I've written a few plugins using C# and I'm familiar with Python, however I find the documentation in the SDK very difficult to understand. My previous plugins that I've written are largely based on modifications to collections of sample code.
Using Rhino3d, I'd like more control over how it meshes curves. I'd like to control the number of mesh vertex divisions on a curve/arc using my algorithm based on the angle and radius of the curve. I actually already have a plugin that calculates the number of divisions (range) to use.
Currently I am forced to export it into ANSYS APDL (where I can directly specify divisions by selecting each line), meshing, then importing back to rhino.
in fact mesh is a graph and Ansys can handle graphs, but Ansys SDK is tricky... as a beginner check this posts:
http://sysmagazine.com/posts/140397/
alyms-alis.blogspot.ch/2013/01/integration-c-and-module-of-ansys.html
meshing is a science itself. There are some algorithms and approaches which are working fine and found implementation as http://www.mi.fu-berlin.de/en/math/groups/ag-geom/publications/db/KNP07-QuadCover.pdf
Related
I'm working on a project with computer vision (opencv 2.4 on c++). On this project I'm trying to detect certain features to build a map (an internal representation) of the world around.
The information I have available is the camera pose (6D vector with 3 position and 3 angular values), calibration values (focal length, distortion, etc) and the features detected on the object being tracked (this features are basically the contour of the object but it doesn't really matter)
Since the camera pose, the position of the features and other variables are subject to errors, I want to model the object as a 3D probability density function (with the probability of finding the "object" on a given 3D point on space, this is important since each contour has a probability associated of how likely it is that it is an actually object-contour instead of a noise-contour(bear with me)).
Example:
If the object were a sphere, I would detect a circle (contour). Since I know the camera pose, but have no depth information, the internal representation of that object should be a fuzzy cylinder (or a cone, if the camera's perspective is included but it's not relevant). If new information is available (new images from a different location) a new contour would be detected, with it's own fuzzy cylinder merged with previous data. Now we should have a region where the probability of finding the object is greater in some areas and weaker somewhere else. As new information is available, the model should converge to the original object shape.
I hope the idea is clear now.
This model should be able to:
Grow dynamically if needed.
Update efficiently as new observations are made (updating the probability inside making stronger the areas observed multiple times and weaker otherwise). Ideally the system should be able to update in real time.
Now the question:
How can I do to computationally represent this kind of fuzzy information in such a way that I can perform these tasks on it?
Any suitable algorithm, data structure, c++ library or tool would help.
I'll answer with the computer vision equivalent of Monty Python: "SLAM, SLAM, SLAM, SLAM!": :-) I'd suggest starting with Sebastian Thrun's tome.
However, there's older older work on the Bayesian side of active computer vision that's directly relevant to your question of geometry estimation, e.g. Whaite and Ferrie's seminal IEEE paper on uncertainty modeling (Waithe, P. and Ferrie, F. (1991). From uncertainty to visual exploration. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 13(10):1038–1049.). For a more general (and perhaps mathematically neater) view on this subject, see also chapter 4 of D.J.C. MacKay's Ph.D. thesis.
I have a lot of polygons. Ideally, all the polygons must not overlap one other, but they can be located adjacent to one another.
But practically, I would have to allow for slight polygon overlap ( defined by a certain tolerance) because all these polygons are obtained from user hand drawing input, which is not as machine-precised as I want them to be.
My question is, is there any software library components that:
Allows one to input a range of polygons
Check if the polygons are overlapped more than a prespecified tolerance
If yes, then stop, or else, continue
Create mesh in terms of coordinates and elements for the polygons by grouping common vertex and edges together?
More importantly, link back the mesh edges to the original polygon(s)'s edge?
Or is there anyone tackle this issue before?
This issue is a daily "bread" of GIS applications - this is what is exactly done there. We also learned that at a GIS course. Look into GIS systems how they address this issue. E.g. ArcGIS define so called topology rules and has some functions to check if the edited features are topologically correct. See http://webhelp.esri.com/arcgisdesktop/9.2/index.cfm?TopicName=Topology_rules
This is pretty long, only because the question is so big. I've tried to group my comments based on your bullet points.
Components to draw polygons
My guess is that you'll have limited success without providing more information - a component to draw polygons will be very much coupled to the language and UI paradigm you are using for the rest of your project, ie. code for a web component will look very different to a native component.
Perhaps an alternative is to separate this element of the process out from the rest of what you're trying to do. There are some absolutely fantastic pre-existing editors that you can use to create 2d and 3d polygons.
Inkscape is an example of a vector graphics editor that makes it easy to enter 2d polygons, and has the advantage of producing output SVG, which is reasonably easy to parse.
In three dimensions Blender is an open source editor that can be used to produce arbitrary geometries that can be exported to a number of formats.
If you can use a google-maps API (possibly in an native HTML rendering control), and you are interested in adding spatial points on a map overlay, you may be interested in related click-to-draw polygon question on stackoverflow. From past experience, other map APIs like OpenLayers support similar approaches.
Check whether polygons are overlapped
Thomas T made the point in his answer, that there are families of related predicates that can be used to address this and related queries. If you are literally just looking for overlaps and other set theoretic operations (union, intersection, set difference) in two dimensions you can use the General Polygon Clipper
You may also need to consider the slightly more generic problem when two polygons that don't overlap or share a vertex when they should. You can use a Minkowski sum to dilate (enlarge) two and three dimensional polygons to avoid such problems. The Computational Geometry Algorithms Library has robust implementations of these algorithms.
I think that it's more likely that you are really looking for a piece of software that can perform vertex welding, Christer Ericson's book Real-time Collision Detection includes extensive and very readable description of the basics in this field, and also on related issues of edge snapping, crack detection, T-junctions and more. However, even though code snippets are included for that book, I know of no ready made library that addresses these problems, in particular, no complete implementation is given for anything beyond basic vertex welding.
Obviously all 3D packages (blender, maya, max, rhino) all include built in software and tools to solve this problem.
Group polygons based on vertices
From past experience, this turned out to be one of the most time consuming parts of developing software to solve problems in this area. It requires reasonable understanding of graph theory and algorithms to traverse boundaries. It is worth relying upon a solid geometry or graph library to do the heavy lifting for you. In the past I've had success with igraph.
Link the updated polygons back to the originals.
Again, from past experience, this is just a case of careful bookkeeping, and some very careful design of your mesh classes up-front. I'd like to give more advice, but even after spending a big chunk of the last six months on this, I'm still struggling to find a "nice" way to do this.
Other Comments
If you're interacting with users, I would strongly recommend avoiding this issue where possible by using an editor that "snaps", rounding all user entered points onto a grid. This will hopefully significantly reduce the amount of work that you have to do.
Yes, you can use OGR. It has python bindings. Specifically, the Geometry class has an Intersects method. I don't fully understand what you want in points 4 and 5.
I'm using the libraries OpenCV for image processing in C + + and this is my question: can you think possible to do a facial recognition (saying the name of a person based on a database of photos) by comparing the frame of videocamera with images in a database using the technique of image histograms comparison? (Note that i compare only the facial region of an image using an example included in the opecv libraries).
I'm asking this because i've just tried to do a program like above but i have a lot of problem (often i detect the wrong person)
You might want to start with compiling the Face Detection using OpenCV example. As others have pointed out, general facial recognition isn't exactly an easy problem to solve. EigenFaces is one common technique for face recognition that is fairly easy to understand and implement.
As others have stated, it's a hard problem, but this gives you a place to start.
Some method I had experience with them are
metric learning for comparing faces
naming video characters: they use SIFT descriptors computed at specific feducial points on each face. Their code worked quite well for me in the past.
A dataset and benchmark that is dedicated for this task is labeled faces in the wild. You can find there references to working methods for comparing faces after detection.
UPDATE:
I have a description of an experiment on face clustering: unsupervised face identification.
The experiment is described in Section 4.4 of my thesis.
The basic flow is as follows
Metric learning: how to determine if two faces are of the same person or not.
This part is supervised, in the sense that it requires as input face images labeled with the identity of the person who appears in each photo.
a. Detect fiducial points (eyes, corner of mouth, nose).
You may use this code, or more recent versions such as this one.
b. Extract SIFT descriptors at the detected fiducial points.
c. Construct a "face descriptor": each face is described using a single vector.
This vector is a concatenation of the sqrt of all the SIFT descriptors.
d. Use the method described here to learn a mahalanobis distance between faces of different persons.
Unsupervised face identification: Once a metric was learned, you may use new photos of new people (these people need not be part of the training set, you may use photos of unseen-before people!).
a. Repeat stages a-c to construct the same "face descriptor" vector for each input face.
b. Compare the descriptor vectors using the learned mahalanobis distance.
I suggest using an existing algorithm such as the one available in the Luxand FaceSDK: http://www.luxand.com/facesdk/ rather than trying to develop your own.
there are 3 builtin techniques for face-recognition in opencv now, pca(eigenfaces), lda(fisherfaces) and lbph.
nice example code:
https://github.com/Itseez/opencv/blob/master/samples/cpp/facerec_demo.cpp
I am trying to figure out what algorithms there are to do surface reconstruction from 3D range data. At a first glance, it seems that the Ball pivoting algorithm (BPA) and Poisson surface reconstruction are the more established methods?
What are the established, more robust algorithm in the field other than BPA and Poisson surface reconstruction algorithm?
Recommended research publications?
Is there available source code?
I have been facing this dilemma for some months now, and made exhaustive research.
Algorithms
Mainly there are 2 categories of algorithms: computation geometry, and implicit surfaces.
Computation Geometry
They fit the mesh on the existing points.
Probably the most famous algorithm of this group is powercrust, because it is theoretically well-established - it guarantees watertight mesh.
Ball Pivoting is patented by IBM. Also, it is not suitable for pointclouds with varying point density.
Implicit functions
One fits implicit functions on the pointcloud, then uses a marching-cube-like algorithm to extract the zero-set of the function into a mesh.
Methods in this category differ mainly by the different implicit functions used.
Poisson, Hoppe's, and MPU are the most famous algorithms in this category. If you are new to the topic, i recommend to read Hoppe's thesis, it is very explanatory.
The algorithms of this category usually can be implemented so that they are able to process huge inputs very efficiently, and one can scale their quality<->speed trade-off. They are not disturbed by noise, varying point-density, holes. A disadvantage of them is that they require consistently oriented surface normals at the input points.
Implementations
You will find small number of free implementations. However it depends on whether You are going to integrate it into free software (in this case GPL license is acceptable for You) or into a commercial software (in this case You need a more liberal license). The latter is very rare.
One is in VTK. I suspect it to be difficult to integrate (no documentation is available for free), it has a strange, over-complicated architecture, and is not designed for high-performance applications. Also has some limitations for the allowed input pointclouds.
Take a look at this Poisson implementation, and after that share your experience about it with me please.
Also:
here are a few high-performance algorithms, with surface reconstruction among them.
CGAL is a famous 3d library, but it is free only for free projects.
Meshlab is a famous application with GPL.
Also (Added August 2013):
The library PCL has a module dedicated to surface reconstruction and is in active development (and is part of Google's Summer of Code). The surface module contains a number of different algorithms for reconstruction. PCL also has the ability to estimate surface normals, incase you do not have them provided with your point data, this functionality can be found in the features module. PCL is released under the terms of the BSD license and is open source software, it is free for commercial and research use.
If you want make some direct experiments with various surface reconstruction algorithms you should try MeshLab, the mesh-processing system, it is open source and it contains implementations of many of the previously cited surface reconstruction algorithms, like:
Poisson Surface Recon
a couple of MLS based approach,
a ball pivoting implementation
a variant of the Curless volume based approach
Delaunay based techniques (Alpha shapes and Voronoi filtering)
tools for computing normals from scattered point sets
and many other tools for comparing/measuring/cleaning/simplifying the resulting meshes.
