Advertisement

An image oriented CAD approach

  • Cordelia Schmid
  • Philippe Bobet
  • Bart Lamiroy
  • Roger Mohr
Appearance-Based Representations
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 1144)

Abstract

Matching abstract CAD models with images is a well studied problem. It includes the problems of identifying modelled objects for which 3D CAD data is available in images, and of locating them with respect to a given reference frame. Some authors have concluded that this problem has no real general solution as the representation levels are too different (see for instance the discussion in the workshop of CAD model-based vision [Bow91]).

We are developing an alternative approach which overcomes this problem by representing each CAD model by several images to which 3D CAD features are added. This representation allows to solve the standard vision problems to be solved much more easily such as “where is this CAD feature in the image?” or “what is the object pose?”. In addition it supports fast and robust recognition using recently developed hashing techniques. Several annotated images must then be stored along with CAD data.

Experiments with different kinds of images illustrate the validity of the approach.

Keywords

Object Recognition Model Image Scale Change Visual Servoing Epipolar Geometry 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [BA90]
    J. Ben-Arie. The probabilistic peaking effect of viewed angles and distances with application to 3-D object recognition. Ieee Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 12(8):760–774, August 1990.Google Scholar
  2. [BH86]
    R.C. Bolles and R. Horaud. 3DPO: A three-dimensional Part Orientation system. The International Journal of Robotics Research, 5(3):3–26, 1986.Google Scholar
  3. [BL93]
    T.O. Binford and T.S. Levitt. Quasi-invariants: Theory and exploitation. In Proceedings of Darpa Image Understanding Workshop, pages 819–829, 1993.Google Scholar
  4. [Bow91]
    K. Bowyer. Why aspect graphs are not (yet) practical for computer vision. In Proceedings of the Ieee workshop on Direction on automated Cad-based Vision, Maui, Hawaii, USA, pages 97–104, 1991.Google Scholar
  5. [BWR90]
    J.B. Burns, R. Weiss, and E.M. Riseman. View variation of point set and line segment features. In Proceedings of Darpa Image Understanding Workshop, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA, pages 650–659, 1990.Google Scholar
  6. [BZM94]
    P. Beardsley, A. Zisserman, and D. Murray. Sequential update of projective and affine structure from motion. Technical Report 2012/94, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom, August 1994.Google Scholar
  7. [CJ90]
    D.J. Clemens and D.W. Jacobs. Model-group indexing for recognition. In Proceedings of Darpa Image Understanding Workshop, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA, pages 604–613, September 1990.Google Scholar
  8. [CM91]
    C.H. Chen and P.G. Mulgaonkar. CAD-based feature-utility measures for automatic vision programming. In Direction in Automated CAD-Based Vision, pages 106–114. Ieee Computer Society Press, 1991.Google Scholar
  9. [CS94]
    JL. Chen and G.G. Stockman. Matching curved 3D object models to 2D images. In A.C. Kak and K. Ikeuchi, editors, Proceedings of the Second CAD-Based Vision Workshop, pages 210–218, Los Alamitos, California, February 1994. IEEE Computer Society Press.Google Scholar
  10. [DBB+93]
    S.J. Dickinson, R. Bergevin, I. Biederman, J.-O. Eklund, R. Munck-Fairwood, and A. Pentland. The use of geons for generic 3D object recognition. In Proceedings of the 12th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Chambery, France, pages 1693–1699, 1993.Google Scholar
  11. [EFR92]
    B. Espiau, F. Chaumette, and P. Rives. A new approach to visual servoing in robotics. Ieee Trans. on Robotics and Automation, 8(3):313–326, 1992.Google Scholar
  12. [FLM92]
