• Laser & Optoelectronics Progress
  • Vol. 56, Issue 8, 081005 (2019)
Jun Yang* and Ming Lei
Author Affiliations
  • School of Electronic and Information Engineering, Lanzhou Jiaotong University, Lanzhou, Gansu 730070, China
  • show less
    DOI: 10.3788/LOP56.081005 Cite this Article Set citation alerts
    Jun Yang, Ming Lei. Correspondence Calculation of Model Cluster by Functional Mapping Combined with Cycle-Consistency Constraints[J]. Laser & Optoelectronics Progress, 2019, 56(8): 081005 Copy Citation Text show less
    FPS sampling results under different numbers of sampling points. (a) Sparse point sampling; (b) dense point sampling
    Fig. 1. FPS sampling results under different numbers of sampling points. (a) Sparse point sampling; (b) dense point sampling
    Sparse sampling results for 10 sampling points. (a) FPS algorithm in Ref. [20]; (b) proposed algorithm
    Fig. 2. Sparse sampling results for 10 sampling points. (a) FPS algorithm in Ref. [20]; (b) proposed algorithm
    Dense sampling results for 1000 sampling points. (a) FPS algorithm in Ref. [20]; (b) proposed algorithm
    Fig. 3. Dense sampling results for 1000 sampling points. (a) FPS algorithm in Ref. [20]; (b) proposed algorithm
    Comparison of function mapping relationships for horse model cluster. (a) Algorithm in Ref. [21]; (b) proposed algorithm
    Fig. 4. Comparison of function mapping relationships for horse model cluster. (a) Algorithm in Ref. [21]; (b) proposed algorithm
    Comparison of function mapping relationships for dog model cluster. (a) Algorithm in Ref. [21]; (b) proposed algorithm
    Fig. 5. Comparison of function mapping relationships for dog model cluster. (a) Algorithm in Ref. [21]; (b) proposed algorithm
    Comparison of function mapping relationships for human model cluster. (a) Algorithm in Ref. [21]; (b) proposed algorithm
    Fig. 6. Comparison of function mapping relationships for human model cluster. (a) Algorithm in Ref. [21]; (b) proposed algorithm
    Comparison of sparse correspondences for cat model cluster. (a) Algorithm in Ref. [20]; (b) proposed algorithm
    Fig. 7. Comparison of sparse correspondences for cat model cluster. (a) Algorithm in Ref. [20]; (b) proposed algorithm
    Comparison of sparse correspondences for dog model cluster. (a) Algorithm in Ref. [20]; (b) proposed algorithm
    Fig. 8. Comparison of sparse correspondences for dog model cluster. (a) Algorithm in Ref. [20]; (b) proposed algorithm
    Comparison of dense correspondences for horse model cluster. (a) Algorithm in Ref. [20]; (b) proposed algorithm
    Fig. 9. Comparison of dense correspondences for horse model cluster. (a) Algorithm in Ref. [20]; (b) proposed algorithm
    Comparison of dense correspondences for human model cluster. (a) Algorithm in Ref.[20]; (b) proposed algorithm
    Fig. 10. Comparison of dense correspondences for human model cluster. (a) Algorithm in Ref.[20]; (b) proposed algorithm
    Comparison of correspondences for incomplete model clusters. (a) Cat model; (b) dog model; (c) horse model
    Fig. 11. Comparison of correspondences for incomplete model clusters. (a) Cat model; (b) dog model; (c) horse model
    Types of three-dimensional modelSparse correspondence (100 vertices)Dense correspondence (1000 vertices)
    Proposed algorithmAlgorithm of Ref. [20]Proposed algorithmAlgorithm of Ref. [20]
    Horse0.0150.0260.0240.426
    Human (FAUST)0.0160.0280.0150.028
    Dog0.0200.0240.0270.306
    Human (TOSCA)0.0110.0150.0400.386
    Cat0.0160.0180.0600.482
    Gorilla0.0130.0160.0150.203
    Human (SCAPE)0.0090.0150.0900.101
    Table 1. Comparison of geodesic errors for correspondence between models
    Type of three-dimensional modelSparse correspondence (100 vertices)Dense correspondence (1000 vertices)
    Proposed algorithmAlgorithmin Ref. [20]Proposed algorithmAlgorithmin Ref. [20]
    Horse36.15637.23243.60346.130
    Human (FAUST)41.54742.47558.98059.128
    Dog24.34124.45347.35948.128
    Human (TOSCA)38.46838.50349.34551.342
    Cat26.68028.89544.39646.987
    Gorilla21.39522.67039.58741.245
    Human (SCAPE)32.65434.92358.43261.361
    Table 2. Comparison of execution time for algorithmss
    Jun Yang, Ming Lei. Correspondence Calculation of Model Cluster by Functional Mapping Combined with Cycle-Consistency Constraints[J]. Laser & Optoelectronics Progress, 2019, 56(8): 081005
    Download Citation