2.1 Scientific grounds

Mesh generation is a notoriously difficult task. A quick search on the NSF grant web page with “mesh generation AND finite element” keywords returns more than 30 currently active grants for a total of $8 million. NASA indicates mesh generation as one of the major challenges for 2030  43, and estimates that it costs 80% of time and effort in numerical simulation. This is due to the need for constructing supports that match both the geometry and the physics of the system to be modeled. In our team we pay a particular attention to scientific computing, because we believe it has a world changing impact.

It is very unsatisfactory that meshing, i.e. just “preparing the data” for the simulation, eats up the major part of the time and effort. Our goal is to make the situation evolve, by studying the influence of shapes and discretizations, and inventing new algorithms to automatically generate meshes that can be directly used in scientific computing. This goal is a result of our progressive shift from pure graphics (“Geometry and Lighting”) to real world problems (“Shape Fidelity”).

Meshing is so central in geometric modeling because it provides a way to represent functions on the objects studied (texture coordinates, temperature, pressure, speed, etc.). There are numerous ways to represent functions, but if we suppose that the functions are piecewise smooth, the most versatile way is to discretize the domain of interest. Ways to discretize a domain range from point clouds to hexahedral meshes; let us list a few of them sorted by the amount of structure each representation has to offer (refer to Figure 1).

• At one end of the spectrum there are point clouds: they exhibit no structure at all (white noise point samples) or very little (blue noise point samples). Recent explosive development of acquisition techniques (e.g. scanning or photogrammetry) provides an easy way to build 3D models of real-world objects that range from figurines and cultural heritage objects to geological outcrops and entire city scans. These technologies produce massive, unstructured data (billions of 3D points per scene) that can be directly used for visualization purposes, but this data is not suitable for high-level geometry processing algorithms and numerical simulations that usually expect meshes. Therefore, at the very beginning of the acquisition-modeling-simulation-analysis pipeline, powerful scan-to-mesh algorithms are required.

  During the last decade, many solutions have already been proposed  39, 22, 34, 33, 25, but the problem of building a good mesh from scattered 3D points is far from being solved. Beside the fact that the data is unusually large, the existing algorithms are challenged also by the extreme variation of data quality. Raw point clouds have many defects, they are often corrupted with noise, redundant, incomplete (due to occlusions): they all are uncertain.

• Triangulated surfaces are ubiquitous, they are the most widely used representation for 3D objects. Some applications like 3D printing do not impose heavy requirements on the surface: typically it has to be watertight, but triangles can have an arbitrary shape. Other applications like texturing require very regular meshes, because they suffer from elongated triangles with large angles.

  While being a common solution for many problems, triangle mesh generation is still an active topic of research. The diversity of representations (meshes, NURBS, ...) and file formats often results in a “Babel” problem when one has to exchange data. The only common representation is often the mesh used for visualization, that has in most cases many defects, such as overlaps, gaps or skinny triangles. Re-injecting this solution into the modeling-analysis loop is non-trivial, since again this representation is not well adapted to analysis.

• Tetrahedral meshes are the volumic equivalent of triangle meshes, they are very common in the scientific computing community. Tetrahedral meshing is now a mature technology. It is remarkable that still today all the existing software used in the industry is built on top of a handful of kernels, all written by a small number of individuals 27, 41, 47, 29, 40, 42, 28, 51.

  Meshing requires a long-term, focused, dedicated research effort, that combines deep theoretical studies with advanced software development. We have the ambition to bring this kind of maturity to a different type of mesh (structured, with hexahedra), which is highly desirable for some simulations, and for which, unlike tetrahedra, no satisfying automatic solution exists. In the light of recent contributions, we believe that the domain is ready to overcome the principal difficulties.

• Finally, at the most structured end of the spectrum there are hexahedral meshes composed of deformed cubes (hexahedra). They are preferred for certain physics simulations (deformation mechanics, fluid dynamics ...) because they can significantly improve both speed and accuracy. This is because (1) they contain a smaller number of elements (5-6 tetrahedra for a single hexahedron), (2) the associated tri-linear function basis has cubic terms that can better capture higher order variations, (3) they avoid the locking phenomena encountered with tetrahedra 20, (4) hexahedral meshes exploit inherent tensor product structure and (5) hexahedral meshes are superior in direction dominated physical simulations (boundary layer, shock waves, etc). Being extremely regular, hexahedral meshes are often claimed to be The Holy Grail for many finite element methods  21, outperforming tetrahedral meshes both in terms of computational speed and accuracy.

  Despite 30 years of research efforts and important advances, mainly by the Lawrence Livermore National Labs in the U.S. 46, 45, hexahedral meshing still requires considerable manual intervention in most cases (days, weeks and even months for the most complicated domains). Some automatic methods exist 32, 49, that constrain the boundary into a regular grid, but they are not fully satisfactory either, since the grid is not aligned with the boundary. The advancing front method 19 does not have this problem, but generates irregular elements on the medial axis, where the fronts collide. Thus, there is no fully automatic algorithm that results in satisfactory boundary alignment.

3.1 Point clouds

Currently, transforming the raw point cloud into a triangular mesh is a long pipeline involving disparate geometry processing algorithms:

• Point pre-processing: colorization, filtering to remove unwanted background, first noise reduction along acquisition viewpoint;
• Registration: cloud-to-cloud alignment, filtering of remaining noise, registration refinement;
• Mesh generation: triangular mesh from the complete point cloud, re-meshing, smoothing.

The output of this pipeline is a locally structured model which is used in downstream mesh analysis methods such as feature extraction, segmentation in meaningful parts or building Computer-Aided Design (CAD) models.

It is well known that point cloud data contains measurement errors due to factors related to the external environment and to the measurement system itself  44, 38, 23. These errors propagate through all processing steps: pre-processing, registration and mesh generation. Even worse, the heterogeneous nature of different processing steps makes it extremely difficult to know how these errors propagate through the pipeline. To give an example, for cloud-to-cloud alignment it is necessary to estimate normals. However, the normals are forgotten in the point cloud produced by the registration stage. Later on, when triangulating the cloud, the normals are re-estimated on the modified data, thus introducing uncontrollable errors.

We plan to develop new reconstruction, meshing and re-meshing algorithms, with a specific focus on the accuracy and resistance to all defects present in the input raw data. We think that pervasive treatment of uncertainty is the missing ingredient to achieve this goal. We plan to rethink the pipeline with the position uncertainty maintained during the whole process. Input points can be considered either as error ellipsoids  48 or as probability measures  31. In a nutshell, our idea is to start by computing an error ellipsoid  50, 35 for each point of the raw data, and then to cumulate the errors (approximations) committed at each step of the processing pipeline while building the mesh. In this way, the final users will be able to take the uncertainty knowledge into account and rely on this confidence measure for further analysis and simulations. Quantifying uncertainty for reconstruction algorithms, and propagating them from input data to high-level geometry processing algorithms has never been considered before, possibly due to the very different methodologies of the approaches involved. At the very beginning we will re-implement the entire pipeline, and then attack the weak links through all three reconstruction stages.

3.2 Parameterizations

One of the favorite tools we use in our team are parameterizations, and we have major contributions to the field: we have solved a fundamental problem formulated more than 60 years ago 2. Parameterizations provide a very powerful way to reveal structures on objects. The most omnipresent application of parameterizations is texture mapping: texture maps provide a way to represent in 2D (on the map) information related to a surface. Once the surface is equipped with a map, we can do much more than a mere coloring of the surface: we can approximate geodesics, edit the mesh directly in 2D or transfer information from one mesh to another.

Parameterizations constitute a family of methods that involve optimizing an objective function, subject to a set of constraints (equality, inequality, being integer, etc.). Computing the exact solution to such problems is beyond any hope, therefore approximations are the only resort. This raises a number of problems, such as the minimization of highly nonlinear functions and the definition of direction fields topology, without forgetting the robustness of the software that puts all this into practice.

 

We are particularly interested in a specific instance of parameterization: hexahedral meshing. The idea 6, 4 is to build a transformation $f$ from the domain to a parametric space, where the deformed domain can be meshed by a regular grid. The inverse transformation $f^{-1}$ applied to this grid produces the hexahedral mesh of the domain, aligned with the boundary of the object. The strength of this approach is that the transformation may admit some discontinuities. Let us show an example: we start from a tetrahedral mesh (Figure 2, left) and we want deform it in a way that its boundary is aligned with the integer grid. To allow for a singular edge in the output (the valency 3 edge, Figure 2, right), the input mesh is cut open along the highlighted faces and the central edge is mapped onto an integer grid line (Figure 2, middle). The regular integer grid then induces the hexahedral mesh with the desired topology.

Current global parameterizations allow grids to be positioned inside geometrically simple objects whose internal structure (the singularity graph) can be relatively basic. We wish to be able to handle more configurations by improving three aspects of current methods:

• Local grid orientation is usually prescribed by minimizing the curvature of a 3D steering field. Unfortunately, this heuristic does not always provide singularity curves that can be integrated by the parameterization. We plan to explore how to embed integrability constraints in the generation of the direction fields. To address the problem, we already identified necessary validity criteria, for example, the permutation of axes along elementary cycles that go around a singularity must preserve one of the axes (the one tangent to the singularity). The first step to enforce this (necessary) condition will be to split the frame field generation into two parts: first we will define a locally stable vector field, followed by the definition of the other two axes by a 2.5D directional field (2D advected by the stable vector field).
• The grid combinatorial information is characterized by a set of integer coefficients whose values are currently determined through numerical optimization of a geometric criterion: the shape of the hexahedra must be as close as possible to the steering direction field. Thus, the number of layers of hexahedra between two surfaces is determined solely by the size of the hexahedra that one wishes to generate. In this setting degenerate configurations arise easily, and we want to avoid them. In practice, mixed integer solvers often choose to allocate a negative or zero number of layers of hexahedra between two constrained sheets (boundaries of the object, internal constraints or singularities). We will study how to inject strict positivity constraints into these cases, which is a very complex problem because of the subtle interplay between different degrees of freedom of the system. Our first results for quad-meshing of surfaces give promising leads, notably thanks to motorcycle graphs  24, a notion we wish to extend to volumes.
• Optimization for the geometric criterion makes it possible to control the average size of the hexahedra, but it does not ensure the bijectivity (even locally) of the resulting parameterizations. Considering other criteria, as we did in 2D  30, would probably improve the robustness of the process. Our idea is to keep the geometry criterion to find the global topology, but try other criteria to improve the geometry.

3.3 Hexahedral-dominant meshing

All global parameterization approaches are decomposed into three steps: frame field generation, field integration to get a global parameterization, and final mesh extraction. Getting a full hexahedral mesh from a global parameterization means that it has positive Jacobian everywhere except on the frame field singularity graph. To our knowledge, there is no solution to ensure this property, but some efforts are done to limit the proportion of failure cases. An alternative is to produce hexahedral dominant meshes. Our position is in between those two points of view:

1. We want to produce full hexahedral meshes;
2. We consider as pragmatic to keep hexahedral dominant meshes as a fallback solution.

The global parameterization approach yields impressive results on some geometric objects, which is encouraging, but not yet sufficient for numerical analysis. Note that while we attack the remeshing with our parameterizations toolset, the wish to improve the tool itself (as described above) is orthogonal to the effort we put into making the results usable by the industry. To go further, our idea (as opposed to  36, 26) is that the global parameterization should not handle all the remeshing, but merely act as a guide to fill a large proportion of the domain with a simple structure; it must cooperate with other remeshing bricks, especially if we want to take final application constraints into account.

For each application we will take as an input domains, sets of constraints and, eventually, fields (e.g. the magnetic field in a tokamak). Having established the criteria of mesh quality (per application!) we will incorporate this input into the mesh generation process, and then validate the mesh by a numerical simulation software.

4.1 Geometric Tools for Simulating Physics with a Computer

Numerical simulation is the main targeted application domain for the geometry processing tools that we develop. Our mesh generation tools will be tested and evaluated within the context of our cooperation with Hutchinson, experts in vibration control, fluid management and sealing system technologies. We think that the hex-dominant meshes that we generate have geometrical properties that make them suitable for some finite element analyses, especially for simulations with large deformations.

We also have a tight collaboration with a geophysical modeling specialists via RING consortium. In particular, we produce hexahedral-dominant meshes for geomechanical simulations of gas and oil reservoirs. From a scientific point of view, this use case introduces new types of constraints (alignments with faults and horizons), and allows certain types of nonconformities that we did not consider until now.

Our cooperation with RhinoTerrain pursues the same goal: reconstruction of buildings from point cloud scans allows to perform 3D analysis and studies on insolation, floods and wave propagation, wind and noise simulations necessary for urban planification.

5.1 Awards

• David Lopez has received the best presentation award during GTMG2021
• Our paper 10 has received the 2nd best paper award for SPM2021

6.1 Restricted Power Diagrams on the GPU

 

We continue to improve performance of meshing algorithms. Few years ago we have proposed a GPU version of Voronoi diagrams computation 3, this year we have proposed a method 8 to simultaneously decompose a 3D object into power diagram cells and to integrate given functions in each of the obtained simple regions. We offer a novel, highly parallel algorithm that lends itself to an efficient GPU implementation. It is optimized for algorithms that need to compute many decompositions, for instance, centroidal Voronoi tesselation algorithms and incompressible fluid dynamics simulations.

We propose an efficient solution that directly evaluates the integrals over every cell without computing the power diagram explicitly and without intersecting it with a tetrahedralization of the domain, Fig. 4 provides an illustration. Most computations are performed on the fly, without storing the power diagram. We manipulate a triangulation of the boundary of the domain (instead of tetrahedralizing the domain) to speed up the process. Moreover, the cells are treated independently one from another, making it possible to trivially scale up on a parallel architecture.

Despite recent Voronoi diagram generation methods optimized for the GPU, computing integrals over restricted power diagrams still poses significant challenges; the restriction to a complex simulation domain is difficult and likely to be slow. It is not trivial to determine when a cell of a power diagram is completely computed, and the resulting integrals (e.g. the weighted Laplacian operator matrix) do not fit into fast (shared) GPU memory. We address all these issues and boost the performance of the state-of-the-art algorithms by a factor 2 to 3 for (unrestricted) Voronoi diagrams and a $\times 50$ speed-up with respect to CPU implementations for restricted power diagrams. An essential ingredient to achieve this is our new scheduling strategy that allows us to treat each Voronoi/power diagram cell with optimal settings and to benefit from the fast memory.

6.2 Roof fitting

 

This work is done as part of our contract between our team and RhinoTerrain. Automatic extraction of building roofs from remote sensing data is important for many applications including 3D city modeling, urban planning, disaster management, and simulations. In this project, we propose an automatic workflow for roof reconstruction by polygonal models from airbourne LIDAR data (Figure 5). This year we have published one paper on this subject 9. The main idea is to extend the VSDM algorithm (Voronoï Squared Distance Minimization) developed by the team  37 to the case of fitting parametric template models to point clouds. Using a high quality mesh as geometric template to fit a point cloud is a common practice to generate animation of faces or even full bodies from a depth camera. We are interested here to match the human-made objects whose acceptable deformations are not as rigid as possible, but rather described by a parametric template. The motivation is to be able to retrieve CAD objects or buildings in a point cloud. While it has a very broad applicability range, we are particularly interested in fitting roof templates to airborne LIDAR point clouds. Most previous works detect characteristic features (planes, ridges, contours) to combine them into a roof. We instead formulate it as a global fitting problem, and propose an efficient way to solve it. The originality of our approach is to fit a mesh with geometric constraints (a roof template) to the point cloud by a fast and robust numerical optimization. More precisely, we simultaneously consider the distance from the model to the point cloud, and the distance from the point cloud to the model, with a biweight estimator to integrate outliers rejection directly in our numerical optimization framework. With our formulation, we do not need to alternate between matching and fitting steps. The objective function being smooth everywhere, it can be minimized by quasi-Newtonian methods like the limited-memory Broyden–Fletcher–Goldfarb–Shanno algorithm. The advantage of our method is that the feature matching, roof trimming, point cloud segmentation, and integrity roof constraints are all supported in a unique numerical optimization problem that can be solved very efficiently.

6.3 Frame fields and parameterization

As we have mentioned in § 3.2, all global parameterization approaches contain two main steps:

1. Frame field generation: this step defines the orientation of the grid at each point of the domain.
2. Field integration: this step computes the position and the size of the grid cells aligned with the input orientation field.

We have new results for both of them.

6.4 Auxiliary stabilization systems for legged robots

 

Demands on leg degrees of freedom and control precision for bipedal robotics are steadily increasing, especially for the tasks involving walking on a rough terrain. We present an alternative, as well as a working proof-of-concept. We propose to give robots an additional “support point” without touching the rest of the mechanical system. We have created an electromechanical auxiliary stabilization system able to compensate for external disturbances and control errors with aid of control moment gyroscopes.

This year we have published two papers15, 7 on the subject in flagship venues (Automatica and ICRA2021). Meet gyrubot: a 5-link almost planar bipedal robot with a torso complemented by a nonanthropomorphic stabilization system, capable of blindly walking through uneven areas (refer to Fig. 6). Despite being almost planar, the robot does not need any support in the frontal plane! We provide the experimental evidence of the ability of gyrubot to navigate across non-flat terrains.

Gyrubot is a biped with 2 DoF legs stabilized by two orthogonal scissored-pair control moment gyroscopes. To challenge the stabilization system, the legs' controller is completely ignorant of the inertial measurement unit (IMU) readings. Moreover, the robot is built around low-end ($2.5k) servo drives. Despite that, our prototype successfully walks blindfolded even through (slightly) rough terrains. To conclude the above, gyrubot is a bold little step away from the mainstream developments in legged robotics.

7.1 Bilateral contracts with industry

• Company: CEA

  Duration: 01/10/2019 – 30/09/2022

  Participants: Dmitry Sokolov, Nicolas Ray and François Protais

  Amount: 45k euros

  Abstract: This project revolves around generation of Polycubes guided by orientation fields. The first goal of the project is to define a new Polycube method that deforms an object along a previously generated 3D orientation field. Such a solution would overcome two major defects of Polycube methods, namely : (1) The possible absence of aligned mesh layers along the smooth edges; (2) The poor treatment of sharp edges (which is very common on mechanical parts in CAD).

• Company: RhinoTerrain

  Duration: 01/12/2019 – 30/03/2024

  Participants: Dmitry Sokolov, Nicolas Ray and Justine Basselin

  Amount: 50k euros

  Abstract: In this project, we are interested in the reconstruction phase in the context of LIDAR point clouds of city districts. These data are acquired via an airplane and contain every object present in the city: cars, trees, building roofs, roads and ground features, etc. Applications of these data, ranging from city visualization for tourism to flood and wind simulation, require the reconstruction of buildings as geometrical objects. As LIDAR point cloud are acquired from the sky, buildings are only represented by their roofs. Hence, determining the polygonal surfaces of roofs enables the reconstruction of the whole city by extrusion.

• Company: TotalEnergies

  Duration: 01/10/2020 – 30/03/2024

  Participants: Dmitry Sokolov, Nicolas Ray and David Desobry

  Amount: confidential

  Abstract: The goal of this project is to improve the accuracy of rubber behavior simulations for certain parts produced by TotalEnergies, notably gaskets. To do this, both parties need to develop meshing methods adapted to simulations of large deformation in non-linear mechanics. The Pixel team has a great expertise in hex-dominant meshing, TotalEnergies has a strong background in numerical simulations within an industrial context. This collaborative project aims to take advantage of both expertises.

8.1 International initiatives

Participant: François Protais.

9.1 Promoting scientific activities

9.2 Teaching - Supervision - Juries

9.3 Popularization

10.1 Major publications

• 1 articleJ.Justine Basselin, L.Laurent Alonso, N.Nicolas Ray, D.Dmitry Sokolov, S.Sylvain Lefebvre and B.Bruno Lévy. Restricted Power Diagrams on the GPU.Computer Graphics Forum402June 2021
  HALDOI
• 2 articleV.Vladimir Garanzha, I.Igor Kaporin, L.Liudmila Kudryavtseva, F.François Protais, N.Nicolas Ray and D.Dmitry Sokolov. Foldover-free maps in 50 lines of code.ACM Transactions on GraphicsVolume 40issue 4July 2021, Article No.102, pp 1–16
  HALDOIback to text
• 3 articleN.Nicolas Ray, D.Dmitry Sokolov, S.Sylvain Lefebvre and B.Bruno Lévy. Meshless Voronoi on the GPU.ACM Trans. Graph.376December 2018, 265:1--265:12URL: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/3272127.3275092
  DOIback to text
• 4 articleN.Nicolas Ray, D.Dmitry Sokolov and B.Bruno Lévy. Practical 3D Frame Field Generation.ACM Trans. Graph.356November 2016, 233:1--233:9URL: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/2980179.2982408
  DOIback to text
• 5 articleN.Nicolas Ray and D.Dmitry Sokolov. Robust Polylines Tracing for N-Symmetry Direction Field on Triangulated Surfaces.ACM Trans. Graph.333June 2014, 30:1--30:11URL: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/2602145
  DOI
• 6 articleD.Dmitry Sokolov, N.Nicolas Ray, L.Lionel Untereiner and B.Bruno Lévy. Hexahedral-Dominant Meshing.ACM Transactions on Graphics3552016, 1 - 23
  HALDOIback to text

10.2 Publications of the year

10.3 Other

10.4 Cited publications

• 19 articleT. C.Tristan Carrier Baudouin, J.-F.Jean-François Remacle, E.Emilie Marchandise, F.François Henrotte and C.Christophe Geuzaine. A frontal approach to hex-dominant mesh generation.Adv. Model. and Simul. in Eng. Sciences112014, 8:1--8:30URL: https://doi.org/10.1186/2213-7467-1-8
  DOIback to text
• 20 inproceedingsS. E.Steven E. Benzley, K.Karl Ernest Perry, B. C.Brett Clark Merkley and G.Greg Sjaardema. A Comparison of All-Hexahedral and All-Tetrahedral Finite Element Meshes for Elastic and Elasto-Plastic Analysis.International Meshing Roundtable conf. proc.1995
  back to text
• 21 inproceedingsT.Ted Blacker. Meeting the Challenge for Automated Conformal Hexahedral Meshing.9th International Meshing Roundtable2000, 11--20
  back to text
• 22 miscCloud Compare.http://www.danielgm.net/cc/release/
  back to text
• 23 articleZ.Zhengchun Du, M.Mengrui Zhu, Z.Zhaoyong Wu and J.Jianguo Yang. Measurement uncertainty on the circular features in coordinate measurement system based on the error ellipse and Monte Carlo methods.Measurement Science and Technology27122016, 125016URL: http://stacks.iop.org/0957-0233/27/i=12/a=125016
  back to text
• 24 inproceedingsD.David Eppstein, M. T.Michael T. Goodrich, E.Ethan Kim and R.Rasmus Tamstorf. Motorcycle Graphs: Canonical Quad Mesh Partitioning.Proceedings of the Symposium on Geometry ProcessingSGP '08Aire-la-Ville, Switzerland, SwitzerlandCopenhagen, DenmarkEurographics Association2008, 1477--1486URL: http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1731309.1731334
  back to text
• 25 miscGRAPHITE.http://alice.loria.fr/software/graphite/doc/html/
  back to text
• 26 articleX.Xifeng Gao, W.Wenzel Jakob, M.Marco Tarini and D.Daniele Panozzo. Robust Hex-Dominant Mesh Generation using Field-Guided Polyhedral Agglomeration.ACM Transactions on Graphics (Proceedings of SIGGRAPH)364July 2017
  DOIback to text
• 27 articleP. L.P. L. George, F.F. Hecht and E.E. Saltel. Fully Automatic Mesh Generator for 3D Domains of Any Shape.IMPACT Comput. Sci. Eng.23December 1990, 187--218URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0899-8248(90)90012-Y
  DOIback to text
• 28 articleC.C. Geuzaine and J.-F.J.-F. Remacle. Gmsh: a three-dimensional finite element mesh generator.International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering79112009, 1309-1331
  back to text
• 29 inproceedingsY.Yasushi Ito, A. M.Alan M. Shih and B. K.Bharat K. Soni. Reliable Isotropic Tetrahedral Mesh Generation Based on an Advancing Front Method.International Meshing Roundtable conf. proc.2004
  back to text
• 30 inproceedingsB.Bruno Lévy, S.Sylvain Petitjean, N.Nicolas Ray and J.Jérome Maillot. Least squares conformal maps for automatic texture atlas generation.ACM transactions on graphics (TOG)21ACM2002, 362--371
  back to text
• 31 articleB.B. Lévy and E.E. Schwindt. Notions of Optimal Transport theory and how to implement them on a computer.Computer and Graphics2018
  back to text
• 32 inproceedingsL.Loïc Maréchal. A New Approach to Octree-Based Hexahedral Meshing.International Meshing Roundtable conf. proc.2001
  back to text
• 33 miscMeshMixer.http://www.meshmixer.com/
  back to text
• 34 miscMeshlab.http://www.meshlab.net/
  back to text
• 35 inproceedingsC.C. Mezian, B.Bruno Vallet, B.Bahman Soheilian and N.Nicolas Paparoditis. Uncertainty Propagation for Terrestrial Mobile Laser Scanner.SPRS - International Archives of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences2016
  back to text
• 36 articleM.M. Nieser, U.U. Reitebuch and K.K. Polthier. CubeCover - Parameterization of 3D Volumes.Computer Graphics Forum3052011, 1397-1406URL: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1467-8659.2011.02014.x
  DOIback to text
• 37 articleV.Vincent Nivoliers, D.-M.Dong-Ming Yan and B.Bruno Lévy. Fitting polynomial surfaces to triangular meshes with Voronoi squared distance minimization.Engineering with Computers3032014, 289--300
  back to text
• 38 miscJ.-H.Jae-Han Park, Y.-D.Yong-Deuk Shin, J.-H.Ji-Hun Bae and M.-H.Moon-Hong Baeg. Spatial Uncertainty Model for Visual Features Using a Kinect Sensor.2012
  back to text
• 39 miscPoint Cloud Library.http://www.pointclouds.org/downloads/
  back to text
• 40 articleSchöberl. NETGEN An advancing front 2D/3D-mesh generator based on abstract rules.Computing and visualization in science111997
  back to text
• 41 articleM.Mark Shephard and M.Marcel Georges. Automatic three-dimensional mesh generation by the finite octree technique.International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering3241991
  back to text
• 42 articleH.Hang Si. TetGen, a Delaunay-Based Quality Tetrahedral Mesh Generator.ACM Trans. on Mathematical Software4122015
  back to text
• 43 techreportJ.J. Slotnick, A.A. Khodadoust, J.J. Alonso, D.D. Darmofal, G.G. William, L.L. Elizabeth and D.D. Mavriplis. CFD Vision 2030 Study: A Path to Revolutionary Computational Aerosciences.NASA/CR-2014-218178, NF1676L-183322014
  back to text
• 44 articleS.Sylvie Soudarissanane, R.Roderik Lindenbergh, M.Massimo Menenti and P.Peter Teunissen. Scanning geometry: Influencing factor on the quality of terrestrial laser scanning points.ISPRS Journal of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing6642011, 389 - 399URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0924271611000098
  DOIback to text
• 45 inproceedingsM. L.Matthew L. Staten, S. J.Steven J. Owen and T.Ted Blacker. Unconstrained Paving & Plastering: A New Idea for All Hexahedral Mesh Generation.International Meshing Roundtable conf. proc.2005
  back to text
• 46 articleT. J.Timothy J. Tautges, T.Ted Blacker and S. A.Scott A. Mitchell. The whisker weaving algorithm.International Journal of Numerical Methods in Engineering1996
  back to text
• 47 articleN. P.N. P. Weatherill and O.O. Hassan. Efficient three-dimensional Delaunay triangulation with automatic point creation and imposed boundary constraints.International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering37121994, 2005--2039URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/nme.1620371203
  DOIback to text
• 48 inproceedingsM.Markus Ylimäki, J.Juho Kannala and J.Janne Heikkilä. Robust and Practical Depth Map Fusion for Time-of-Flight Cameras.Image AnalysisChamSpringer International Publishing2017, 122--134
  back to text
• 49 inproceedingsY.Yongjie Zhang and C.Chandrajit Bajaj. Adaptive and Quality Quadrilateral/Hexahedral Meshing from Volumetric Data.International Meshing Roundtable conf. proc.2004
  back to text
• 50 articleD.Du Zhengchun, W.Wu Zhaoyong and Y.Yang Jianguo. Point cloud uncertainty analysis for laser radar measurement system based on error ellipsoid model.Optics and Lasers in Engineering792016, 78 - 84URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0143816615002675
  DOIback to text
• 51 misc, Computational Geometry Algorithms Library.http://www.cgal.org
  back to text