Academia.eduAcademia.edu

Outline

A Comparative Survey on 3D Models Retrieval Methods

2013, REV Journal on Electronics and Communications

https://doi.org/10.21553/REV-JEC.49

Abstract

In computer vision many studies have been conducted in order to perform the matching and comparison of 3D models of objects. The main goal of matching is to group the models into different categories according to their similarity in order to allow their retrieval for recognition purposes and for further usage. So, in most of the cases, the comparison is run on a large dataset containing various models whether they belong to the same type of object or not and generally having similar or different shapes and poses. The objects’ nature and characteristics are important factors to be taken into consideration before performing the comparison step. We distinguish between two main categories of objects: rigid objects and deformable objects whose treatment and handling differ in the modeling as well as in the comparison phases. In this paper, we will be focusing on the comparison of deformable objects, and thus dealing with objects whose shapes might vary in different instances. For this pu...

References (32)

  1. K.-L. Tam, L. R. W.H, and C.-W. Ngo, "Deformable object model matching by topological and geometric similarity," in Proc. of the Computer Graphics International, Jun. 2004, pp. 335-342.
  2. M. Yu, I. Atmosukarto, W. K. Leow, Z. Huang, and R. Xu, "3D model retrieval with morphing-based geometric and topological feature maps," in Proc. of IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2003, pp. 656- 661.
  3. A. Johnson, "Spin-images: a representation for 3-D sur- face matching," Ph.D. dissertation, The Robotics Insti- tute, Carnegie Mellon University, USA, Aug. 2007.
  4. S. Belongie, J. Malik, and J. Puzicha, "Shape matching and object recognition using shape contexts," IEEE Trans- action on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, vol. 24, no. 4, pp. 509-522, 2002.
  5. M. Ankerst, G. Kastenmüller, H.-P. Kriegel, T. Seidl et al., "Nearest neighbor classification in 3D protein databases," in Proc. of the Seventh International Conference on Intelligent Systems for Molecular Biology, Jun. 1999, pp. 34-43.
  6. R. Osada, T. Funkhouser, B. Chazelle, and D. Dobkin, "Shape distributions," ACM Transactions on Graphics, vol. 21, pp. 807-832, 2002.
  7. M. Kazhdan, T. Funkhouser, and S. Rusinkiewicz, "Ro- tation invariant spherical harmonic representation of 3D shape descriptors," in Proceedings of the 2003 Eurograph- ics/ACM SIGGRAPH symposium on Geometry processing, 2003, pp. 156-164.
  8. H. Laga, H. Takahashi, and M. Nakajima, "Spherical wavelet descriptors for content-based 3D model re- trieval," in Proc. of Shape Modelling and Applications, 2006, pp. 15-25.
  9. H. Sundar, D. Silver, N. Gagvani, and S. Dickinson, "Skeleton based shape matching and retrieval," in Proc. of the Conference on Shape Modeling International, 2003, pp. 130-139.
  10. D. Bespalov, W. C. Regli, and A. Shokoufandeh, "Reeb graph based shape retrieval for CAD," in Proc. of ASME design engineering technical conferences, computers and in- formation in engineering conference, 2003.
  11. D. Vranic, "Desire: a composite 3D-shape descriptor," in Proc. of IEEE International Conference on Multimedia and Expo, 2005.
  12. V. Jain and H. Zhang, "A spectral approach to shape- based retrieval of articulated 3D models," CAD, vol. 39, pp. 398-407, 2007.
  13. J. Zhang, R. Kaplow, R. Chen, and K. Sid- diqi, "The McGill shape benchmark," 2005, www.cim.mcgill.ca/ shape/benchMark/.
  14. A. Frome, D. Huber, R. Kolluri, T. Bülow, and J. Malik, "Recognizing objects in range data using regional point descriptors," in Proc. on European Conference on Computer Vision, 2004, pp. 224-237.
  15. D. G. Lowe, "Distinctive image features from scale- invariant keypoints," Int.J.Comput.Vis, vol. 60, no. 2, pp. 91-110, 2003.
  16. L. Zhouhui, G. Afzal, and S. Xianfang, "Visual similarity based 3D shape retrieval using bag-of-features," in Proc. of the 2010 Shape Modeling International Conference, 2010, pp. 25-36.
  17. T. Gatzke, C. Grimm, M. Garland, and S. Zelinka, "Cur- vature maps for local shape comparison," in Proc. of SMI'05, 2005, pp. 244-256.
  18. T. Darom and Y. Keller, "Scale-invariant features for 3- D mesh models," IEEE Transactions on Image Processing, vol. 21, no. 5, pp. 2758-2769, 2012.
  19. R. Ohbuchi, K. Osada, T. Furuya, and T. Banno, "Salient local visual features for shape-based 3D model retrieval," in Proc. of SMI'08, 2008, pp. 93-102.
  20. Y. Liu, H. Zha, and H. Qin, "Shape topics: A compact representation and new algorithms for 3D partial shape retrieval," in Proc. of IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), 2006, pp. 2025-2032.
  21. P. Shilane, P. Min, M. Kazhdan, and T. Funkhouser, "The Princeton shape benchmark," in Proc. of the Shape Modeling International, 2004, pp. 167-178.
  22. T. Furuya and R. Ohbuchi, "Dense sampling and fast encoding for 3D model retrieval using bag-of-visual features," in Proc. of the ACM International Conference on Image and Video Retrieval, July 2009, pp. 26:1-26:8.
  23. R. Ohbuchi and T. Furuya, "Distance metric learning and feature combination for shape-based 3D model re- trieval," in Proc. of the ACM workshop on 3D object retrieval, 2010, pp. 63-68.
  24. A. M. Bronstein, M. M. Bronstein, and R. Kimmel, "Generalized multidimensional scaling: a framework for isometry-invariant partial surface matching," in Proc. of the National Academy of Sciences, 2006, pp. 1168-1172.
  25. H.-P. Kriegel and T. Seidl, "Approximation-based sim- ilarity search for 3-D surface segments," Geoinformatica Journal, vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 113-147, Jun 1998.
  26. M. T. Suzuki, T. Kato, and H. Tsukune, "3D object retrieval based on subjective measures," in Proc. of Ninth International Workshop on Database and Expert Systems Applications, 1998, pp. 850-856.
  27. D. V. Vranic, D. Saupe, and J. Richter, "Tools for 3D object retrieval: Karhunen-Loeve transform and spherical harmonics," in Proc. of IEEE Workshop on Multimedia Signal Processings, 2001, pp. 293-298.
  28. M. Novotni and R. Klein, "A geometric approach to 3D object comparison," in Proc. of the International Conference on Shape Modeling & Applications, 2001, pp. 167-175.
  29. F. Lazarus and A. Verroust, "Level set diagrams of polyhedral objects," in Proc. of the fifth ACM symposium on Solid modeling and applications, 1999, pp. 130-140.
  30. D. Steiner and A. Fischer, "Cutting 3D freeform objects with genus-n into single boundary surfaces using topo- logical graphs," in Proc. of the seventh ACM symposium on Solid modeling and applications, 2002, pp. 336-343.
  31. C. Moenning and N. A. Dodgson, "Fast farthest point sampling for point clouds and implicit surfaces," 2003, university of Cambridge, Computer Laboratory Techni- cal Report No. 565, Cambridge,UK.
  32. A. Elad and R. Kimmel, "On bending invariant signa- tures for surfaces," IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell., vol. 25, no. 10, pp. 1285-1295, Oct. 2003.