Multimedia Tools and Applications

, Volume 76, Issue 6, pp 8145–8173 | Cite as

A method of 3D CAD model retrieval based on spatial bag of words



In order to improve both the discriminative power for models’ local parts and the searching efficiency in 3D CAD model retrieval, a novel hierarchical feature descriptor for retrieval based on spatial bag of words is proposed in this paper. By extracting the essential information from Boundary Representation (B-Rep), 3D CAD models are transformed to Labelled Attribute Adjacency Graphs (LAAGs). Next, the models in training dataset are segmented into different regions according to their corresponding LAAG with an improved segmentation method. All collections of these local regions are described as local feature vectors with graph spectrum, and the codebook is created by clustering all these vectors. Each library model is then decomposed with the same methods mentioned above and globally represented as a spatial histogram of word pairs along with the adjacent relations of its regions, called Spatial Bags-of-Words (SBoWs),and then, the hierarchical feature descriptor(HFD) of each library model composed of global SBoWs and local graph spectrum is constructed. Finally, according to HFD, a two-level searching framework is presented for CAD model retrieval: the candidates are acquired by comparing the query with each target model based on their SBoWs vectors, and the remaining candidates are verified using optimal matching algorithm according to their local features. Experimental results show that the proposed methods promote both retrieval quality and efficiency significantly, so they can support the effective reuse of CAD models for enterprises.


3D model retrieval Model segmentation Labelled attribute adjacency graph Spectral graph theory Bag of words Spatial relation 


