2006
DOI: 10.1016/j.cag.2006.08.013
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A 3D object classifier for discriminating manufacturing processes

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
9
0

Year Published

2007
2007
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
1
1

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 29 publications
(9 citation statements)
references
References 25 publications
0
9
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Such an approach has been considered because these differential properties are currently used by algorithms for segmentation, recognition and registration of range images [13][14][15]. Fig.…”
Section: Surface Damage Recognition By Curvature Computationmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Such an approach has been considered because these differential properties are currently used by algorithms for segmentation, recognition and registration of range images [13][14][15]. Fig.…”
Section: Surface Damage Recognition By Curvature Computationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Sampling step (cm) 1.5 0.7 Sub-area size (cm) 15 In case of the column, the comparison between reference visual recognition and K-based recognition has been performed on the entire surface, whereas in case of the beam such a recognition has been performed on four zones each consisting of 448 sub-areas and the corresponding results have been extrapolated to the entire surface. Sub-areas where the computation has not provided results are considered as incorrectly recognized.…”
Section: Column Beammentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Our work is similar in spirit to the manufacturing classification problem of CAD models in [6], where a methodology for discriminating between two machining processes of mechanical artifacts was presented. However, our aim is to identify an unknown number of "machining processes", each of which will define a certain set of rules for a specific CAD operation.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 94%
“…Only three methods in [36] are compared by [34], thus the results of the other methods are not presented here. In each class, we apply five different levels (1)(2)(3)(4)(5) of strength for the transformation: the higher the number, the stronger the transformation. Repeatability rate is defined in [34] as the percentage of the detected points that are common in two different instances of an object.…”
Section: Interest Points Extractionmentioning
confidence: 99%