Soft Computing

, Volume 21, Issue 18, pp 5443–5455 | Cite as

Selectively densified 3D object modeling based on regions of interest detection using neural gas networks

  • Ana-Maria Cretu
  • Maude Chagnon-Forget
  • Pierre Payeur
Methodologies and Application


The paper discusses automated solutions for 3D object modeling at multiple resolutions in the context of virtual reality. An original solution, based on an unsupervised neural network, is proposed to guide the creation of selectively densified meshes. A neural gas network, applied over a sparse density object mesh, adapts its nodes during training to capture the embedded shape of the object. Regions of interest are then identified as areas with higher density of nodes in the adapted neural gas map. Meshes at different level of detail for an object, which preserve these regions of interest, are constructed by adapting a classical simplification algorithm, the QSlim. The simplification process will therefore only affect the regions of lower interest, ensuring that the characteristics of an object are preserved even at lower resolutions. Various interest point detectors are incorporated in selectively densified meshes in a similar manner to enable the comparison with the proposed neural gas approach. A novel solution based on learning is proposed to select the number of faces for the discrete models of an object at different resolutions. Finally, selectively densified object meshes are incorporated in a discrete level-of-detail method for presentation in virtual reality applications.


Neural gas 3D object models Interest point detectors Mesh simplification 



The authors thank H. Monette-Thériault for his help with the implementation of the adapted QSlim algorithm.

Compliance with ethical standards


The authors acknowledge the support to this research from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada, under the Discovery Grant RGPIN-2014-04953.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest related to this work.

Human and animal rights

This article does not contain any studies with human participants performed by any of the authors.


