skip to main content
research-article

To cut or to fill: a global optimization approach to topological simplification

Published:27 November 2020Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

We present a novel algorithm for simplifying the topology of a 3D shape, which is characterized by the number of connected components, handles, and cavities. Existing methods either limit their modifications to be only cutting or only filling, or take a heuristic approach to decide where to cut or fill. We consider the problem of finding a globally optimal set of cuts and fills that achieve the simplest topology while minimizing geometric changes. We show that the problem can be formulated as graph labelling, and we solve it by a transformation to the Node-Weighted Steiner Tree problem. When tested on examples with varying levels of topological complexity, the algorithm shows notable improvement over existing simplification methods in both topological simplicity and geometric distortions.

Skip Supplemental Material Section

Supplemental Material

3414685.3417854.mp4

mp4

137.9 MB

References

  1. 2014. 11th DIMACS Implementation Challenge in Collaboration with ICERM: Steiner Tree Problems. http://dimacs11.zib.de/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Dominique Attali, Ulrich Bauer, Olivier Devillers, Marc Glisse, and André Lieutier. 2015. Homological reconstruction and simplification in R3. Computational Geometry 48, 8 (2015), 606--621.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Marco Attene, Marcel Campen, and Leif Kobbelt. 2013. Polygon Mesh Repairing: An Application Perspective. ACM Comput. Surv. 45, 2 (March 2013), 15:1--15:33.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Ulrich Bauer, Michael Kerber, and Jan Reininghaus. 2014. Distributed computation of persistent homology. In 2014 proceedings of the sixteenth workshop on algorithm engineering and experiments (ALENEX). SIAM, 31--38.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. Stephan Bischoff and Leif Kobbelt. 2002. Isosurface Reconstruction with Topology Control.. In Pacific Conference on Computer Graphics and Applications. 246--255.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. Yuri Boykov, Olga Veksler, and Ramin Zabih. 2001. Fast approximate energy minimization via graph cuts. IEEE Transactions on pattern analysis and machine intelligence 23, 11 (2001), 1222--1239.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Erin W Chambers, Tao Ju, David Letscher, Mao Li, and Christopher Topp. 2018. Some Heuristics for the Homological Simplification Problem. In CCCG.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Lin Chen and Gudrun Wagenknecht. 2006. Automated topology correction for human brain segmentation. In International Conference on Medical Image Computing and Computer-Assisted Intervention. Springer, 316--323.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Xiao Han, Chenyang Xu, Ulisses Braga-Neto, and Jerry L. Prince. 2002. Topology Correction in Brain Cortex Segmentation Using a Multi-Scale, Graph-Based Algorithm. IEEE Trans. Med. Imaging 21, 2 (2002), 109--121.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  10. Xiao Han, Chenyang Xu, and Jerry L. Prince. 2003. A topology preserving level set method for geometric deformable models. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence 25, 6 (2003), 755--768.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Allen Hatcher. 2002. Algebraic Topology. Cambridge University Pres.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Zhiyang Huang, Ming Zou, Nathan Carr, and Tao Ju. 2017. Topology-controlled Reconstruction of Multi-labelled Domains from Cross-sections. ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG) 36, 4 (2017), 1--12.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Tao Ju, Qian-Yi Zhou, and Shi-Min Hu. 2007. Editing the Topology of 3D Models by Sketching. ACM Trans. Graph. 26, 3, Article 42 (July 2007). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. N. Kriegeskorte and R. Goebel. 2001. An efficient algorithm for topologically correct segmentation of the cortical sheet in anatomical mr volumes. Neuroimage 14, 2 (August 2001), 329--346.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. Roee Lazar, Nadav Dym, Yam Kushinsky, Zhiyang Huang, Tao Ju, and Yaron Lipman. 2018. Robust optimization for topological surface reconstruction. ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG) 37, 4 (2018), 1--10.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Markus Leitner, Ivana Ljubić, Martin Luipersbeck, and Markus Sinnl. 2018. A dual ascent-based branch-and-bound framework for the prize-collecting steiner tree and related problems. INFORMS Journal on Computing 30, 2 (2018), 402--420.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. Fakir S. Nooruddin and Greg Turk. 2003. Simplification and Repair of Polygonal Models Using Volumetric Techniques. IEEE Trans. Vis. Comput. Graph. 9, 2 (2003), 191--205.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Florent Ségonne. 2008. Active contours under topology control - genus preserving level sets. International Journal of Computer Vision 79, 2 (2008), 107--117.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Florent Ségonne, Jenni Pacheco, and Bruce Fischl. 2007. Geometrically accurate topology-correction of cortical surfaces using nonseparating loops. IEEE transactions on medical imaging 26, 4 (2007), 518--529.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  20. Andrei Sharf, Thomas Lewiner, Ariel Shamir, Leif Kobbelt, and Daniel Cohen-Or. 2006. Competing fronts for coarse-to-fine surface reconstruction. In Eurographics. Vienna, 389--398. http://www.mat.puc-rio.br/~tomlew/competing_fronts_eg.pdfGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Andrei Sharf, Thomas Lewiner, Gil Shklarski, Sivan Toledo, and Daniel Cohen-Or. 2007. Interactive Topology-aware Surface Reconstruction. ACM Trans. Graph. 26, 3 (July 2007).Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. David W. Shattuck and Richard M. Leahy. 2001. Automated Graph Based Analysis and Correction of Cortical Volume Topology. IEEE Trans. Med. Imaging 20, 11 (2001), 1167--1177.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  23. Andrzej Szymczak and James Vanderhyde. 2003. Extraction of topologically simple isosurfaces from volume datasets. In IEEE Visualization. 67--74.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. Zoë J. Wood, Hugues Hoppe, Mathieu Desbrun, and Peter Schröder. 2004. Removing excess topology from isosurfaces. ACM Trans. Graph. 23, 2 (2004), 190--208.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. Kangxue Yin, Hui Huang, Hao Zhang, Minglun Gong, Daniel Cohen-Or, and Baoquan Chen. 2014. Morfit: Interactive Surface Reconstruction from Incomplete Point Clouds with Curve-driven Topology and Geometry Control. ACM Trans. Graph. 33, 6 (Nov. 2014), 202:1--202:12.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. Yun Zeng, Dimitris Samaras, Wei Chen, and Qunsheng Peng. 2008. Topology cuts: A novel min-cut/max-flow algorithm for topology preserving segmentation in N-D images. Computer Vision and Image Understanding 112, 1 (2008), 81--90.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. Qian-Yi Zhou, Tao Ju, and Shi-Min Hu. 2007. Topology Repair of Solid Models Using Skeletons. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 13, 4 (July 2007), 675--685.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. Ming Zou, Michelle Holloway, Nathan Carr, and Tao Ju. 2015. Topology-constrained surface reconstruction from cross-sections. ACM Trans. Graph. 34, 4 (2015), 128.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. To cut or to fill: a global optimization approach to topological simplification

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Login options

      Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

      Sign in

      Full Access

      • Published in

        cover image ACM Transactions on Graphics
        ACM Transactions on Graphics  Volume 39, Issue 6
        December 2020
        1605 pages
        ISSN:0730-0301
        EISSN:1557-7368
        DOI:10.1145/3414685
        Issue’s Table of Contents

        Copyright © 2020 ACM

        Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

        Publisher

        Association for Computing Machinery

        New York, NY, United States

        Publication History

        • Published: 27 November 2020
        Published in tog Volume 39, Issue 6

        Permissions

        Request permissions about this article.

        Request Permissions

        Check for updates

        Qualifiers

        • research-article

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader