4.3 Article Proceedings Paper

Provably good sampling and meshing of surfaces

期刊

GRAPHICAL MODELS
卷 67, 期 5, 页码 405-451

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.gmod.2005.01.004

关键词

surface mesh generation; epsilon-sampling; surface approximation; restricted Delaunay triangulation; mesh refinement

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The notion of epsilon-sample, introduced by Amenta and Bern, has proven to be a key concept in the theory of sampled surfaces. Of particular interest is the fact that, if E is an epsilon-sample of a C-2-continuous surface S for a sufficiently small r, then the Delaunay triangulation of E restricted to S is a good approximation of S, both in a topological and in a geometric sense. Hence, if one can construct an epsilon-sample, one also gets a good approximation of the surface. Moreover, correct reconstruction is ensured by various algorithms. In this paper, we introduce the notion of loose epsilon-sample. We show that the set of loose epsilon-samples contains and is asymptotically identical to the set of epsilon-samples. The main advantage of loose epsilon-samples over epsilon-samples is that they are easier to check and to construct. We also present a simple algorithm that constructs provably good surface samples and meshes. Given a C-2-continuous surface S without boundary, the algorithm generates a sparse epsilon-sample E and at the same time a triangulated surface Dells(E). The triangulated surface has the same topological type as S, is close to S for the Hausdorff distance and can provide good approximations of normals, areas and curvatures. A notable feature of the algorithm is that the surface needs only to be known through an oracle that, given a line segment, detects whether the segment intersects the surface and, in the affirmative, returns the intersection points. This makes the algorithm useful in a wide variety of contexts and for a large class of surfaces. (c) 2005 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

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

4.3
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