Sources are protected by GPL, so you could not use them in a commercial closed source project, but it is very important to get the right feeling about the properties of the various surface reconstruction algorithms (how sensitive to noise they are, the speed, the robustness to outliers, how they preserve fine details etc etc) before starting to implement one of them.
You might start looking at some recent work in the field - currently something like Fast low-memory streaming MLS reconstruction of point-sampled surfaces by Gianmauro Cuccuru, Enrico Gobbetti, Fabio Marton, Renato Pajarola, and Ruggero Pintus. Its citations can get you going through the literature pretty quickly.
While not a mesh representation, an ex-colleague recommended me this link
to source code for a Thin Plate Spline method:
Link
Anyone tried it?
Not sure if it's exactly right for your case, since it seems weird that you omitted it, but marching cubes is commonly mentioned in cases like these.
As I had this problem too, I did develop and implement my own point cloud crust algorithm. The sources, as well as the documentation, can be found on github.com: https://github.com/meixxi/PointCloudCrust. The algorithm is implemented in Java.
Maybe, this can help you. You can find also a short python script on the page which illustrates how to use the library. Have fun!
Here on GitHub, is a open source Mesh Processing Library in C++ by Dr. Hugues Hoppe, in which the surface reconstruction program Recon is a good option for your problem...
There is 3D Delaunay tool by Geometric Tools. This tool is used DirecX and OpenGL. Unfortunately, you may need buy a book to see actual example code of the library. You still read the code and figure out.
Matlab also introduced a surface reconstruction tool using Delaunay, delaunayTriangulation class.
You might be interested in Alpha Shapes.
I am interested to read and understand the 2D mesh algorithms. A search on Google reveals a lot of papers and sources, however most are too academic and not much on beginner's side.
So, would anyone here recommend any reading sources ( suitable for the beginners), or open source implementation that I can learn from the start? Thanks.
Also, compared to triangular mesh generation, I have more interest in quadrilateral mesh and mix mesh( quad and tri combined).
I second David's answer regarding Jonathan Shewchuk's site as a good starting point.
In terms of open source software, it depends on what you are looking for exactly.
If you are interested in mesh generation, you can have a look at CGAL's code. Understanding the low level parts of CGAL's code is too much for a beginner. However, having a look at the higher level algorithms can be quite interesting even for a beginner. Also note that the documentation of CGAL is very detailed.
You can also have a look at TetGen, but its source code is monolithic and is not documented (it is more of an end user software rather than a library, even if it can also be called simply from other programs). Still, it is fairly readable, and the user manual contains a short presentation of mesh generation, with some references.
If you are also interested in mesh processing, you can have a look at OpenMesh.
More informations about your goals would definitely help providing more relevant pointers.
The first link on your Google search takes you to Jonathan Shewchuk's site. This is not actually a bad place to start. He has a program called triangle which you can download for 2D triangulation. On that page there is a link to references used in creating triangle, including a link to a description of the triangluation algorithm.
There are several approaches to mesh generation. One of the most common is to create a Delaunay triangulation. Triangulating a set of points is fairly simple and there are several algorithms which do that, including Watson's and Rupert's as used in triangle
When you want to create a constrained triangulation, where the edges of the triangulation match the edges of your input shape it is a bit harder, because you need to recover certain edges.
I would start by understanding Delaunay triangulation. Then maybe look at some of the other meshing algorithms.
Some of the common topics that you will find in mesh generation papers are
Robustness - that is how to deal with floating point round off errors.
Mesh quality - ensuring the shapes of the triangles/tetrahedrons are close to equilateral. Whether this is important depends on why you are creating the mesh. For analysis work it is very important,
How to choose where to insert the nodes in the mesh to give a good mesh distribution.
Meshing speed
Quadrilateral/Hexahedral mesh generation. This is harder than using triangles/tetrahedra.
3D mesh generation is much harder than 2D so a lot of the papers are on 3D generation
Mesh generation is a large topic. It would be helpful if you could give some more information on what aspects (eg 2D or 3D) that you are interested in. If you can give some idea of what you ant to do then maybe I can find some better sources of information.