Deepwater Archaeological Survey: An Interdisciplinary and Complex Process

This chapter introduces several state of the art techniques that could help to make deep underwater archaeological photogrammetric surveys easier, faster, more accurate, and to provide more visually appealing representations in 2D and 3D for both experts and public. We detail how the 3D captured data is analysed and then represented using ontologies, and how this facilitates interdisciplinary interpretation and cooperation. Towards more automation, we present a new method that adopts a deep learning approach for the detection and the recognition of objects of interest, amphorae for example. In order to provide more readable, direct and clearer illustrations, we describe several techniques that generate different styles of sketches out of orthophotos developed using neural networks. In the same direction, we present the Non-Photorealistic Rendering (NPR) technique, which converts a 3D model into a more readable 2D representation that is more useful to communicate and simplifies the identification of objects of interest. Regarding public dissemination, we demonstrate how recent advances in virtual reality to provide an accurate, high resolution, amusing and appropriate visualization tool that offers the public the possibility to ‘visit’ an unreachable archaeological site. Finally, we conclude by introducing the plenoptic approach, a new promising technology that can change the future of the photogrammetry by making it easier and less time consuming and that allows a user to create a 3D model using only one camera shot. Here, we introduce the concepts, the developing process, and some results, which we obtained with underwater imaging.

[1]  Sergey Ioffe,et al.  Batch Normalization: Accelerating Deep Network Training by Reducing Internal Covariate Shift , 2015, ICML.

[2]  P. Drap,et al.  TOWARDS GUIDED UNDERWATER SURVEY USING LIGHT VISUAL ODOMETRY , 2017 .

[3]  Paul Ozog,et al.  Building 3D mosaics from an Autonomous Underwater Vehicle, Doppler velocity log, and 2D imaging sonar , 2015, 2015 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA).

[4]  Filipe Castro,et al.  A multilingual approach to technical manuscripts: 16th and 17th-century Portuguese shipbuilding treatises , 2007, JCDL '07.

[5]  Ramesh Raskar Hardware support for non-photorealistic rendering , 2001, HWWS '01.

[6]  Richard Furuta,et al.  A digital library approach to the reconstruction of ancient sunken ships , 2010 .

[7]  Christophe De Vleeschouwer,et al.  A semi-global color correction for underwater image restoration , 2017, SIGGRAPH Posters.

[8]  Aaron Hertzmann,et al.  Computing smooth surface contours with accurate topology , 2014, TOGS.

[9]  Vikram Pakrashi,et al.  A Stereo-Matching Technique for Recovering 3D Information from Underwater Inspection Imagery , 2018, Comput. Aided Civ. Infrastructure Eng..

[10]  Martin Doerr,et al.  CRMgeo: A spatiotemporal extension of CIDOC-CRM , 2017, International Journal on Digital Libraries.

[11]  Michael S. Bernstein,et al.  ImageNet Large Scale Visual Recognition Challenge , 2014, International Journal of Computer Vision.

[12]  Tamaki Ura,et al.  Methods for quantitative studies of seafloor hydrothermal systems using 3D visual reconstructions , 2017 .

[13]  Filipe Castro,et al.  Underwater Photogrammetry and Object Modeling: A Case Study of Xlendi Wreck in Malta , 2015, Sensors.

[14]  Xu Yang,et al.  Underwater image matching by incorporating structural constraints , 2017 .

[15]  Brian Wyvill,et al.  Precise Ink Drawing of 3D Models , 2003, Comput. Graph. Forum.

[16]  Huibin Wang,et al.  Underwater Object Segmentation Based on Optical Features , 2018, Sensors.

[17]  Huaizhong Li,et al.  Gradient-guided color image contrast and saturation enhancement , 2017 .

[18]  Pierre Grussenmeyer,et al.  Adjustment of Sonar and Laser Acquisition Data for Building the 3D Reference Model of a Canal Tunnel † , 2015, Sensors.

[19]  Adam Finkelstein,et al.  Suggestive contours for conveying shape , 2003, ACM Trans. Graph..

[20]  Kotaro Yamafune,et al.  Underwater photogrammetric monitoring techniques for mid-depth shipwrecks , 2018, Journal of Cultural Heritage.

[21]  Julien Hué,et al.  Underwater Archaeological 3D Surveys Validation within the Removed Sets Framework , 2011, ECSQARU.

