Piecewise Linear Interpolation between Polygonal Slices - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

1 / 20
About This Presentation
Title:

Piecewise Linear Interpolation between Polygonal Slices

Description:

Stitch. Triangulate the rest. Orientation ... Choose arbitrary one end to start the stitching from. ... Stitching and summing (2) After summing we remain with ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:119
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 21
Provided by: Kai69
Category:

less

Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Piecewise Linear Interpolation between Polygonal Slices


1
Piecewise Linear Interpolation between Polygonal
Slices
  • Gill Barequet
  • Micha Sharir

2
Reconstruction from Polygonal Slices
  • Input series of parallel planar slices not
    crossing but might be nested.
  • Output Polyhedral solid model whose
    cross-sections along the given planes coincide
    with the input slices.

3
Wish List
  • No input limitations.
  • Automatic procedure.
  • intuitive surface.

4
The Algorithm in Brief
  • Match similarities
  • Stitch
  • Triangulate the rest

5
Orientation
  • Orient all contours in each slice in alternating
    directions, from the outside to the inside,
    Starting clockwise.

6
Discretize
  • Discretize each contour polygon into a cyclic
    sequence of vertices with a constant and small
    (enough) length.

7
Finding similarities Voting process (1)
  • The voting process is done for every pair of
    contour polygons which belong to a different
    slices.
  • Indexing The two cyclic contours are break into
    two linear indexed vertices list.
  • For each vertex C2(j) with distance less then e
    from vertex C1(i) we place a vote for (j-i)(mod
    lc2).
  • Large number of votes reflects long portions of
    contour matching.
  • Identify the start and end of each match.

8
Finding similarities Voting process (2)
  • Score each match according to the number of votes
    and additional parameters (Distance, max.
    consecutive mismatch).
  • Notes
  • e is an a-priory estimation of the physical
    differences between two slices.
  • The distance function considers orientation. This
    guarantees that the material will be on the same
    side of the contours.
  • Its most important that every intersected pair of
    contours will be matched.

9
Stitching
  • We stitch all the pairs vertices chains which
    were discovered.
  • Stitching algorithm
  • Inverse the orientation of lower chain.
  • Choose arbitrary one end to start the stitching
    from.
  • Always add the triangle with the shorter
    perimeter.

10
Stitching and summing (1)
  • Inversing orientation
  • Stitching
  • Summing (e (-e) 0)

11
Stitching and summing (2)
  • After summing we remain with 3D polygon (Clefts)
  • When projected to xy-plane Clefts are
    non-intersecting. This is due to the matching in
    the interesting neighborhood.
  • The Clefts form an hierarchy of nested curves
    when projected to xy-plane.

12
Connecting the Clefts
  • Build a complete graph with vertices represent
    Clefts and edges represent the minimum distance
    between the two Clefts.
  • Calculate Minimum Spanning Tree.
  • Build Bridges According to the MST ? simple 3D
    cycle (also a cycle when projected to xy-plane).
  • Triangulate Using dynamic programming function
    which minimize a given function (e.g area or
    perimiter).

13
Example (1)
14
Example (2)
15
Conclusions (1)
  • The algorithm overcomes the classic problems
    nesting and branching.
  • The algorithm doesnt take any assumption on
    input.
  • The procedure is automatic except for few
    parameters (discretize length, e distance hard
    decision parameter and cost function of the
    Clefts triangulation).
  • The algorithm enforces that planer intersecting
    contours will be connected, and for a reasonable
    e non nested or intersecting contours wont be
    connected.

16
Conclusions (2)
  • The algorithm divide the solution to a set of
    simple known algorithms and therefore
    implementation should be simple as well.
  • The authors claim to test the algorithm on
    several examples including synthetic contours,
    real contours (CT,MRI) and cases taken from
    previous works (boissonat and unsolvable
    problems of gitlin, ORouke and subramanian). The
    Algorithms gave good results with all of those
    examples. However, only few examples are given in
    the paper.

17
Conclusions (3)
  • Its not proven in the article that bridges wont
    cross contours and Cleft projection is a simple
    circle. The authors does refer to this problem as
    unlikely to happen if using sufficiently good
    parameters.
  • The paper is written clearly and is
    self-contained. More and better examples would
    make it simpler to understand.

18
Bonus example (1)
19
Bonus example (2)
20
Bonus example (3)
Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
About PowerShow.com