Shape Segmentation and Matching with Flow Discretization

  • Tamal K. Dey
  • Joachim Giesen
  • Samrat Goswami
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 2748)


Geometric shapes are identified with their features. For computational purposes a concrete mathematical definition of features is required. In this paper we use a topological approach, namely dynamical systems, to define features of shapes. To exploit this definition algorithmically we assume that a point sample of the shape is given as input from which features of the shape have to be approximated. We translate our definition of features to the discrete domain while mimicking the set-up developed for the continuous shapes. Experimental results show that our algorithms segment shapes in two and three dimensions into so-called features quite effectively. Further, we develop a shape matching algorithm that takes advantage of our robust feature segmentation step.


Distance Function Voronoi Diagram Stable Manifold Voronoi Cell Shape Match 
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.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Alt, H., Guibas, L.J.: Discrete geometric shapes: matching, interpolation, and approximation: a survey. Tech. report B 96-11, EVL-1996-142, Institute of Computer Science, Freie Universität Berlin (1996) Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Belongie, S., Malik, J.: Matching with shape contexts. IEEE Trans. PAMI 24, 509–522 (2002)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Besl, P.J., McKay, N.D.: A method for registration of 3-D shapes. IEEE Trans. PAMI 14, 239–256 (1992)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cass, T.A.: Robust Affine Structure Matching for 3D Object Recognition. IEEE Trans. PAMI 20, 1264–1265 (1998)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Chen, Y., Medioni, G.: Object Modelling by Registration of Multiple Range Images. Image abd Vision Computing 10, 145–155 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Chew, L.P., Goodrich, M.T., Huttelnocher, D.P., Kedem, K., Kleinberg, J.M., Kravets, D.: Geometric Pattern Matching under Euclidean motion. Computational Geometry, Theory and Applications 7, 113–124 (1997)zbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Edelsbrunner, H., Facello, M.A., Liang, J.: On the definition and the construction of pockets in macromolecules. Discrete Apl. Math. 88, 83–102 (1998)zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Giesen, J., John, M.: The flow complex: a data structure for geometric modeling. In: Proc. 14th Annu. ACM-SIAM Sympos. Discrete Algorithms, pp. 285–294 (2003)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Grove, K.: Critical point theory for distance functions. Proc. Sympos. Pure Math. 54, 357–385 (1993)MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hilaga, M., Shinagawa, Y., Komura, T., Kunni, T.: Topology matching for fully automatic similarity estimation of 3D shapes. In: Proc. SIGGRAPH 2001, pp. 203–212 (2001)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Osada, R., Funkhouser, T., Chazelle, B., Dobkin, D.: Matching 3D Models with Shape Distribution. In: Proc. Shape Modelling Int’l (2001)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Sebastian, T.B., Klein, P.N., Kimia, B.: Recognition of shapes by editing shock graphs. In: Proc. ICCV, pp. 755–762 (2001)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Siddiqi, K., Shokoufandeh, A., Dickinson, S.J., Zucker, S.W.: Shock graphs and shape matching. Computer Vision, 222–229 (1998)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Veltkamp, R.C., Hagedoorn, M.: State-of-the-art in shape matching. Technical report UUCS-1999-27, Utrecht University, the Netherlands (1999)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Tamal K. Dey
    • 1
  • Joachim Giesen
    • 2
  • Samrat Goswami
    • 1
  1. 1.The Ohio State U.ColumbusUSA
  2. 2.ETH ZürichZürichSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations