Abstract
Distinguishing differences between areas represented with point cloud data is generally approached by choosing a optimal viewpoint. The most informative view of a scene ultimately enables to have the optimal coverage over distinct points both locally and globally while accounting for the distance to the foci of attention. Measures of surface saliency, related to curvature inconsistency, extenuate differences in shape and are coupled with viewpoint selection approaches. As there is no analytical solution for optimal viewpoint selection, candidate viewpoints are generally discretely sampled and evaluated for information and require (near) exhaustive combinatorial searches. We present a consolidated optimization framework for optimal viewpoint selection with a continuous cost function and analytically derived Jacobian that incorporates view angle, vertex normals and measures of task related surface information relative to viewpoint. We provide a mechanism in the cost function to incorporate sensor attributes such as operating range, field of view and angular resolution. The framework is evaluated as competing favourably with the state-of-the-art approaches to viewpoint selection while significantly reducing the number of viewpoints to be evaluated in the process.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsReferences
Anders, G.J., Mies, W., Sweetser, J.N., Woodfill, J.: Best-known-methods for tuning intel realsense D400 depth cameras for best performance. Intel (2018)
Andersen, M.R., Jensen, T., Lisouski, P., Mortensen, A.K., Hansen, M.K., Gregersen, T., Ahrendt, P.: Kinect depth sensor evaluation for computer vision applications. Tech. Rep. Electron. Comput. Eng. 1(6) (2012)
Botsch, M., Kobbelt, L., Pauly, M., Alliez, P., Lévy, B.: Polygon Mesh Processing. CRC Press, Boca Raton (2010)
Boumal, N., Mishra, B., Absil, P.A., Sepulchre, R.: Manopt, a matlab toolbox for optimization on manifolds. J. Mach. Learn. Res. 15(1), 1455–1459 (2014)
Cate, A.D., Behrmann, M.: Perceiving parts and shapes from concave surfaces. Atten. Percept. Psychophys. 72(1), 153–167 (2010)
Chen, X., Saparov, A., Pang, B., Funkhouser, T.: Schelling points on 3D surface meshes. ACM Trans. Graph. (TOG) 31(4), 29 (2012)
Foissotte, T., Stasse, O., Wieber, P.B., Escande, A., Kheddar, A.: Autonomous 3D object modeling by a humanoid using an optimization-driven next-best-view formulation. Int. J. Hum. Rob. 7(03), 407–428 (2010)
Gal, R., Cohen-Or, D.: Salient geometric features for partial shape matching and similarity. ACM Trans. Graph. (TOG) 25(1), 130–150 (2006)
Gonzalez-Barbosa, J.J., García-Ramírez, T., Salas, J., Hurtado-Ramos, J.B., et al.: Optimal camera placement for total coverage. In: IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation 2009. ICRA 2009, pp. 844–848. IEEE (2009)
Johnson, A.E., Hebert, M.: Using spin images for efficient object recognition in cluttered 3D scenes. IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell. 21(5), 433–449 (1999)
Lee, C.H., Varshney, A., Jacobs, D.W.: Mesh saliency. ACM Trans. Graph. (TOG) 24, 659–666 (2005)
Lee, J., Moghaddam, B., Pfister, H., Machiraju, R.: Finding optimal views for 3D face shape modeling. In: Proceedings of the Sixth IEEE International Conference on Automatic Face and Gesture Recognition 2004, pp. 31–36. IEEE (2004)
Leifman, G., Shtrom, E., Tal, A.: Surface regions of interest for viewpoint selection. IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell. 38(12), 2544–2556 (2016)
May, S., Mies, W., Edwards, J., Williams, F., Wise, J., Morgan, J., Savell, J., Cross, H.: Beef carcass composition of slaughter cattle differing in frame size, muscle score, and external fatness. J. Anim. Sci. 70(8), 2431–2445 (1992)
