Proceedings IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition. CVPR 2000 (Cat. No.PR00662)
DOI: 10.1109/cvpr.2000.854933
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Shape-based 3D surface correspondence using geodesics and local geometry

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

0
66
0
1

Publication Types

Select...
5
3
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 91 publications
(67 citation statements)
references
References 16 publications
0
66
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Most previous approaches to automated and semiautomated landmark generation and registration of 3D-surfaces use the local surface geometry. Examples of this are the non-rigid registration technique by Feldmar and Ayache [3], the local geometry and surface geodesic approach by Wang et al [4] and the surface signature technique by Yamany et al [5]. A method for automatic landmark generation based on a symmetric version of the iterative closest point algorithm is presented in [6].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Most previous approaches to automated and semiautomated landmark generation and registration of 3D-surfaces use the local surface geometry. Examples of this are the non-rigid registration technique by Feldmar and Ayache [3], the local geometry and surface geodesic approach by Wang et al [4] and the surface signature technique by Yamany et al [5]. A method for automatic landmark generation based on a symmetric version of the iterative closest point algorithm is presented in [6].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Due to the convoluted nature and variability among different brains, mapping of the cortical surfaces poses many numerical challenges for classical surface matching algorithms such as the iterative closest point(ICP) method (Besl and McKay, 1992) and its extension in brain mapping (Wang et al, 2000). Thus, the cortical mapping problem is conventionally solved through an indirect approach as illustrated in Fig.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The problem of these mappings is that they only work well for sphere-like shapes, which is not the case for the CC. Other investigators used conformal mapping to flatten colon surface [252], surface matching using geodesic and local geometry to locate correspondences between two surface points [253], harmonic shape images to map a 3D surface patch with disc topology to a 2D domain and encode the shape information of the surface patch into the 2D image [254], harmonics differentials to unfold colon wall volume [255], and solving the Poisson equation to extract useful shape features of a closed 2D object [256].…”
Section: Trendsmentioning
confidence: 99%