  1. A Benchmark for 3D Interest Points Marked by Human Subjects [Online].
  2. Castellani U, Cristiani M, Fantoni S, Murino V (2008) Sparse points matching by combining 3D mesh saliency with statistical descriptors. Eurographics 27(2):643–652Google Scholar
  3. Cignoni P, Rocchini C, Scopigno R (1998) Metro: measuring error on simplified surfaces. Comput Graph Forum 17(2):167–174. [AAOnline].
  4. CloudCompare—3D Point Cloud and Mesh Processing Software, Open Source Project [Online].
  5. Cretu A-M (2009) Experimental data acquisition and modeling of 3D deformable objects. Ph.D. Thesis, University of OttawaGoogle Scholar
  6. Creusot C, Pears N, Austin J (2013) A machine-learning approach to keypoint detection and landmarking on 3D meshes. Springer Int J Comput Vis 102(1–3):146–179CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Dugataci H, Cheung CP, Godil A (2012) Evaluation of 3D interest point detection techniques via human-generated ground truth. Vis Comput 28(9):901–917CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Feixas M, Sbert M, Gonzalez F (2009) A unified information-theoretic framework for viewpoint selection and mesh saliency. ACM Trans Appl Percept 6(1):1:2–1:23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Gal R, Cohen-Or D (2006) Salient geometric features for partial shape matching and similarity. ACM Trans Graph 25(1):130–150CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Garland M, Heckbert PS (1997) Surface simplification using quadric error meshes. In: Proceedings of ACM Siggraph 97, pp 209–216Google Scholar
  11. Godil A, Wagan AI (2011) Salient local 3D features for 3D shape retrieval. In: Beraldin, JA, Cheok GS, McCarthy MB, Neuschaefer-Rube U, Baskurt AM, McDowall IE, Dolinsky M (eds) Three-dimensional imaging, interaction, and measurement. Proceedings of the SPIE, vol 7864. San Francisco, USA, pp 78640S-1–78640S-8Google Scholar
  12. Ho T-C, Lin Y-C, Chuang J-H, Peng C-H, Cheng Y-J (2006) User-assisted mesh simplification. In: Proceedings of ACM international conference on virtual reality continuum and its applications, pp 59–66Google Scholar
  13. Kho Y, Garland M (2003) User-guided simplification. In: Proceedings of ACM symposium on interactive 3D graphics, pp 123–126Google Scholar
  14. Lee CH, Varshney A, Jacobs DW (2005) Mesh saliency. ACM SIGGRAPH 174:659–666CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Leifman G, Shtrom E, Tal A (2012) Surface regions of interest for viewpoint selection. IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pp 414–421Google Scholar
  16. Liu Y-S, Liu M, Kihara D, Ramani K (2007) Salient critical points for meshes. ACM symposium on solid and physical modelling, pp 277–282Google Scholar
  17. Luebke D (2001) A developer’s survey of polygonal simplification algorithm. IEEE Comput Graph Appl 21(3):24–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Luebke D, Reddy M, Cohen JD, Varshney A, Watson B, Huebner R (2003) Level of detail for 3D graphics. In: The Morgan Kaufmann Series in Computer Graphics and Geometric Modeling. Elsevier, San FranciscoGoogle Scholar
  19. Martinetz M, Berkovich SG, Schulten KJ (1993) Neural-gas network for vector quantization and its application to time-series prediction. IEEE Trans Neural Netw 4(4):558–568CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Monette-Thériault H, Cretu A-M, Payeur P (2014) 3D object modeling with neural gas based selective densification of surface meshes. IEEE international conference on systems, man, and cybernetics, pp 1373–1378, San Diego, USGoogle Scholar
  21. Novatnack J, Nishino K (2007) Scale-dependent 3D geometric features. IEEE international conference on computer vision, pp 1–8Google Scholar
  22. Payeur P, Curtis P, Cretu A-M (2013) Computational methods for selective acquisition of depth measurements in machine perception. IEEE international conference on systems, man, and cybernetics, pp 876–881, Manchester, UKGoogle Scholar
  23. Pojar E, Schmalstieg D (2003) User-controlled creation of multiresolution meshes. In: Proceedings of ACM symposium on interactive 3D graphics, pp 127–130Google Scholar
  24. Sipiran I, Bustos B (2010) A robust 3D interest points detector based on Harris operator. Eurographics workshop on 3D object retrieval, pp 7–14Google Scholar
  25. Song R, Liu Y, Zhao Y, Martin RR, Rosin PL (2012) Conditional random field-based mesh saliency. IEEE international conference on image processing, pp 637–640Google Scholar
  26. Song R, Liu Y, Martin RR, Rosin PL (2014) Mesh saliency via spectral processing. ACM Trans Graph 33(1):6:1–6:17CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  27. Sun J, Ovsjanikov M, Guibas L (2009) A concise and provably informative multi-scale signature based on heat diffusion. Eurograph Symp Geom Process 28(5):1383–1392Google Scholar
  28. Tombari F, Salti S, Di Stefano L (2013) Performance evaluation of 3D keypoint detectors. Springer Int J Comput Vis 102(1–3):198–220CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Wu J, Shen X, Zhu W, Liu L (2013) Mesh saliency with global rarity. Graph Models 75:255–264CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Yang Y-B, Lu T, Lin J-J (2009) Saliency regions for 3D mesh abstraction. In: Muneesawang P et al (eds) Advances in multimedia information processing, LNCS 5879, pp 292–299Google Scholar
  31. Yu T-H, Woodford OJ, Cipolla R (2013) A performance evaluation of volumetric 3D interest point detectors. Int J Comput Vis 102(1–3):180–197CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Zaharescu A, Boyer E, Varanasi K, Horaud R (2009) Surface feature detection and description with applications to mesh matching. IEEE international conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pp 373–380Google Scholar
  33. Zhao Y, Liu Y, Song R, Zhang M (2012) Extended non-local means filter for surface saliency detection. IEEE international conference on image processing, pp 633–636Google Scholar
  34. Zhao Y, Liu Y, Song R, Zhang M (2013a) A Retinex theory based points sampling method. Int J Comput Inf Syst Ind Manag Appl 5:1–10Google Scholar
  35. Zhao Y, Liu Y, Zeng Z (2013b) Using region-based saliency for 3D interest points detection. In: Wilson R et al (eds) CAIP 2013, Part II, LNCS 8048, pp 108–116Google Scholar
  36. Zou G, Hua J, Dong M, Qin H (2008) Surface matching with salient keypoints in geodesic scale space. Comput Animat Virtual Worlds 19:399–410CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ana-Maria Cretu
    • 1
    • 2
  • Maude Chagnon-Forget
    • 1
  • Pierre Payeur
    • 2
  1. 1.Université du Québec en OutaouaisGatineauCanada
  2. 2.University of OttawaOttawaCanada

Personalised recommendations