Qualitative Comparison of Contraction-Based Curve Skeletonization Methods

Sobiecki, André; Yasan, HC Haluk; Jalba, AC Andrei; Telea, AC Alexandru

doi:10.1007/978-3-642-38294-9_36

Cited by 27 publications

(41 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…While these are needed for tasks like high-fidelity rendering and 3D printing, other tasks, such as shape retrieval, only require access to a specific subset of the Given the long history of skeletonization, understanding the properties of 2D shape skeletons, and computing them efficiently, is a well covered field [SP09,ABE09]. Sobiecki et al [SYJT13] qualitatively compare six contraction-based curve skeletonization methods against six of the properties [CSM07]. First, 3D shapes admit a much richer, and more complex, set of skeleton types, each having specific properties.…”

Section: Compactnessmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Main differences with respect to existing skeletonization surveys are as follows: We focus solely on 3D skeletons (in contrast to [SBdB15,SP09]); and we cover both surface and curve skeletons using both mesh-based and voxel-based representations (in contrast to [CSM07,SP09,SYJT13,SJT14]). Main differences with respect to existing skeletonization surveys are as follows: We focus solely on 3D skeletons (in contrast to [SBdB15,SP09]); and we cover both surface and curve skeletons using both mesh-based and voxel-based representations (in contrast to [CSM07,SP09,SYJT13,SJT14]).…”

Section: Survey Outlinementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

3D Skeletons: A State‐of‐the‐Art Report

Tagliasacchi

Delame

Spagnuolo

et al. 2016

Computer Graphics Forum

207

152

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

International audienceGiven a shape, a skeleton is a thin centered structure which jointly describes the topology and the geometry of the shape. Skeletons provide an alternative to classical boundary or volumetric representations, which is especially effective for applications where one needs to reason about, and manipulate, the structure of a shape. These skeleton properties make them powerful tools for many types of shape analysis and processing tasks. For a given shape, several skeleton types can be defined, each having its own properties, advantages, and drawbacks. Similarly, a large number of methods exist to compute a given skeleton type, each having its own requirements, advantages, and limitations. While using skeletons for two-dimensional (2D) shapes is a relatively well covered area, developments in the skeletonization of three-dimensional (3D) shapes make these tasks challenging for both researchers and practitioners. This survey presents an overview of 3D shape skeletonization. We start by presenting the definition and properties of various types of 3D skeletons. We propose a taxonomy of 3D skeletons which allows us to further analyze and compare them with respect to their properties. We next overview methods and techniques used to compute all described 3D skeleton types, and discuss their assumptions, advantages, and limitations. Finally, we describe several applications of 3D skeletons, which illustrate their added value for different shape analysis and processing tasks

show abstract

Section: Compactnessmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Survey Outlinementioning

confidence: 99%

3D Skeletons: A State‐of‐the‐Art Report

Tagliasacchi

Delame

Spagnuolo

et al. 2016

Computer Graphics Forum

207

152

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This process can be seen as a 'recursive' skeletonization which computes the surface skeleton from the input shape, the curve skeleton from the surface skeleton, and the shape center from the curve skeleton. All skeletons λ τ should satisfy the well-known desirable properties -centeredness, rotational invariance, homotopy to the input shape Ω, noise robustness, one-pixel (in 2D) and one-voxel (in 3D) thickness, inclusion of the curve skeleton in the surface skeleton, and computational efficiency [16], [61], [62].…”

Section: Proposed Framework a Preliminariesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A different approach is taken by Jalba and Telea who contract the surface skeleton to compute its curve skeleton counterpart [30]. A recent review of contraction methods is given in [62].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

An Unified Multiscale Framework for Planar, Surface, and Curve Skeletonization

Jalba

Sobiecki

Telea

2016

IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Computing skeletons of 2D shapes, and medial surface and curve skeletons of 3D shapes, is a challenging task. In particular, there is no unified framework that detects all types of skeletons using a single model, and also produces a multiscale representation which allows to progressively simplify, or regularize, all skeleton types. In this paper, we present such a framework. We model skeleton detection and regularization by a conservative mass transport process from a shape's boundary to its surface skeleton, next to its curve skeleton, and finally to the shape center. The resulting density field can be thresholded to obtain a multiscale representation of progressively simplified surface, or curve, skeletons. We detail a numerical implementation of our framework which is demonstrably stable and has high computational efficiency. We demonstrate our framework on several complex 2D and 3D shapes.

show abstract

“…We refer to [15,19] for a qualitative comparison of the most representative methods based on this idea. A recent contraction-based method is [11] which is a robust skeletonization algorithm whose resulting skeletons are topology-preserving, usually well centered and smoother than previous similar methods.…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

An interactive editor for curve-skeletons: SkeletonLab

Barbieri

Meloni

Usai

et al. 2016

Computers & Graphics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Curve-skeletons are powerful shape descriptors able to provide higher level information on topology, structure and semantics of a given digital object. Their range of application is wide and encompasses computer animation, shape matching, modelling and remeshing. While a universally accepted definition of curve-skeleton is still lacking, there are currently many algorithms for the curve-skeleton computation (or skeletonization) as well as different techniques for building a mesh around a given curve-skeleton (inverse skeletonization). Despite their widespread use, automatically extracted skeletons usually need to be processed in order to be used in further stages of any pipeline, due to different requirements. We present here an advanced tool, named SkeletonLab, that provides simple interactive techniques to rapidly and automatically edit and repair curve skeletons generated using different techniques proposed in literature, as well as handcrafting them. The aim of the tool is to allow trained practitioners to manipulate the curve-skeletons obtained with skeletonization algorithms in order to fit their specific pipelines or to explore the requirements of newly developed techniques.

show abstract

Qualitative Comparison of Contraction-Based Curve Skeletonization Methods

Cited by 27 publications

References 30 publications

3D Skeletons: A State‐of‐the‐Art Report

3D Skeletons: A State‐of‐the‐Art Report

An Unified Multiscale Framework for Planar, Surface, and Curve Skeletonization

An interactive editor for curve-skeletons: SkeletonLab

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About