Efficient Viewpoint Selection for Urban Texture Documentation

  • Houtan Shirani-Mehr
  • Farnoush Banaei-Kashani
  • Cyrus Shahabi
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 5659)


We envision participatory texture documentation (PTD) as a process in which a group of participants (dedicated individuals and/or general public) with camera-equipped mobile phones participate in collaborative/social collection of the urban texture information. PTD enables inexpensive, scalable and high resolution urban texture documentation. PTD is implemented in two steps. In the first step, minimum number of points in the urban environment are selected from which collection of maximum urban texture is possible. This step is called viewpoint selection. In the next step, the selected viewpoints are assigned to users (based on their preferences and constraints) for texture collection. This step is termed viewpoint assignment. In this paper, we focus on the viewpoint selection problem. We prove that this problem is NP-hard, and accordingly, propose a scalable (and efficient) heuristic with approximation guarantee for viewpoint selection. We study, profile and verify our proposed solution by extensive experiments.


Road Network Approximation Guarantee Sensor Deployment Texture Collection Texture Score 
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.
    Chakravarty, S., Shekhawat, A.: Parallel and serial heuristics for the minimum set cover problem. J. Supercomput. 5(4), 331–345 (1992)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Fowler, R.J., Little, J.J.: Automatic extraction of irregular network digital terrain models. In: SIGGRAPH 1979, pp. 199–207. ACM, New York (1979)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cormen, T.H., Leiserson, C.E., Rivest, R.L., Stein, C.: Introduction to Algorithms, 2nd edn. McGraw-Hill Science/Engineering/Math (2001)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Chen, G.H., Yu, M.S., Liu, L.T.: Two algorithms for constructing a binary tree from its traversals. Inf. Process. Lett. 28(6), 297–299 (1988)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Tsai, F., Lin, H.C.: Polygon-based texture mapping for cyber city 3D building models. Int. J. Geogr. Inf. Sci. 21(9), 965–981 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Guillou, E., Meneveaux, D., Maisel, E., Bouatouch, K.: Using vanishing points for camera calibration and coarse 3D reconstruction from a single image. The Visual Computer 16(7), 396–410 (2000)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Huang, C.F., Tseng, Y.C.: The coverage problem in a wireless sensor network. In: WSNA 2003 (2003)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Meguerdichian, S., Koushanfar, F., Potkonjak, M., Srivastava, M.B.: Coverage problems in wireless ad-hoc sensor networks. In: INFOCOM, pp. 1380–1387 (2001)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Wu, C.H., Lee, K.C., Chung, Y.C.: A delaunay triangulation based method for wireless sensor network deployment. Comput. Commun. 30(14-15), 2744–2752 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Dhillon, S.S., Chakrabarty, K.: Sensor placement for effective coverage and surveillance in distributed sensor networks 3, 1609–1614 (2003)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Guestrin, C., Krause, A., Singh, A.P.: Near-optimal sensor placements in gaussian processes. In: ICML 2005 (2005)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Lee, D.T., Lin, A.K.: Computational complexity of art gallery problems. IEEE Trans. Inf. Theor. 32(2), 276–282 (1986)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hörster, E., Lienhart, R.: On the optimal placement of multiple visual sensors. In: VSSN 2006 (2006)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Houtan Shirani-Mehr
    • 1
  • Farnoush Banaei-Kashani
    • 1
  • Cyrus Shahabi
    • 1
  1. 1.University of Southern CaliforniaLos AngelesUSA

Personalised recommendations