Please wait a minute...
Frontiers of Computer Science

ISSN 2095-2228

ISSN 2095-2236(Online)

CN 10-1014/TP

Postal Subscription Code 80-970

2018 Impact Factor: 1.129

Front. Comput. Sci.    2018, Vol. 12 Issue (4) : 798-812    https://doi.org/10.1007/s11704-017-6328-x
RESEARCH ARTICLE
A perceptual quality metric for 3D triangle meshes based on spatial pooling
Xiang FENG1,2,3(), Wanggen WAN1,3, Richard Yi Da XU2, Haoyu CHEN1,3, Pengfei LI1,3, J. Alfredo SÁNCHEZ4
1. School of Communication and Information Engineering, Shanghai University, Shanghai 200444, China
2. Faculty of Engineering and Information Technology, University of Technology Sydney, Sydney NSW 2007, Australia
3. Institute of Smart City, Shanghai University, Shanghai 200444, China
4. Department of Computing, Electronics and Mechatronics, Universidad de las Américas Puebla (UDLAP), Cholula 72820, Mexico
 Download: PDF(866 KB)  
 Export: BibTeX | EndNote | Reference Manager | ProCite | RefWorks
Abstract

In computer graphics, various processing operations are applied to 3D triangle meshes and these processes of ten involve distortions, which affect the visual quality of surface geometry. In this context, perceptual quality assessment of 3D triangle meshes has become a crucial issue. In this paper, we propose a new objective quality metric for assessing the visual difference between a reference mesh and a corresponding distorted mesh. Our analysis indicates that the overall quality of a distorted mesh is sensitive to the distortion distribution. The proposed metric is based on a spatial pooling strategy and statistical descriptors of the distortion distribution. We generate a perceptual distortion map for vertices in the reference mesh while taking into account the visual masking effect of the human visual system. The proposed metric extracts statistical descriptors from the distortion map as the feature vector to represent the overall mesh quality. With the feature vector as input, we adopt a support vector regression model to predict the mesh quality score.We validate the performance of our method with three publicly available databases, and the comparison with state-of-the-art metrics demonstrates the superiority of our method. Experimental results show that our proposed method achieves a high correlation between objective assessment and subjective scores.