[22]  Fabio Menna,et al.  Joint alignment of underwater and above-the-water photogrammetric 3D models by independent models adjustment , 2015 .

[23]  Lennart Wietzke,et al.  Single lens 3D-camera with extended depth-of-field , 2012, Electronic Imaging.

[24]  Raisonnement à partir d'informations structurées et hiérarchisées : application à l'information archéologique , 2010 .

[25]  Dumitru Erhan,et al.  Going deeper with convolutions , 2014, 2015 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR).

[26]  P. Hanrahan,et al.  Light Field Photography with a Hand-held Plenoptic Camera , 2005 .

[27]  Andrew Zisserman,et al.  Very Deep Convolutional Networks for Large-Scale Image Recognition , 2014, ICLR.

[28]  Leon A. Gatys,et al.  Controlling Perceptual Factors in Neural Style Transfer , 2016, 2017 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR).

[29]  Martin Doerr,et al.  A Distributed Object Repository for Cultural Heritage , 2010, VAST.

[30]  Luís Paulo Reis,et al.  Developments and Advances in Intelligent Systems and Applications , 2018 .

[31]  Massimo Martorelli,et al.  Digital Photogrammetry for Documentation of Maritime Heritage , 2014 .

[32]  Frédo Durand,et al.  Apparent ridges for line drawing , 2007, SIGGRAPH 2007.

[33]  David Scaradozzi,et al.  Testing methods to support management decisions in coralligenous and cave environments. A case study at Portofino MPA. , 2016, Marine environmental research.

[34]  Jian Sun,et al.  Deep Residual Learning for Image Recognition , 2015, 2016 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR).

[35]  Julian Padget,et al.  Automatic Mapping of OWL Ontologies into Java , 2004, SEKE.

[36]  Roman Moucek,et al.  Semantic framework for mapping object-oriented model to semantic web languages , 2015, Front. Neuroinform..

[37]  Martin J O’Connor A Mechanism to Define and Execute SWRL Built-ins in Protégé-OWL , 2006 .

[38]  Simon A. Dobson,et al.  Sapphire: Generating Java Runtime Artefacts from OWL Ontologies , 2011, CAiSE Workshops.

[39]  Martin Raubal,et al.  Semantic Rules for Context-Aware Geographical Information Retrieval , 2009, EuroSSC.

[40]  J. Richard Steffy,et al.  Wooden Ship Building and the Interpretation of Shipwrecks , 1994 .

[41]  Djamel Merad,et al.  Underwater Photogrammetry for Archaeology. What Will Be the Next Step , 2013 .

[42]  Alessandro Capra,et al.  3D RECONSTRUCTION OF AN UNDERWATER ARCHAELOGICAL SITE: COMPARISON BETWEEN LOW COST CAMERAS , 2015 .

[43]  Roberto Cipolla,et al.  SegNet: A Deep Convolutional Encoder-Decoder Architecture for Image Segmentation , 2015, IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence.

[44]  Carlo Beltrame,et al.  UNDERWATER PHOTOGRAMMETRY AND 3D RECONSTRUCTION OF MARBLE CARGOS SHIPWRECK , 2015 .

[45]  María Poveda-Villalón,et al.  Linked Open Vocabularies (LOV): A gateway to reusable semantic vocabularies on the Web , 2016, Semantic Web.

[46]  Stefan B. Williams,et al.  A simple, fast, and repeatable survey method for underwater visual 3D benthic mapping and monitoring , 2017, Ecology and evolution.

[47]  G. Bass Archaeology Under Water , 1966 .

[48]  Shalin Hai-Jew Data Analytics in Digital Humanities , 2017 .

[49]  B. M. A. Rahman,et al.  Ultracompact Si-GST Hybrid Waveguides for Nonvolatile Light Wave Manipulation , 2018, IEEE Photonics Journal.

[50]  Olivier Curé,et al.  Toward a Novel Application of CIDOC CRM to Underwater Archaeological Surveys , 2010, 2010 IEEE Fourth International Conference on Semantic Computing.

[51]  Jonathan Benjamin,et al.  Multi-image Photogrammetry for Underwater Archaeological Site Recording: An Accessible, Diver-Based Approach , 2014, Journal of Maritime Archaeology.

[52]  David G. Lowe,et al.  Object recognition from local scale-invariant features , 1999, Proceedings of the Seventh IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision.

[53]  Szymon Rusinkiewicz,et al.  Highlight lines for conveying shape , 2007, NPAR '07.

[54]  Frédo Durand,et al.  Learning Visual Importance for Graphic Designs and Data Visualizations , 2017, UIST.

[55]  Holger Winnemöller,et al.  PortraitSketch: face sketching assistance for novices , 2014, UIST.

[56]  Arthur W. Toga,et al.  Medical data transformation using rewriting , 2015, Front. Neuroinform..

[57]  Julien Seinturier Fusion de connaissances : Applications aux relevés photogrammétriques de fouilles archéologiques sous-marines. (Knowledge Fusion : Applications to photogrammetric surveys of underwater archaeological excavations) , 2007 .

[58]  Luiz Henrique de Figueiredo,et al.  A Hybrid Method for Computing Apparent Ridges , 2010, 2010 23rd SIBGRAPI Conference on Graphics, Patterns and Images.

[59]  Hong Qiao,et al.  Robust Underwater Image Stitching Based on Graph Matching , 2017, Sino-foreign-interchange Workshop on Intelligent Science and Intelligent Data Engineering.

[60]  Les Carr,et al.  Using Aligned Ontology Model to Convert Cultural Heritage Resources into Semantic Web , 2014, 2014 IEEE International Conference on Semantic Computing.

[61]  Geoffrey E. Hinton,et al.  ImageNet classification with deep convolutional neural networks , 2012, Commun. ACM.

[62]  Maria Roussou,et al.  Photorealism and Non-Photorealism in Virtual Heritage Representation , 2003, VAST.

[63]  Trevor Darrell,et al.  Caffe: Convolutional Architecture for Fast Feature Embedding , 2014, ACM Multimedia.

[64]  Filipe Castro,et al.  The Nautical Archaeology Digital Library , 2006, ECDL.

[65]  Odile Papini,et al.  Encoding the Revision of Partially Preordered Information in Answer Set Programming , 2009, ECSQARU.

[66]  Mark Shortis,et al.  Calibration Techniques for Accurate Measurements by Underwater Camera Systems , 2015, Sensors.

[67]  Rodrigo Torres,et al.  Multi-Image Photogrammetry to Record and Reconstruct Underwater Shipwreck Sites , 2017 .

[68]  Martin Doerr,et al.  How to put archaeological geometric data into context? Representing mining history research with CIDOC CRM and extensions , 2014 .

[69]  Massimiliano Secci,et al.  Survey and Recording Technologies in Italian Underwater Cultural Heritage: Research and Public Access Within the Framework of the 2001 UNESCO Convention , 2017 .

[70]  Béatrice Bouchou-Markhoff,et al.  Supporting Semantic Interoperability in Conservation-Restoration Domain: The PARCOURS Project , 2017, JOCCH.

[71]  Sagi Filin,et al.  Photogrammetric modeling of underwater environments , 2010 .

[72]  Sandro Barone,et al.  Experimentation of structured light and stereo vision for underwater 3D reconstruction , 2011 .

[73]  Sorin Hermon,et al.  Expressing reliability with CIDOC CRM , 2016, International Journal on Digital Libraries.

[74]  Trevor Darrell,et al.  Fully Convolutional Networks for Semantic Segmentation , 2017, IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence.

[75]  Carlo Beltrame,et al.  3D reconstruction of marble shipwreck cargoes based on underwater multi-image photogrammetry , 2016, Digit. Appl. Archaeol. Cult. Heritage.

[76]  D. Pitzalis,et al.  Il sistema IIPImage: un nuovo concetto di esplorazione di immagini ad alta risoluzione , 2009 .

[77]  Franco Niccolucci,et al.  Documenting archaeological science with CIDOC CRM , 2017, International Journal on Digital Libraries.

[78]  A. Monteiro,et al.  Recording, Publishing, and Reconstructing Wooden Shipwrecks , 2018 .

[79]  Chris Roman,et al.  Application of structured light imaging for high resolution mapping of underwater archaeological sites , 2010, OCEANS'10 IEEE SYDNEY.

[80]  Lin Zhao,et al.  Underwater Image Recovery Under the Nonuniform Optical Field Based on Polarimetric Imaging , 2018, IEEE Photonics Journal.