[Insight-users] 2nd try: 3D point-set registrations
Radu C. Popa
rcpopa at onlinehome.de
Mon Oct 11 13:56:51 EDT 2004
Luis, thank you for the insight.
Radu
----- Original Message -----
From: "Luis Ibanez" <luis.ibanez at kitware.com>
To: "Radu C. Popa" <rcpopa at onlinehome.de>
Cc: <insight-users at itk.org>
Sent: Monday, October 11, 2004 7:39 PM
Subject: Re: [Insight-users] 2nd try: 3D point-set registrations
Hi Radu,
1) The process for doing PointSet to Model registration
with ITK, requires that you define a Metric returning
a value that measure how well the point set matched
the model. Once you write such metric, you can use all
the other components of the registration framework (e.g.
Transforms, Optimizers...) in order to complete a
registration process.
2) For pointset to pointset registration without defined
correspondences you can use the IterativeClosestPoint
Metric. Note that this metric has been renamed in the
CVS repository as "EuclideanDistancePointMetric", the
name change is due to the fact that there is nothing
iterative in the way this metric is computed.
For examples on the use of this metric, you may want
to look at the files
Insight/Examples/Registration/
IterativeClosestPoint1.cxx
IterativeClosestPoint2.cxx
IterativeClosestPoint3.cxx
If you are using the CVS version, note that these files
have been moved to the Patented directory:
Insight/Examples/Patented
Due to the similarity between these examples, and an
existing patent that covers the definition of the
Iterative Closest Point (ICP) registration method.
3) It is *NOT* correct to conclude that
"3D model-to-mesh-points is not possible"
The correct conclusion is that in order to make
3D model-to-mesh-points registration, you must
implement the Metric of your choice and connect
it to the other components of the registration
framework.
4) Using the sum of squared euclidean distance to
the closest point is a classical Metric for
PointSet to PointSet registration. You could
however implement more formal metrics, Eg. those
considering not only the point distance but also
the coherence between points in one set and points
in the other set.
The simple ICP is usually generating wrong
correspondences during the first iterations.
The implicit assumption of the method is that
despite the wrong correspondences, the intermediate
steps are still moving the point set in the right
direction. You could imaging Metrics more elaborate
than the simple sum of squared distance to closest
points, that will provide better correspondences
between points in both sets.
Regards,
Luis
------------------
Radu C. Popa wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Please help in finding the "final" answers to these questions:
>
> 1. is it possible in ITK to fit-register a 3D **model** (e.g., an
ellipsoid)
> to a "cloud" of **points** (i.e., the nodes of a 3D mesh)?
>
> 2. the same question for a 3D cloud of points to a 3D cloud of points,
when
> the points are not given as pairs as per landmark registration
>
>
> Is it correct to conclude that?:
>
> ->1. the 3D model-to-mesh-points is not possible; instead, only the
> model-to-image (gray levels) solution is readily available
>
> ->2. the solution for mesh-points-to-mesh-points is to use the metric
> IterativeClosestPointMetric
>
> Thank you in advance.
>
> Regards,
>
> Radu
>
> _______________________________________________
> Insight-users mailing list
> Insight-users at itk.org
> http://www.itk.org/mailman/listinfo/insight-users
>
>
More information about the Insight-users
mailing list