2005
DOI: 10.1016/j.gmod.2005.01.003
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Optimization methods for scattered data approximation with subdivision surfaces

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
86
0

Year Published

2006
2006
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
5
2

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 51 publications
(87 citation statements)
references
References 15 publications
1
86
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Several families of functions have been applied to this problem. They include subdivision surfaces [6,7], function reconstruction [8], radial basis functions [9], implicit surfaces [10], hierarchical splines [11], algebraic surfaces [12], polynomial metamodels [13], and many others. However, the most popular choice is given by the free-form parametric basis functions because they are very flexible and very well suited to represent any smooth shape with only a few parameters.…”
Section: Surface Approximation In Reverse Engineeringmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Several families of functions have been applied to this problem. They include subdivision surfaces [6,7], function reconstruction [8], radial basis functions [9], implicit surfaces [10], hierarchical splines [11], algebraic surfaces [12], polynomial metamodels [13], and many others. However, the most popular choice is given by the free-form parametric basis functions because they are very flexible and very well suited to represent any smooth shape with only a few parameters.…”
Section: Surface Approximation In Reverse Engineeringmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…All these methods are not commonly supported within current modeling software systems. More popular choices include triangular meshes and Loop subdivision surfaces [7]. However, structures with quadrilateral sets of poles, such as Catmull-Clark subdivision surfaces and free-form parametric surfaces are de facto industry standard in CAD/CAM and other fields [1,6,22,23].…”
Section: Previous Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Subdivision surfaces [15][16][17][18][19] remove the need for explicitly maintaining continuity, but while regular areas of the subdivision mesh can be approximated by splines, the surface is not everywhere analytic.…”
Section: Previous Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…So, starting from the reference original subdivision surface, a control mesh synchronization moves iteratively its control points in order to match it with the suspect smooth surface. For a given target smooth surface (attacked subdivided watermarked surface) (see Figure 3.a) and a given reference subdivision control mesh (see Figure 3.b), our process displaces control points by minimizing a global error between the corresponding limit surface and the target one, based on the quadratic distance approximants defined by Pottmann and Leopoldseder [14]; This algorithm, used for subdivision surface approximation by Lavoué et al [11] and Marinov and Kobbelt [10] allows a quite accurate and rapid convergence. and 0.03 × 10 −3 after 2 and 5 iterations (surfaces were normalized in a cubic bounding box of length equal to 1).…”
Section: Control Mesh Synchronizationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Figure 1 shows an example of subdivision surface (Catmull-Clark rules [9]), at each iteration, the base mesh is linearly subdivided and smoothed. A lot of algorithms exist to convert a 3D mesh into a subdivision surface [10,11] because this model is much more compact, in term of amount of data, than a dense polygonal mesh.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%