Geometric Inference for Probability Measures
- 633 Downloads
- 27 Citations
Abstract
Data often comes in the form of a point cloud sampled from an unknown compact subset of Euclidean space. The general goal of geometric inference is then to recover geometric and topological features (e.g., Betti numbers, normals) of this subset from the approximating point cloud data. It appears that the study of distance functions allows one to address many of these questions successfully. However, one of the main limitations of this framework is that it does not cope well with outliers or with background noise. In this paper, we show how to extend the framework of distance functions to overcome this problem. Replacing compact subsets by measures, we introduce a notion of distance function to a probability distribution in ℝ d . These functions share many properties with classical distance functions, which make them suitable for inference purposes. In particular, by considering appropriate level sets of these distance functions, we show that it is possible to reconstruct offsets of sampled shapes with topological guarantees even in the presence of outliers. Moreover, in settings where empirical measures are considered, these functions can be easily evaluated, making them of particular practical interest.
Keywords
Geometric inference Computational topology Optimal transportation Nearest neighbor Surface reconstructionMathematics Subject Classification (2000)
62G05 62-07 28A33Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
- 1.N. Amenta, S. Choi, T.K. Dey, N. Leekha, A simple algorithm for homeomorphic surface reconstruction, Int. J. Comput. Geom. Appl. 12(1–2), 125–141 (2002). MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 2.F. Bolley, A. Guillin, C. Villani, Quantitative concentration inequalities for empirical measures on non-compact spaces, Probab. Theory Relat. 137(3), 541–593 (2007). MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 3.F. Chazal, A. Lieutier, Stability and computation of topological invariants of solids in ℝn, Discrete Comput. Geom. 37(4), 601–617 (2007). MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 4.F. Chazal, A. Lieutier, Smooth manifold reconstruction from noisy and non-uniform approximation with guarantees, Comput. Geom. Theor. Appl. 40(2), 156–170 (2008). MathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
- 5.F. Chazal, S.Y. Oudot, Towards persistence-based reconstruction in Euclidean spaces, in Proc. 24th ACM Sympos. Comput. Geom. (2008), pp. 232–241. Google Scholar
- 6.F. Chazal, D. Cohen-Steiner, A. Lieutier, B. Thibert, Stability of curvature measures, Comput. Graph. Forum 28, 1485–1496 (2008) (proc. SGP 2009). CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 7.F. Chazal, D. Cohen-Steiner, A. Lieutier, A sampling theory for compact sets in Euclidean space, Discrete Comput. Geom. 41(3), 461–479 (2009). MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 8.F. Chazal, D. Cohen-Steiner, A. Lieutier, Normal cone approximation and offset shape isotopy, Comput. Geom. Theor. Appl. 42(6-7), 566–581 (2009). MathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
- 9.F. Chazal, D. Cohen-Steiner, Q. Mérigot, Boundary measures for geometric inference, Found. Comput. Math. 10, 221–240 (2010). MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 10.F.H. Clarke, Optimization and Nonsmooth Analysis (Wiley, New York, 1983). MATHGoogle Scholar
- 11.D. Cohen-Steiner, H. Edelsbrunner, J. Harer, Stability of persistence diagrams, Discrete Comput. Geom. 37(1), 103–120 (2007). MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 12.V. de Silva, G. Carlsson, Topological estimation using witness complexes, in Symposium on Point-Based Graphics, ETH, Zürich, Switzerland (2004). Google Scholar
- 13.H. Edelsbrunner, The union of balls and its dual shape, Discrete Comput. Geom. 13, 415–440 (1995). MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 14.H. Edelsbrunner, J. Harer, Computational Topology. An Introduction (American Mathematical Society, Providence, 2010). MATHGoogle Scholar
- 15.H. Federer, Curvature measures, Trans. Am. Math. Soc. 93, 418–491 (1959). MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 16.S. Gallot, D. Hulin, J. Lafontaine, Riemannian Geometry (Springer, Berlin, 1990). MATHGoogle Scholar
- 17.K. Grove, Critical point theory for distance functions, in Proc. of Symposia in Pure Mathematics, vol. 54 (1993). Google Scholar
- 18.A. Lieutier, Any open bounded subset of ℝn has the same homotopy type as its medial axis, Comput. Aided Geom. Des. 36(11), 1029–1046 (2004). Google Scholar
- 19.Q. Mérigot, M. Ovsjanikov, L. Guibas, Robust Voronoi-based curvature and feature estimation, in Proc. SIAM/ACM Joint Conference on Geom. and Phys. Modeling (2009), pp. 1–12. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 20.P. Niyogi, S. Smale, S. Weinberger, A topological view of unsupervised learning from noisy data. Preprint (2008). Google Scholar
- 21.P. Niyogi, S. Smale, S. Weinberger, Finding the homology of submanifolds with high confidence from random samples, Discrete Comput. Geom. 39(1), 419–441 (2008). MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 22.S. Peleg, M. Werman, H. Rom, A unified approach to the change of resolution: space and gray-level, IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell. 11(7), 739–742 (1989). CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 23.A. Petrunin, Semiconcave functions in Alexandrov’s geometry, in Surveys in differential geometry, vol. XI (International Press, Somerville, 2007), pp. 137–201. Google Scholar
- 24.V. Robins, Towards computing homology from finite approximations, Topol. Proc. 24, 503–532 (1999). MathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
- 25.Y. Rubner, C. Tomasi, L.J. Guibas, The earth mover’s distance as a metric for image retrieval, Int. J. Comput. Vis. 40(2), 99–121 (2000). MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 26.C. Villani, Topics in Optimal Transportation (American Mathematical Society, Providence, 2003). MATHGoogle Scholar