2013
DOI: 10.1016/j.cag.2013.05.021
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

New evaluation metrics for mesh segmentation

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
10
0

Year Published

2014
2014
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
5
3

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 25 publications
(10 citation statements)
references
References 39 publications
0
10
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The second test aims to evaluate the proposed method using two evaluation measures the Adaptive Entropy Increment [24] and the Weighted Levenshtein distance [25] proposed by our research team, in order to quantify the quality of our segmentation approach. Then we perform a comparison with four well-known segmentation algorithms, which are K-Means (KM) [7], Fitting Primitives (FP) [26], Normalized Cuts (NC) and Randomized Cuts (RC) [27].…”
Section: Experimental Studymentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…The second test aims to evaluate the proposed method using two evaluation measures the Adaptive Entropy Increment [24] and the Weighted Levenshtein distance [25] proposed by our research team, in order to quantify the quality of our segmentation approach. Then we perform a comparison with four well-known segmentation algorithms, which are K-Means (KM) [7], Fitting Primitives (FP) [26], Normalized Cuts (NC) and Randomized Cuts (RC) [27].…”
Section: Experimental Studymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Our approach gives a high similarity scores compared to the ground truth segmentations and located after the Boundary learning method, which is based on a learning step. Figure.2 The obtained segmentations for each category using our approach Figure. 3 The dissimilarity scores using the Adaptive entropy increment [24] for the five compared algorithms Figure. 4 The dissimilarity scores using the Weighted Levenshtein Distance [25] for the five compared algorithms Figure. 5 The average results of the compared algorithms on the whole dataset using the Weighted Levenshtein Distance [25](WLD) and the Adaptive entropy increment (AEI) [24] Figure.…”
Section: Experimental Studymentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…For space constraints, we compare with only eight related PBS methods. More PBS methods exist, and quantitative metrics can be further used to measure segmentation quality [29]. Yet, even without such extra insights, we argue that our goal of showing that surface skeletons have added both theoretical and practical value for PBS, as opposed to the well-known use of curve skeletons for PBS, is well defended.…”
Section: Robustnessmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In contrast to mesh decomposition or surface segmentation based on the surface model [11,[23][24][25][26][27][28], the approach in this study decomposes 3D models into meaningful parts of source point clouds. This study presents a novel application of the Voronoi theory to represent and quantify the spatial structure of 3D points to segment a 3D point cloud.…”
Section: Introduction and Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%