  1. 1.
    Attene M, Marini S, Spagnuolo M et al (2011) Part-in-whole 3D shape matching and docking. Vis Comput 27(11):991–1004CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bai J (2014) 3D CAD model similarity assessment based on extended feature tree. Comput Integr Manuf Syst 20(2):267–275Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bai J, GAO SM, Tang WH et al (2010) Design reuse oriented partial retrieval of CAD models. Comput Aided Des 42(12):1069–1084CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bespalov D, Regli W, Shokoufandeha A (2006) Local feature extraction and matching partial objects. Comput Aided Des 38(9):1020–1037CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Biasotti S, Giorgi D, Spagnuolo M et al (2006) Sub-part correspondence by structural descriptors of 3D shapes. Comput Aided Des 38(9):1002–1019CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Biasotti S, Giorgi D, Spagnuolo M et al (2008) Size functions for comparing 3D models. Pattern Recogn 41(9):2855–2873CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bronstein AM, Bronstein MM, Guibas LJ et al. (2011) Shape google: Geometric words and expressions for invariant shape retrieval. ACM Trans Graph 30(1):1–20Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Buchele SF, Crawford RH (2004) Three-dimensional halfspace constructive solid geometry tree construction from implicit boundary representations. Comput- Aided Des 36(11):1063–1073CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Cao Y, Wang C, Li Z et al (2010) Spatial-bag-of-features. In: Proceedings of IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition. San Francisco, CA, p 3352–3359Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Cardone A, Gupta SK, Karnik M (2003) A survey of shape similarity assessment algorithms for product design and manufacturing applications. J Comput Inf Sci Eng 3(6):109–118CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Chen DY, Tian XP, Shen YT et al (2003) On Visual Similarity Based 3D Model Retrieval. In: Proceedings of European Association for Computer Graphics 24th Annual Conference (EUROGRAPHICS’03). Granada, Spain, p 223–232Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Dubrovina A, Kimmel R (2010) Matching shapes by eigen-decomposition of the Laplace-Beltrami operator. In: Proceedings of the 5th International Symposium on 3D Data Processing Visualization and Transmission. Paris, France, p 225–233Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ei-Mehalawi M, Allen MR (2003) A database system of mechanical components based on geometric and topological similarity, part I: representation. Comput Aided Des 35(1):95–105CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hong T, Lee K, Kim S (2006) Similarity comparison of mechanical parts to reuse existing designs. Comput Aided Des 38(9):973–984CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Huang R, Zhang S, Bai X et al (2013) Manufacturing semantics based 3D CAD model retrieval method. Comput Integr Manuf Syst 19(6):1177–1185Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Index of/repository. National Design Repository.
  17. 17.
    Iyer N, Jayanti S, Lou K, Kalyanaraman Y et al (2005) Three-dimensional shape searching: state-of-the-art review and future trends. Comput Aided Des 37(5):509–530CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Jayanti S, Kalyanaraman Y, Iyer N et al (2006) Developing an engineering shape benchmark for CAD models. Comput Aided Des 38(9):939–953CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Johnson AE, Hebert M (1999) Using spin images for efficient object recognition in cluttered 3D scenes. IEEE Trans Pattern Anal Mach Intell 21(5):433–449CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kazhdan M, Funkhouser T, Rusinkiewicz S (2003) Rotation invariant spherical harmonic representation of 3D shape descriptors. In: Proceedings of Eurographics Symposium on Geometry Processing. Aire-la-Ville, p 156–164Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Li X, Godil A, Wagan A (2008) Spatially enhanced bags of words for 3D shape retrieval. In: Proceedings of the 4th International Symposium on Visual Computing. Las Vegas, NV, p 349–358Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Li M, Zhang YF, FUH JYH et al (2010) Retrieving reusable 3D CAD models using knowledge-driven dependency graph partitioning. Comput-Aided Des Appl 7(3):417–430Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Li Z, Zhou X, Liu W (2015) A geometric reasoning approach to hierarchical representation for B-rep model retrieval. Comput- Aided Des 62(5):190–202CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Lian Z, Godil A, Sun X (2010) Visual similarity based 3D shape retrieval using bag-of-features. In: Proceedings of 2010 International Conference on Shape Modeling and Applications. Aix-en-Provence, p 25–36Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Liu ZB, Bu SH, Zhou K et al (2013) A survey on partial retrieval of 3D shapes. J Comput Sci Technol 28(5):836–851CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Liu Z, Li H, Zhou W, et al (2012) Embedding spatial context information into inverted file for large-scale image retrieval. In: Proceedings of the 20th ACM International Conference on Multimedia. New York, US, p 199–208Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Liu Y, Zha H, Qin H (2006) Shape Topics: a compact representation and new algorithms for 3D partial shape retrieval. In: Proceedings of the 2006 I.E. Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition. New York, p 2025–2032Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Liu X, Zhang S, Cui W et al (2008) Machined features recognition based on attributed adjacency graph in reverse engineering. Comput Integr Manuf Syst 14(6):1162–1167Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Lu Y, Gadh R, Tautges TJ (2001) Feature based hex meshing methodology: feature recognition and volume decomposition. Comput Aided Des 33(3):221–232CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Ma L, Huang Z, Liang L et al (2009) An approach to surface region decomposition for CAD models. J Comput-Aided Des Comput Graph 21(2):148–153Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Ma L, Huang Z, Wu Q (2008) Retrieval of CAD models based on shape-location codes of faces. J Comput-Aided Des Comput Graph 20(1):19–25Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Malassiotis S, Strintzis MG (2007) Snapshots: a novel local surface descriptor and matching algorithm for robust 3D surface alignment. IEEE Trans Pattern Anal Mach Intell 29(7):1285–1290CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Mukherjee J, Mukhopadhyay J, Mitra P (2014) A survey on image retrieval performance of different bag of visual words indexing techniques. In: proceedings of 2014 I.E. Students’ Technology Symposium. Kharagpur, India, p 99–104Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Ohbuchi R, Osada K, Furuya T et al (2008) Salient local visual features for shape-based 3D model retrieval. In: Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Shape Modeling and Applications. NY, US, p 93–102Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Osada R, Funkhouser T, Chazelle B et al (2002) Shape distributions. ACM Trans Graph 21(4):807–832MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Philbin J, Chum O, Isard M et al (2007) Object retrieval with large vocabularies and fast spatial matching. In: Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition. Minneapolis, US, p 1–8Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Regli WC, Spagnuolo M (2006) Introduction to shape similarity detection and search for CAD/CAE applications. Comput Aided Des 38(9):937–938CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Savelonas MA, Pratikakis I, Sfikas K (2015) An overview of partial 3D object retrieval methodologies. Multimed Tools Appl. doi:10.1007/s11042-014-2267-9 Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Sivic J. Zisserman A (2003) Video Google: A text retrieval approach to object matching in videos. In: Proceedings of the 9th IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision. Nice, France, p 1470–1477Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Sun H (2004) Graph and its applications. Science Press, PekingGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Swift KG, Booker JD (1998) Process selection-from design to manufacture. John Wiley and Sons, NYGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Tao S, Huang Z, Ma L et al (2013) Partial retrieval of CAD models based on local surface region decomposition. Comput Aided Des 45(11):1239–1252CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Tao SQ, Wang ST, Chen AH (2015) 3D CAD solid model retrieval based on region segmentation. Multimed Tools Appl. doi:10.1007/s11-42-015-3033-3 Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Toldo R, Castellani U, Fusiello A (2010) The bag of words approach for retrieval and categorization of 3D objects. Vis Comput 26(10):1257–1268CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Wang H, Zhang S, Bai X et al (2007) Optimal-matching based 3D CAD model similarity assessment algorithm. Comput Integr Manuf Syst 13(10):1921–1927Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    West DB (2000) Introduction to graph theory. Prentice Hall, New JerseyGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Wu X, Kashino K (2015) Second-order configuration of local features for geometrically stable image matching and retrieval. IEEE Trans Circuits Syst Video Technol 25(8):1395–1408CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Yang Y, Newsam S (2011) Spatial pyramid co-occurrence for image classification. In: Proceedings of the 2011 I.E. International Conference on Computer Vision. Barcelona, p 1465–1472Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Zhang K, Zhang S, Bai X (2011) A method of 3D CAD model retrieval based on ant colony algorithm. J Comput-Aided Des Comput Graph 23(4):633–639MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Zhang K, Zhang S, Liu X (2013) Current research and future development of 3D CAD model retrieval. Trans Chin Soc Agric Mach 44(7):256–263Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Zhong-Min Huangfu
    • 1
    • 2
  • Shu-Sheng Zhang
    • 2
  • Luo-Heng Yan
    • 1
  1. 1.College of Information EngineeringNorth China University of Water Resources and Electric PowerHenanChina
  2. 2.The key Laboratory of Contemporary Design and Integrated Manufacturing Technology, Ministry of EducationNorthwestern Polytechnical UniversityShaanxiChina

Personalised recommendations