NSA simplification algorithm: geometrical vs. visual quality

Liu, Zonghua; Wang, Bohyun; Lee, Byung-Wook; Han, Myung-Mook

doi:10.1109/iccsa.2007.66

Cited by 2 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Thus, the model created by NSA algorithm is more adequate for visualization purposes because the mesh is more regular. On the contrary, the geometrical quality of the model created by QSlim algorithm is better than the geometrical quality of the model created by NSA algorithm, i.e., the model created by QSlim have smaller geometric errors (see (Silva, 2007)).…”

Section: Analysis Of Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This fact is due to the simplification criterion of the NSA algorithm which is based on the planarity of the model surface. Since the BUNNY model has not planar regions the meshes produced by NSA algorithm have lower quality (see (Silva, 2007)).…”

Section: Analysis Of Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…NSA algorithm guarantees the quasi-coplanarity of the region to simplify and, at the same time, prevents possible local folding or partial face overlapping of the resulting mesh, because the edge collapse operation is only allowed if the variation of the normals is less than ε. Note that these situations have a great variation of the face normals (see (Silva, 2007)).…”

Section: The Nsa Algorithmmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Note that the NSA algorithm was developed initially for multiresolution purposes. But a new implementation of the NSA algorithm alone was created as a general simplification algorithm of meshes (Silva, 2007) and it is available for test purposes in http://www.di.ubi.pt/˜fsilva/nsa/.…”

Section: The Nsa Algorithmmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Quality Perception of Simplified Models: Nsa v S. Qslim

Silva¹,

Silva²

2008

Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Computer Graphics Theory and Applications

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Quality perception of simplified models is an important aspect for several applications. But, it is normally evaluated only based on the analysis of geometrical errors of the simplified models. However, the analysis of geometrical errors is not enough to evaluate the quality of the simplified models. The quality of the simplified models and the execution times are the main aspects that distinguish the simplification algorithms. These algorithms are of great interest in a variety of areas, since they allow the replacement of large models by approximations with far fewer cells for manipulation and visualization purposes. This paper presents a comparison between two simplification algorithms, NSA and Qslim, and shows the difference between geometrical and graphical quality of the models. The comparison of results was made using the PolyMeCo tool, which enables the analysis and comparison of meshes by providing an environment where several visualization options and metrics are available and can be used in a coordinated way. 2 MESH COMPARISON TOOLS Mesh comparison is usually carried out with the help of dedicated software tools that provide a numerical and visual representation of the data, for example, the

show abstract

Section: Analysis Of Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Analysis Of Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Nsa Algorithmmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Nsa Algorithmmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations