.co/datasets/ilabai/3dcodeverse
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.
Slide text
01 02 03 The pieces

After fine-tuning, most of Qwen’s Blender scripts run

before after fine-tuning

Qwen3.5-9BLoRA

0.0%

84.9%

Qwen3.8-27BLoRA and DPO

51.9%

92.9%

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).
Gao et al. · 3DCodeVerse: Exploring 3D Worlds as Code · arXiv 2610.22341v1 · Table 2, Table 3, Section 6 · one seed, temperature 0.7
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.
Slide text
01 02 03 The limits

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.
Gao et al. · 3DCodeVerse: Exploring 3D Worlds as Code · arXiv 2610.22341v1 · Table 9 · 11 graphics and 10 scene prompts, single-round runs (App. C.3)
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.
Slide text
01 02 03 The limits

Claude Code, Codex and Gemini CLI each wrote the object in one pass

Baselines got neither spatial tools nor render feedback the harness gets both

30 to 60 prompts per object comparison the number of human raters isn’t given

Gemini 3.1 Pro both judges and grades inside the loop for the Flash runs, and as the scorer

Gao et al. · 3DCodeVerse: Exploring 3D Worlds as Code · arXiv 2610.22341v1 · Appendix C.3, Table 7
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.
Slide text
01 02 03 The limits

An object costs dollars in the harness and cents in one pass

$0.035 → $3.31 Gemini 3.8 Flash per object, 60 prompts (Table 8)

$0.29 → $6.72 GPT-6 Sol per run, hard prompts (Table 16)

Gao et al. · 3DCodeVerse: Exploring 3D Worlds as Code · arXiv 2610.22341v1 · Table 8, Table 16 · API list prices
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.
Slide text

The harness, the dataset and the recipes are released

Code github.com/gaoypeng/3dcodeverse

Dataset huggingface.co/datasets/ilabai/3dcodeverse

Paper arxiv.org/abs/2610.22341

Baselines wrote in one pass · about 95× the cost per object for Gemini 3.8 Flash (Table 8)
Gao et al. · 3DCodeVerse: Exploring 3D Worlds as Code · arXiv 2610.22341v1 · Apache-2.0 code · CC BY-NC-SA 4.0 data

Up next