4.7 Article

Error-Bounded and Feature Preserving Surface Remeshing with Minimal Angle Improvement

期刊

出版社

IEEE COMPUTER SOC
DOI: 10.1109/TVCG.2016.2632720

关键词

Surface remeshing; error-bounded; feature preserving; minimal angle improvement; saliency function

资金

  1. European Research Council (ERC Starting Grant Robust Geometry Processing) [257474]
  2. National Science Foundation of China [61373071, 61372168, 61620106003]
  3. German Research Foundation (DFG) [GSC 111]
  4. European Research Council (ERC) [257474] Funding Source: European Research Council (ERC)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Surface remeshing is a key component in many geometry processing applications. The typical goal consists in finding a mesh that is (1) geometrically faithful to the original geometry, (2) as coarse as possible to obtain a low-complexity representation and (3) free of bad elements that would hamper the desired application (e.g., the minimum interior angle is above an application-dependent threshold). Our algorithm is designed to address all three optimization goals simultaneously by targeting prescribed bounds on approximation error delta, minimal interior angle theta and maximum mesh complexity N (number of vertices). The approximation error bound d is a hard constraint, while the other two criteria are modeled as optimization goals to guarantee feasibility. Our optimization framework applies carefully prioritized local operators in order to greedily search for the coarsest mesh with minimal interior angle above theta and approximation error bounded by delta. Fast runtime is enabled by a local approximation error estimation, while implicit feature preservation is obtained by specifically designed vertex relocation operators. Experiments show that for reasonable angle bounds (theta <= 35 degrees) our approach delivers high-quality meshes with implicitly preserved features (no tagging required) and better balances between geometric fidelity, mesh complexity and element quality than the state-of-the-art.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据