2009 IEEE 12th International Conference on Computer Vision Workshops, ICCV Workshops 2009
DOI: 10.1109/iccvw.2009.5457437
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Measuring 3D shape similarity by matching the medial scaffolds

Abstract: We propose to measure 3D shape similarity by matching a medial axis (MA) based representation-the medial scaffold (MS). Shape similarity is measured as the minimum extent of deformation necessary for one shape to match another, guided by the MS. This approach is an extension of an approach to match 2D shapes by matching their shock graphs, whereas here in 3D the MS is in the form of a hypergraph. The MS representation is both hierarchical and complete. Our approach finds the optimal deformation path between tw… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

2010
2010
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
3
2

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 26 publications
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The principal of geometric similarity and symmetry has been established in theory as a crucial shape description problem [16][17][18]. Recent studies [19,20] have been linked to measuring the distances between descriptors using the dissimilarity measurements to reduce the set of measured values and achieve accurate results. Mathematical generalization that satisfactorily represents the salient regions and shapes of any 3D structure is an imperative and also a starting point of research.…”
Section: Prior Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The principal of geometric similarity and symmetry has been established in theory as a crucial shape description problem [16][17][18]. Recent studies [19,20] have been linked to measuring the distances between descriptors using the dissimilarity measurements to reduce the set of measured values and achieve accurate results. Mathematical generalization that satisfactorily represents the salient regions and shapes of any 3D structure is an imperative and also a starting point of research.…”
Section: Prior Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The main challenge to a content-based 3D model retrieval system is how to extract representative features for effectively discriminating different types of 3D models [1,2]. In general, 3D model retrieval methods can be classified into four categories: histogram-based descriptors [3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19], transform-based descriptors [20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28], 2D view-based descriptors , and graph-based descriptors [53][54][55][56].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Graph-based descriptors have the potential of describing the geometrical and topological properties of a 3D model in a more faithful way, particularly for deformable 3D models. The methods include extended cone-curvature [53], medial scaffold [54], Reeb graph [55], skeleton-based descriptors [56], etc.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Estimating the coordinates of the most similar volume can be the very pixels, features that correspond to human visual perception, texture features such as global descriptors or Gabor features, or local descriptors such as SIFT or corner detectors [2]. Shape features such as Fourier descriptors, moment invariants and finite element models were surveyed in [12], graph based shape features were presented in [1]. A method for retrieving 3D datasets based on Local Binary Patterns (LBP) features [4] was introduced in [11] and compared with features such as 3D Wavelet Transforms and 3D co-occurence matrices.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%