1998
DOI: 10.1016/s0097-8493(97)00082-4
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A comparison of mesh simplification algorithms

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

1
202
0
1

Year Published

2005
2005
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
6
3

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 419 publications
(204 citation statements)
references
References 33 publications
1
202
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…For thorough survey, an interested reader is referred to consult [3][4][5][6][7]. We discuss here only some most related iterative algorithms.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For thorough survey, an interested reader is referred to consult [3][4][5][6][7]. We discuss here only some most related iterative algorithms.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…There have always been strong symbiotic interaction and overlap between the solid modeling community and the computer graphics community. In particular, the complexity of the solid assemblies used in industrial applications has challenged the capabilities of graphics subsystems, motivating research in shape simplification [Rossignac93,Cignoni98], occlusion culling [Navazo03], and geometric compression [Rossignac99]. A similar symbiotic relation with computer vision has regained popularity, as some research efforts in vision were model-based [Besl85] and attempted to extract 3D models from images or video sequences of existing parts or scenes.…”
Section: Evolutionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The literature relative to mesh simplification is large [1,2]. The two main categories are the methods based on incremental simplification, such as the well-known Qslim algorithm of Garland and Heckbert [3], and the methods based on partitioning, such as the VSA algorithm of Cohen-Steiner et al [4].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%