skip to main content
article
Free Access

Topological considerations in isosurface generation

Published:01 October 1994Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

A popular technique for rendition of isosurfaces in sampled data is to consider cells with sample points as corners and approximate the isosurface in each cell by one or more polygons whose vertices are obtained by interpolation of the sample data. That is, each polygon vertex is a point on a cell edge, between two adjacent sample points, where the function is estimated to equal the desired threshold value. The two sample points have values on opposite sides of the threshold, and the interpolated point is called an intersection point.

When one cell face has an intersection point in each of its four edges, then the correct connection among intersection points becomes ambiguous. An incorrect connection can lead to erroneous topology in the rendered surface, and possible discontinuities. We show that disambiguation methods, to be at all accurate, need to consider sample values in the neighborhood outside the cell. This paper studies the problems of disambiguation, reports on some solutions, and presents some statistics on the occurrence of such ambiguities.

A natural way to incorporate neighborhood information is through the use of calculated gradients at cell corners. They provide insight into the behavior of a function in well-understood ways. We introduce two gradient consistency heuristics that use calculated gradients at the corners of ambiguous faces, as well as the function values at those corners, to disambiguate at a reasonable computational cost. These methods give the correct topology on several examples that caused problems for other methods we examined.

References

  1. ARTZV, E., FR1EDER, G., AND HERMAN, G. 1980. The theory, design, implementation, and evaluation of a three-dimensional surface generation program. Comput. Graph. 14, 3 (July) 2-9. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. ARTZY, E., FRIEDER, G., AND HERMAN, G. 1981. The theory, design, implementation, and evaluation of a three-dimensional surface detection algorithm. Comput. Graph. Image Process. 15, 1 (Jan.), 1-24.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. BAKER, H.H. 1989. Building surfaces of evolution: The weaving wall. Int. J. Comput. Vis. 3, 1 (May), 51-71.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. BLOOMENTHAL, J. 1988. Polygonization of implicit surfaces. Comput.-Aided Geom. Des. 5, 4 (Nov.), 341-355. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. CusE, H. E., DUMOULIN, C. L., LORENSEN, W. E., HART, JR., H. R., AND LUDKE, S. 1987. 3D reconstruction of the brain from magnetic resonance images. Mag. Res. Imaging 5, 5 (July).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. CHEN, L.-S., HERMAN, G. T., REYNOLDS, A., AND UOUPA, J. K. 1985. Surface shading in a cuberi!le environment. IEEE Comput. Graph. Appl. 5, 12 (Dec.), 33-43.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. CooK, L. T., DWYSR III, S. J., BATSI?ZKY, S., AND LEE, K.R. 1983. A three-dimensional display system for diagnostic imaging applications. IEEE Comput. Graph. Appl. 3, 5 (Aug.), 13-19.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. CLINE, H. E., LORENSEN, W. E., LUDKE, S., CRAWFORD, C. R., AND TEETER, B.C. 1988. Two algorithms for the reconstruction of surfaces from tomograms. Med. Phys. (June).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. CATMULL, E., AND ROM, R. 1974. A class of local interpolating splines. In Computer Aided Geometric Design, R. Barnhill and R. Riesenfeld, Eds. Academic Press, San Francisco, 317-326.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. CHRISTIANSEN, H. N., AND SEDERBERG, T.W. 1978. Conversion of complex contour line definitions into polygonal element mosaics. Comput. Graph. 12, 3 (Aug.) 187-192. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Dot, A., AND KOIDE, A. 1991. An efficient method of triangulating equi-valued surfaces by using tetrahedral cells. In IEICE Trans. Commun. Elec. Inf. Syst. E-74, 1, (Jan.), 214-224.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Dt~RST, M.J. 1988. Letters: Additional reference to "marching cubes." Comput. Graph. 22, 2 (Apr.). Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. FOLEY, J. D., VAN DAM, A., FEINER, S., AND HUGHES, J. 1990. Computer Graphics: Principles and Practice, 2nd ed. Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, Reading, Mass. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Fucks, H., KZOEM, Z. M., AND USZLrON, S. P. 1977. Optimal surface reconstruction from planar contours. Commun. ACM 10 (Oct.), 693-702. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. GALLAGHER, R. S., AND NAGTEGAAL, J. C. 1989. An efficient 3-D visualization technique for finite element models. Comput. Graph. 23, 3, (July) 185-194. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. HOHNE, K, H., AND BERNSTE1N, R. 1986. Shading 3D-images from ct using gray-level gradients. IEEE Trans. Med. Imaging Ml-5, 1 (March), 45-57.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. HERMAN, G. T., AND LIu, H. K. 1979. Three-dimensional display of human organs from computer tomography. Comput. Graph. Image Process. 9, 1.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. HERMAN, G. T., AND UDUPA, J.K. 1983. Display of 3-D digital images: Computational foundations and medical applications. IEEE Comput. Graph. Appl. 3, 5 (Aug.) 39 46.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. KALVIN, A.D. 1991. Segmentation and surface-based modeling of objects in three-dimensional biomedical images. Ph.D. thesis, New York Univ., New York. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. KALRA, D., AND BARR, A.H. 1989. Guaranteed ray intersections with implicit surfaces. Cornput. Graph. 23, 3 (July) 297-306. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. KALVlN, A. D., DEAN, D., HUSLIN, J.-J., AND BRAUM, M. 1992. Visualization in anthropology: Reconstruction of human fossils from multiple pieces. In Proceedings of Visualization 92. IEEE, New York, 404-410. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. KOIDE, A., Dol, A., AND KAJIOKA, K. 1986. Polyhedral approximation approach to molecular orbit graphics. J. Molec. Graph. 4, 149 156. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. LORENSEN, W. E., AND CLINE, H. E. 1987. Marching cubes: A high resolution 3D surface construction algorithm. Comput. Graph. 21, 4 (July) 163-169. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. LEVO~, M. 1988. Display of surfaces from volume data. IEEE Comput. Graph. Appl. 8, 3 (Mar.) 29 37. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. I})sg~:(Tr, S., AND VERBE('K, P.W. 1980. Three-dimensional skeletonization. IEEE Trans. Patt. Matching Mach. lnteU. PAMI-2, I (Jan.) 75-77.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. NATAR~IA~N, B.K. 1991. On generating topologically correct isosurfaces from uniform samples. Tech. Rep. HPL-91-76, Software and Systems Lab., Hewlett-Packard Co. Page Mill Road, Palo Alto, Ca. To appear in Visual Computer.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. NIELSON, G. M., AND HAMANN, B. 1991. The asymptotic decider: Resolving the ambiguity in marcbing cubes. In Proceedings of Visualization '91 (San Diego, Calif., Oct.), IEEE, New York, 83-91. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. RUSINEK, H., N()Z, M. E., MAGU1RE, G. Q., AND KALVtN, A.D. 1991. Quantitative and qualitative comparison of volumetric and surface rendering techniques. IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci. 38, 2 (Oct.), 659-662.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. SRIHARI, S.N. 1981. Representation of three-dimensional digital images. ACM Comput. Surv. 13, 4 (Dec.), 399-424. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. UDUrA, J. K., AND AJJANA(;AOt)E, V. G. 1990. Boundary and object labelling in three-dimensional images. Comput. Via. Graph. Image Process. 51,355-369. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. UDUPA, J.K. 1989. Display of medical objects and their interactive manipulation. In Proceedings of Graphics Interface '89 (London, Ontario, June) 40-43.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. UPSON, C., AND KEELER, M. 1988. The v-buffer: Visible volume rendering. Comput. Graph. 22, 4 (July) 59-64. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. UDUPA, J. K., SRIHARI, H., AND HERMAN, G.T. 1982. Boundary detection in multidimensions. IEEE Trans. Patt. Anal. Mach. Intel. PAMI-4, 1 (Jan.) 41 50.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  34. WRIGttT, T., AND HUMBRECHT, J. 1979. Isosurf-- an algorithm for plotting iso-valued surfaces of a function of three variables. Comput. Graph. I3, 2 (Aug.) 182 189. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  35. WIN(;ET, J. M. 1988. Advanced graphics hardware for finite element results display. In Advanced Topics in Finite Element Analysis. American Society of Mechanical Engineers, New York. Presented at Pressure, Vessels, and Piping Conf.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  36. WYVILI,, G., MCPHEETERS, C., AND WYVILL, B. 1986. Data structures for soft objects. The Visual Computer 2, 4 (Aug.) 227-234.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  37. W1LttELMS, J., AND VAN GELDER, A. 1990. Topological considerations in isosurface generation, extended abstract. Comput. Graph. 24, 5, 79-86. Special Issue on San Diego Workshop on Volume Visualization; also UCSC Tech. Rep. UCSC-CRL-90-14. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  38. WILHELMS, J., AND VAN GELDER, A. 1992. Octrees for faster isosurface generation. ACM. Trans. Graph. 11, 3 (July) 201-227. Extended abstract in ACM Comput. Graph. 24, 5, 57-62; also UCSC Tech. Rep. UCSC-CRL-90-28. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Topological considerations in isosurface generation

              Recommendations

              Reviews

              Nickolas S. Sapidis

              The authors describe techniques for generating topologically correct approximate isosurfaces from sample data where the underlying function is not available for resampling. Section 2 lists desirable features of a general-purpose polygonal isosurface algorithm. Section 3 briefly reviews existing approaches and introduces concepts and definitions related to isosurface generation. It defines topological ambiguities, discusses the problem of disambiguation, and introduces functions useful in testing an algorithm's ability to determine correct topology. Also, section 3 establishes that “it is impossible (in general) to determine correct surface topology in a cell solely by examination of the voxel values at the vertices of that cell.” The last part of section 3 focuses on insuring the continuity of isosurfaces and proves that “if the method of disambiguation for ambiguous faces employs only values in the plane of the face, and is invariant under rotations and reflections, then the isosurface…is continuous.” Section 4 discusses in detail approaches to disambiguation of sampled data, which are categorized as “simple boolean,” “extended boolean,” “simple metric,” or “extended metric.” In section 5, these techniques are applied on realistic data, and performance measurements are reported. Finally, section 6 attempts to evaluate the topological accuracy of the various heuristics by applying them on data from known underlying functions and by evaluating the smoothness of volumes with the aid of Fourier analysis. This paper offers a comprehensive treatment of its subject, including an interesting evaluation of both old and new techniques. This work will be useful to graduate students, researchers, and practitioners, because the text is clearly written and understandable even by nonspecialists.

              Access critical reviews of Computing literature here

              Become a reviewer for Computing Reviews.

              Comments

              Login options

              Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

              Sign in

              Full Access

              PDF Format

              View or Download as a PDF file.

              PDF

              eReader

              View online with eReader.

              eReader