    O.D. Faugeras, Q.T. Luong, and S.J. Maybank. Camera self-calibration: Theory and experiments. In G. Sandini, editor, Proceedings of the 2nd European Conference on Computer Vision, Santa Margherita Ligure, Italy, pages 321–334. Springer-Verlag, May 1992.Google Scholar
  13. [Flo93]
    L. Florack. The Syntactical Structure of Scalar Images. PhD thesis, Universiteit Utrecht, m11 1993.Google Scholar
  14. [FM95]
    O. Faugeras and B. Mourrain. On the geometry and algebra of the point and line correspondences between n images. In Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Computer Vision, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA, pages 951–956, June 1995.Google Scholar
  15. [GA94]
    A. Guéziec and N. Ayache. Smoothing and matching of 3-D space curves. International Journal of Computer Vision, 12(1):79–104, 1994.Google Scholar
  16. [GCS91]
    Z. Gigus, J. Canny, and R. Seidel. Efficiently computing and representing aspect graphs of polyhedral objects. Ieee Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 13(6):542–551, 1991.Google Scholar
  17. [Gro94]
    P. Gros. Using quasi-invariants for automatic model building and object recognition: An overview. In Proceedings of the NSF-ARPA Workshop on Object Representations in Computer Vision, New York, USA, December 1994.Google Scholar
  18. [Gro95]
    P. Gros. Matching and clustering: Two steps towards object modelling in computer vision. The International Journal of Robotics Research, 14(6):633–642, December 1995.Google Scholar
  19. [Har92]
    R. Hartley. Invariants of points seen in multiple images. Technical report, G.E. CRD, Schenectady, 1992.Google Scholar
  20. [HKR93]
    D.P. Huttenlocher, G.A. Klanderman, and W.J. Rucklidge. Comparing images using the Hausdorff distance. Ieee Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 15(9):850–863, September 1993.Google Scholar
  21. [HRvdH+92]
    F. Heitger, L. Rosenthaler, R. von der Heydt, E. Peterhans, and O. Kuebler. Simulation of neural contour mechanism: from simple to end-stopped cells. Vision Research, 32(5):963–981, 1992.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. [HSV90]
    R. Horaud, T. Skordas, and F. Veillon. Finding geometric and relational structures in an image. In Proceedings of the 1st European Conference on Computer Vision, Antibes, France, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 374–384. Springer-Verlag, April 1990.Google Scholar
  23. [IK88]
    K. Ikeuchi and T. Kanade. Applying sensor models to automatic generation of object recognition programs. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Computer Vision, Tampa, Florida, USA, pages 228–237, 1988.Google Scholar
  24. [KD79]
    J. Koenderink and A.V. Doorn. The internal representation of solid shape with respect to vision. Biological Cybernetics, 32:211–216, 1979.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. [KDN93]
    D. Koller, K. Daniilidis, and H.-H. Nagel. Model-based object tracking in monocular image sequences of road traffic scenes. International Journal of Computer Vision, 10:257–281, 1993.Google Scholar
  26. [KN95]
    H. Kollnig and H.H. Nagel. 3D pose estimation by fitting image gradients directly to polyedral models. In Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Computer Vision, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA, pages 569–574, 1995.Google Scholar
  27. [Koe84]
    J.J. Koenderink. What does the occluding contour tell us about solid shape? Perception, 13:321–330, 1984.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. [KvD87]
    J. J. Konderink and A. J. van Doorn. Representation of local geometry in the visual system. Biological Cybernetics, 55:367–375, 1987.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. [LB92]
    S.W. Lee and R. Bajcsy. Detection of specularity using color and multiple views. In G. Sandini, editor, Proceedings of the 2nd European Conference on Computer Vision, Santa Margherita Ligure, Italy, pages 99–114. Springer-Verlag, May 1992.Google Scholar
  30. [LG96]