Newcombe, R.A., Fox, D., Seitz, S.M.: Dynamicfusion: reconstruction and tracking of non-rigid scenes in real-time. In: Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pp. 343–352 (2015)
Norman, J.F., Norman, H.F., Lee, Y.L., Stockton, D., Lappin, J.S.: The visual perception of length along intrinsically curved surfaces. Percept. Psychophys. 66(1), 77–88 (2004)
Ohbuchi, R., Osada, K., Furuya, T., Banno, T.: Salient local visual features for shape-based 3D model retrieval. In: IEEE International Conference on Shape Modeling and Applications 2008, SMI 2008, pp. 93–102. IEEE (2008)
Pece, F., Kautz, J., Weyrich, T.: Three depth-camera technologies compared. In: First BEAMING Workshop, Barcelona, vol. 2011, p. 9 (2011)
Quin, P., Paul, G., Alempijevic, A., Liu, D., Dissanayake, G.: Efficient neighbourhood-based information gain approach for exploration of complex 3D environments. In: 2013 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), pp. 1343–1348. IEEE (2013)
Shilane, P., Funkhouser, T.: Distinctive regions of 3D surfaces. ACM Trans. Graph. (TOG) 26(2), 7 (2007)
Skinner, B., Vidal Calleja, T., Valls Miro, J., De Bruijn, F., Falque, R.: 3D point cloud upsampling for accurate reconstruction of dense 2.5 D thickness maps. In: Australasian Conference on Robotics and Automation (2014)
Vieira, T., Bordignon, A., Peixoto, A., Tavares, G., Lopes, H., Velho, L., Lewiner, T.: Learning good views through intelligent galleries. In: Computer Graphics Forum, vol. 28, pp. 717–726. Wiley Online Library (2009)
Wu, K., Ranasinghe, R., Dissanayake, G.: Active recognition and pose estimation of household objects in clutter. In: 2015 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), pp. 4230–4237. IEEE (2015)
Acknowledgments
This work was possible due to the financial and in-kind support, and efforts of many individuals from NSW Department of Primary Industries, University of Technology Sydney, and Meat and Livestock Australia.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
A Appendix
A Appendix
Lemma:
Let \(\mathbf {t}\), \(\mathbf {p}\) and \(\mathbf {z}\) be three column vectors in \(\mathrm{I\!R}^n\) and \(\mathbf {R}\) is a \(n\times n\) matrix. Then for \(\mathbf {u}(\mathbf {R},\mathbf {t})=\frac{\left\Vert \mathbf {R}\mathbf {z}\,\varvec{\times }\,(\mathbf {p}\,-\,\mathbf {t})\right\Vert }{\mathbf {R}\mathbf {z}\,\bullet \, (\mathbf {p}\,-\,\mathbf {t})}\), we have:
Note: To avoid notational confusion, \(\mathbf {u}\) denotes the value of function \(\mathbf {u}(\mathbf {R},\mathbf {t})\).
Proof
Assume \(\mathbf {a}\) and \(\mathbf {b}\) are two column vectors in \(\mathrm{I\!R}^n\). The auxiliary variable \(\pmb {\kappa }\) is defined as a scalar function of \(\mathbf {a},\mathbf {b}\) which first vector, \(\mathbf {a}\), is a constant,
The differential of \(\pmb {\kappa }\) is:
by substituting:
And also if:
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this paper
Cite this paper
Maleki, B., Alempijevic, A., Vidal-Calleja, T. (2020). Continuous Optimization Framework for Depth Sensor Viewpoint Selection. In: Morales, M., Tapia, L., Sánchez-Ante, G., Hutchinson, S. (eds) Algorithmic Foundations of Robotics XIII. WAFR 2018. Springer Proceedings in Advanced Robotics, vol 14. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-44051-0_21
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-44051-0_21
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-44050-3
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-44051-0
eBook Packages: Intelligent Technologies and RoboticsIntelligent Technologies and Robotics (R0)