Keywords mesh visual quality assessment      spatial pooling      statistical descriptors      support vector regression      visual masking     
Corresponding Author(s): Xiang FENG   
Online First Date: 20 December 2017    Issue Date: 14 June 2018
 Cite this article:   
Xiang FENG,Wanggen WAN,Richard Yi Da XU, et al. A perceptual quality metric for 3D triangle meshes based on spatial pooling[J]. Front. Comput. Sci., 2018, 12(4): 798-812.
 URL:  
https://academic.hep.com.cn/fcs/EN/10.1007/s11704-017-6328-x
https://academic.hep.com.cn/fcs/EN/Y2018/V12/I4/798
1 Lavoué G, Gelasca E D, Dupont F, Baskurt A, Ebrahimi T. Perceptually driven 3D distance metrics with application to watermarking. In: Proceedings of SPIE Electronic Imaging. 2006
https://doi.org/10.1117/12.686964
2 Lavoué G. A multiscale metric for 3D mesh visual quality assessment. Computer Graphics Forum, 2011, 30(5): 1427–1437
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8659.2011.02017.x
3 Váša L, Rus J. Dihedral angle mesh error: a fast perception correlated distortion measure for fixed connectivity triangle meshes. Computer Graphics Forum, 2012, 31(5): 1715–1724
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8659.2012.03176.x
4 Wang K, Torkhani F, Montanvert A. A fast roughness-based approach to the assessment of 3D mesh visual quality. Computer & Graphics, 2012, 36(7): 808–818
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cag.2012.06.004
5 Torkhani F, Wang K, Chassery J M. A curvature-tensor-based perceptual quality metric for 3D triangular meshes. Machine Graphics Vision, 2014, 23(1): 59–82
6 Dong L, Fang Y M, Lin W S, Seah H S. Perceptual quality assessment for 3D triangle mesh based on curvature. IEEE Transactions on Multimedia, 2015, 17(12): 2171–2184
https://doi.org/10.1109/TMM.2015.2484221
7 Wang Z, Bovik A C, Sheikh H R. Simoncelli E P. Image quality assessment: from error visibility to structural similarity. IEEE Transactions on Image Processing, 2004, 13(4): 1–14
https://doi.org/10.1109/TIP.2003.819861
8 Zhang L, Zhang D, Mou X Q, Zhang D. FSIM: a feature similarity index for image quality assessment. IEEE Transactions on Image Processing, 2011, 20(8): 2378–2386
https://doi.org/10.1109/TIP.2011.2109730
9 Xue W F, Zhang L, Mou X Q, Bovik A C. Gradient magnitude similarity deviation: a highly efficient perceptual image quality index. IEEE Transactions on Image Processing, 2014, 23(2): 684–695
https://doi.org/10.1109/TIP.2013.2293423
10 Li Q H, Fang Y M, Xu J T. A novel spatial pooling strategy for image quality assessment. Journal of Computer Science and Technology, 2016, 31(2): 225–234
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11390-016-1623-9
11 Lavoué G, Mantiuk R. Quality assessment in computer graphics. In: Deng C W, Ma L, Lin W S, et al, eds. Visual Signal Quality Assessment. Springer International Publishing, 2015, 243–286
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-10368-6_9
12 Gastaldo P, Zunino R, Redi J. Supporting visual quality assessment with machine learning. EURASIP Journal on Image and Video Processing, 2013, 2013(1): 1–15
https://doi.org/10.1186/1687-5281-2013-54
13 Narwaria M, Lin W S. Objective image quality assessment based on support vector regression. IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks, 2010, 21(3): 515–519
https://doi.org/10.1109/TNN.2010.2040192
14 Narwaria M, Lin W S. SVD-based quality metric for image and video using machine learning. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Part B: Cybernetics, 2012, 42(2): 347–364
https://doi.org/10.1109/TSMCB.2011.2163391
15 Hines A, Kendrick P, Barri A, Narwaria M, Redi J A. Robustness and prediction accuracy of machine learning for objective visual quality assessment. In: Proceedings of the 22nd European Signal Processing Conference (EUSIPCO). 2014, 2130–2134
16 Gastaldo P, Redi J A. Machine learning solutions for objective visual quality assessment. In: Proceedings of the 6th International Workshop on Video Processing and Quality Metrics for Consumer Electronics. 2012
17 Xu L, Lin W S, Kuo C C J. Visual Quality Assessment by Machine Learning. Springer Singapore, 2015
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-287-468-9
18 Lavoué G, Cheng I, Basu A. Perceptual quality metrics for 3D meshes: towards an optimal multi-attribute computational model, In: Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics. 2013, 3271–3276
https://doi.org/10.1109/SMC.2013.557
19 Wang Z, Bovik A C. Modern image quality assessment. Synthesis Lectures on Image, Video, and Multimedia Processing, 2006, 2(1): 1–156
https://doi.org/10.2200/S00010ED1V01Y200508IVM003
20 Wang Z, Bovik A C. Reduced- and no-reference image quality assessment. IEEE Signal Processing Magazine, 2011, 28(6): 29–40
https://doi.org/10.1109/MSP.2011.942471
21 Lavoué G, Corsini M. A comparison of perceptually-based metrics for objective evaluation of geometry processing. IEEE Transactions on Multimedia, 2010, 12(7): 636–649
https://doi.org/10.1109/TMM.2010.2060475
22 Corsini M, Larabi M C, Lavoué G, Petrik O, Vasa L, Wang K. Perceptual metrics for static and dynamic triangle meshes. Computer Graphics Forum, 2013, 32(1): 101–125
https://doi.org/10.1111/cgf.12001
23 Rogowitz B E, Rushmeier H E. Are image quality metrics adequate to evaluate the quality of geometric objects?. In: Proceedings of Human Vision and Electronic Imaging. 2001, 340–348
https://doi.org/10.1117/12.429504
24 Karni Z, Gotsman C. Spectral compression of mesh geometry. In: Proceedings of the 27th Annual Conference on Computer Graphics and Interactive Techniques. 2000, 279–286
https://doi.org/10.1145/344779.344924
25 Sorkine O, Daniel C O, Toledo S. High-pass quantization for mesh encoding. In: Proceedings of Symposium on Geometry Processing. 2003, 42–51
26 Corsini M, Gelasca D E, Ebrahimi T, Barni M. Watermarked 3-D mesh quality assessment. IEEE Transactions on Multimedia, 2007, 9(2): 247–256
https://doi.org/10.1109/TMM.2006.886261
27 Bian Z, Hu S M, Martin R R. Evaluation for small visual difference between conforming meshes on strain field. Journal of Computer Science and Technology, 2009, 24(1): 65–75
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11390-009-9198-3
28 Tian D, Alregib G. FQM: a fast quality measure for efficient transmission of textured 3D models. In: Proceedings of the 12th Annual ACM International Conference on Multimedia. 2004, 684–691
https://doi.org/10.1145/1027527.1027684
29 Pan Y, Cheng I, Basu A. Quality metric for approximating subjective evaluation of 3-D objects. IEEE Transactions on Multimedia, 2005, 7(2): 269–279
https://doi.org/10.1109/TMM.2005.843364
30 Chang C C, Lin C J. LIBSVM: a library for support vector machines. ACM Transactions on Intelligent Systems and Technology, 2011, 2(3):27
https://doi.org/10.1145/1961189.1961199
31 Lavoué G. A local roughness measure for 3D meshes and its application to visual masking. ACM Transactions on Applied Perception, 2009, 5(4): 23
https://doi.org/10.1145/1462048.1462052
32 Engeldrum P G. Psychometric Scaling: A Toolkit for Imaging Systems Development. Winchester: Imcotek Press, 2000
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed