SHREC’16: Matching of Deformable Shapes with Topological Noise

A particularly challenging setting of the shape matching problem arises when the shapes being matched have topological artifacts due to the coalescence of spatially close surface regions – a scenario that frequently occurs when dealing with real data under suboptimal acquisition conditions. This track of the SHREC’16 contest evaluates shape matching algorithms that operate on 3D shapes under synthetically produced topological changes. The task is to produce a pointwise matching (either sparse or dense) between 90 pairs of shapes, representing the same individual in different poses but with different topology. A separate set of 15 shapes with ground-truth correspondence was provided as training data for learning-based techniques and for parameter tuning. Three research groups participated in the contest; this paper presents the track dataset, and describes the different methods and the contest results.

[1]  Daniel Cremers,et al.  Anisotropic Diffusion Descriptors , 2016, Comput. Graph. Forum.

[2]  M. Bronstein,et al.  SHREC’16: Partial Matching of Deformable Shapes , 2016 .

[3]  Vladlen Koltun,et al.  Robust Nonrigid Registration by Convex Optimization , 2015, 2015 IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV).

[4]  Michael J. Black,et al.  FAUST: Dataset and Evaluation for 3D Mesh Registration , 2014, 2014 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition.

[5]  Daniel Cremers,et al.  Dense Non-rigid Shape Correspondence Using Random Forests , 2014, 2014 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition.

[6]  Michael M. Bronstein,et al.  Coulomb Shapes: Using Electrostatic Forces for Deformation-invariant Shape Representation , 2014, 3DOR@Eurographics.

[7]  Yasuo Kuniyoshi,et al.  Elastic Net Constraints for Shape Matching , 2013, 2013 IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision.

[8]  Ghassan Hamarneh,et al.  Bilateral Maps for Partial Matching , 2013, Comput. Graph. Forum.

[9]  Yücel Yemez,et al.  Minimum-Distortion Isometric Shape Correspondence Using EM Algorithm , 2012, IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence.

[10]  Alexander M. Bronstein,et al.  A game-theoretic approach to deformable shape matching , 2012, 2012 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition.

[11]  Daniel Cremers,et al.  The wave kernel signature: A quantum mechanical approach to shape analysis , 2011, 2011 IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision Workshops (ICCV Workshops).

[12]  Vladimir G. Kim,et al.  Blended intrinsic maps , 2011, ACM Trans. Graph..

[13]  Nikos Paragios,et al.  Discrete Minimum Distortion Correspondence Problems for Non-rigid Shape Matching , 2011, SSVM.

[14]  Radu Horaud,et al.  SHREC '11: Robust Feature Detection and Description Benchmark , 2011, 3DOR@Eurographics.

[15]  Thomas A. Funkhouser,et al.  Biharmonic distance , 2010, TOGS.

[16]  Marcel Campen,et al.  Exact and Robust (Self‐)Intersections for Polygonal Meshes , 2010, Comput. Graph. Forum.

[17]  Ghassan Hamarneh,et al.  A Survey on Shape Correspondence , 2011, Comput. Graph. Forum.

[18]  Leonidas J. Guibas,et al.  SHREC 2010: robust correspondence benchmark , 2010 .

[19]  Leonidas J. Guibas,et al.  A concise and provably informative multi-scale signature based on heat diffusion , 2009 .

[20]  Leonidas J. Guibas,et al.  Global Intrinsic Symmetries of Shapes , 2008, Comput. Graph. Forum.

[21]  Hao Li,et al.  Global Correspondence Optimization for Non‐Rigid Registration of Depth Scans , 2008, Comput. Graph. Forum.

[22]  Raif M. Rustamov,et al.  Laplace-Beltrami eigenfunctions for deformation invariant shape representation , 2007 .