    B. Lamiroy and P. Gros. Rapid object indexing and recognition using enhanced geometric hashing. In Proceedings of the 4th European Conference on Computer Vision, Cambridge, England, volume 1, pages 59–70, April 1996. Postscript version available at ftp://ftp.imag.fr/pub/MOVI/publications/Lamiroy_eccv96.ps.gz.Google Scholar
  31. [Lin94]
    T. Lindeberg. Scale-Space Theory in Computer Vision. Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1994.Google Scholar
  32. [Low86]
    D. Lowe. Three-dimensional object recognition from single two-dimensional images. Artificial Intelligence, ??:355–395, 1986.Google Scholar
  33. [LW88]
    Y. Lamdan and H.J. Wolfson. Geometric hashing: a general and efficient model-based recognition scheme. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Computer Vision, Tampa, Florida, USA, pages 238–249, 1988.Google Scholar
  34. [MU92]
    Y. Moses and S. Ullman. Limitations of non model-based recognition. In Proceedings of the 2nd European Conference on Computer Vision, Santa Margherita Ligure, Italy, pages 820–828, May 1992.Google Scholar
  35. [MZ92]
    J. Mundy and A. Zisserman. Projective geometry for machine vision. In J. Mundy and A. Zisserman, editors, Geometric Invariance in Computer Vision, chapter 23, pages 463–519. MIT Press, 1992.Google Scholar
  36. [Rom94]
    Bart M. ter Haar Romeny, editor. Geometry-Driven Diffusion in Computer Vision. Kluwer Academic, computational imaging and vision edition, 1994.Google Scholar
  37. [Ruc95]
    W.J. Rucklidge. Locating objects using the Hausdorff distance. In Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Computer Vision, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA, pages 457–464, 1995.Google Scholar
  38. [SB91]
    L. Shapiro and K. Bowyer, editors. IEEE Workshop on Directions in Automated CAD-Based Vision, Maui, Hawai, 1991. Ieee Computer Society Press.Google Scholar
  39. [Sha94]
    A. Shashua. Trilinearity in visual recognition by alignment. In Jan-Olof Eklundh, editor, Proceedings of the 3rd European Conference on Computer Vision, Stockholm, Sweden, pages 479–484. Springer Verlag, May 1994.Google Scholar
  40. [SM92]
    F. Stein and G. Medioni. Structural indexing: Efficient 3-D object recognition. Ieee Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 14(2):125–145, 1992.Google Scholar
  41. [SM95]
    C. Schmid and R. Mohr. Matching by local invariants. Technical report, Inria, August 1995.Google Scholar
  42. [SM96]
    C. Schmid and R. Mohr. Combining greyvalue invariants with local constraints for object recognition. In Proceedings of the Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, San Francisco, California, USA, m4 1996. Accepted for CVPR 96. ftp:/ftp.imag.fr/pub/MOVI/publications/Schmid_cvpr96.ps.gz.Google Scholar
  43. [Wit83]
    A. P. Witkin. Scale-space filtering. In Proceedings of the 8th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Karlsruhe, Germany, pages 1019–1023, 1983.Google Scholar
  44. [YC94]
    J. Ho Yi and D.M. Chelberg. Rapid object recognition from a large model database. In A.C. Kak and K. Ikeuchi, editors, Proceedings of the Second CAD-Based Vision Workshop, pages 28–35, Los Alamitos, California, February 1994. IEEE Computer Society Press.Google Scholar
  45. [ZDFL94]
    Z. Zhang, R. Deriche, O. Faugeras, and Q.T. Luong. A robust technique for matching two uncalibrated images through the recovery of the unknown epipolar geometry. Rapport de recherche 2273, INRIA, May 1994.Google Scholar
  46. [ZY95]
    S.C. Zhu and A.L. Yuille. FORMS: a flexible object recognition and modelling system. In Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Computer Vision, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA, pages 465–472, 1995.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  • Cordelia Schmid
    • 1
  • Philippe Bobet
    • 1
  • Bart Lamiroy
    • 1
  • Roger Mohr
    • 1
  1. 1.INRIAMontbonnot Saint MartinFrance

Personalised recommendations