skip to main content
10.1145/777792.777820acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagessocgConference Proceedingsconference-collections
Article

Local polyhedra and geometric graphs

Published:08 June 2003Publication History

ABSTRACT

We introduce a new realistic input model for geometric graphs and nonconvex polyhedra. A geometric graph G is local if (1) the longest edge at every vertex v is only a constant factor longer than the distance from v to its Euclidean nearest neighbor and (2) the lengths of the longest and shortest edges differ by at most a polynomial factor. A polyhedron is local if all its faces are simplices and its edges form a local geometric graph. We show that any boolean combination of any two local polyhedra in IRd, each with n vertices, can be computed in O(n log n) time, using a standard hierarchy of axis-aligned bounding boxes. Using results of de Berg, we also show that any local polyhedron in IRd has a binary space partition tree of size O(n logd-1 n). Finally, we describe efficient algorithms for computing Minkowski sums of local polyhedra in two and three dimensions.

References

  1. G. Barequet, B. Chazelle, L. Guibas, J. Mitchell, and A. Tal. BOXTREE: A hierarchical representation for surfaces in 3D. Comput. Graph. Forum 15(3):C387--C396, C484, 1996. Proc. Eurographics'96.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  2. M. de Berg. Linear size binary space partitions for uncluttered scenes. Algorithmica 28:353--366, 2000.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. M. de Berg, M. Katz, M. Overmars, A. F. van der Stappen, and J. Vleugels. Models and motion planning. Proc. 6th Scand. Workshop Algorithm Theory, 83--94, 1998. Lecture Notes Comput. Sci. 1432, Springer-Verlag. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. M. de Berg, M. J. Katz, A. F. van der Stappen, and J. Vleugels. Realistic input models for geometric algorithms. Proc. 13th Annu. ACM Sympos. Comput. Geom., 294--303, 1997. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. T. Brinkhoff, H.-P. Kriegel, and B. Seeger. Efficient processing of spatial joins using R trees. Proc. ACM SIGMOD Conf. on Management of Data, 237--246, 1993. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. B. Chazelle. Convex partitions of polyhedra: a lower bound and worst-case optimal algorithm. SIAM J. Comput. 13:488--507, 1984. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. B. Chazelle, H. Edelsbrunner, L. J. Guibas, and M. Sharir. Algorithms for bichromatic line segment problems and polyhedral terrains. Algorithmica 11:116--132, 1994.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. N. Chin and S. Feiner. Near real-time shadow generation using BSP trees. Comput. Graph. 23:99--106, 1989. Proc. SIGGRAPH '89. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. N. Chin and S. Feiner. Fast object-precision shadow generation for areal light sources using BSP trees. Comput. Graph. 25:21--30, Mar. 1992. Proc. 1992 Sympos. Interactive 3D Graphics. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. K. L. Clarkson and P. W. Shor. Applications of random sampling in computational geometry, II. Discrete Comput. Geom. 4:387--421, 1989.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. J. Erickson. On the relative complexities of some geometric problems. Proc. 7th Canad. Conf. Comput. Geom., 85--90, 1995. http://www.uiuc.edu/~jeffe/pubs/relative.html.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. J. Erickson. New lower bounds for Hopcroft's problem. Discrete Comput. Geom. 16:389--418, 1996.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. J. Erickson. Nice point sets can have nasty Delaunay triangulations. Proc. 17th Annu. ACM Sympos. Comput. Geom., 96--105, 2001. Full version to appear in Discrete Comput. Geom., 2003. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. H. Fuchs, Z. M. Kedem, and B. Naylor. On visible surface generation by a priori tree structures. Comput. Graph. 14:124--133, 1980. Proc. SIGGRAPH '80. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. S. Gottschalk, M. C. Lin, and D. Manocha. OBB-tree: A hierarchical structure for rapid interference detection. Comput. Graph. ??:171--180, 1996. Proc. SIGGRAPH '96. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. L. Guibas, A. Nguyen, D. Russel, and L. Zhang. Collision detection for deforming necklaces. Proc. 18th Annu. ACM Sympos. Comput. Geom., 33--42, 2002. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. A. Guttmann. R-trees:~A dynamic index structure for spatial searching. Proc. ACM SIGMOD Conf. on Management Data, 47--57, 1984. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. H. H. Haverkort, M. de Berg, and J. Gudmundsson. Box-trees for collision checking in industrial applications. Proc. 18th Annu. ACM Sympos. Comput. Geom., 53---62, 2002. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. P. M. Hubbard. Approximating polyhedra with spheres for time-critical collision detection. ACM Trans. Graph. 15(3):179--210, 1996. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. J. Klosowski, M. Held, J. S. B. Mitchell, K. Zikan, and H. Sowizral. Efficient collision detection using bounding volume hierarchies of k-DOPs. IEEE Trans. Visualizat. Comput. Graph. 4(1):21--36, 1998. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. X.-Y. Li and S.-H. Teng. Generating well-shaped Delaunay meshes in 3D. Proc. 12th Annu. ACM SIAM Sympos. Discrete Algorithms, 28--37, 2001. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. I. Lotan, F. Schwarzer, D. Halperin, and J.-C. Latombe. Efficient maintenance and self collision testing for kinematic chains. Proc. 18th Annu. ACM Sympos. Comput. Geom., 43--52, 2002. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. G. L. Miller, D. Talmor, S.-H. Teng, and N. Walkington. A Delaunay based numerical method for three dimensions: generation, formulation, and partition. Proc. 27th Annu. ACM Sympos. Theory Comput., 683--692, 1995. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. B. Mirtich and J. Canny. Impulse-based dynamic simulation. The Algorithmic Foundations of Robotics, 1995. A. K. Peters. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. T. M. Murali and T. A. Funkhouser. Consistent solid and boundary representations from arbitrary polygonal data. Proc. 1997 Sympos. Interactive 3D Graphics, 1997. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. B. Naylor, J. A. Amanatides, and W. Thibault. Merging BSP trees yields polyhedral set operations. Comput. Graph. 24:115--124, Aug. 1990. Proc. SIGGRAPH '90. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. P. van Oosterom. An R-tree based map-overlay algorithm. Proc. EGIS '94, 318--327, 1994.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. M. H. Overmars and A. F. van der Stappen. Range searching and point location among fat objects. J. Algorithms 21:629--656, 1996. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. M. S. Paterson and F. F. Yao. Efficient binary space partitions for hidden-surface removal and solid modeling. Discrete Comput. Geom. 5:485--503, 1990.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  30. M. S. Paterson and F. F. Yao. Optimal binary space partitions for orthogonal objects. J. Algorithms 13:99--113, 1992. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  31. M. Pellegrini. Ray shooting on triangles in 3-space. Algorithmica 9:471--494, 1993.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  32. O. Schwarzkopf and J. Vleugels. Range searching in low-density environments. Inform. Process. Lett. 60:121--127, 1996. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  33. J. R. Shewchuk. Tetrahedral mesh generation by Delaunay refinement. Proc. 14th Annu. ACM Sympos. Comput. Geom., 86--95, 1998. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  34. A. F. van~der Stappen. Motion Planning amidst Fat Obstacles. Ph.D. dissertation, Dept. Comput. Sci., Utrecht Univ., Utrecht, Netherlands, 1994.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  35. S. Suri, P. M. Hubbard, and J. F. Hughes. Collision detection in aspect and scale bounded polyhedra. Proc. 9th ACM-SIAM Sympos. Discrete Algorithms, 127--136, 1998. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  36. E. Schomer and C. Thiel. Efficient collision detection for moving polyhedra. Proc. 11th Annu. ACM Sympos. Comput. Geom., 51--60, 1995. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  37. R. A. Schumacker, R. Brand, M. Gilliland, and W. Sharp. Study for applying computer-generated images to visual simulation. Tech. Rep. AFHRL--TR--69--14, U.S. Air Force Human Resources Laboratory, 1969.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  38. D. Talmor. Well-Spaced Points and Numerical Methods. Ph.D. thesis, School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA, August 1997. http://reports-archive.adm.cs.cmu.edu/anon/1997/abstracts/97-164.html. Technical report CMU-CS-97-164.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  39. S. J. Teller and C. H. Séquin. Visibility preprocessing for interactive walkthroughs Comput. Graph. 25(4): 61--69, 1991. Proc. SIGGRAPH '91. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  40. S.-H. Teng. Points, Spheres, and Separators: A Unified Geometric Approach to Graph Partitioning. Ph.D. thesis, School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA, 1992. Technical report CMU-CS-91-184. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  41. W. C. Thibault and B. F. Naylor. Set operations on polyhedra using binary space partitioning trees. Comput. Graph. 21:153--162, 1987. Proc. SIGGRAPH '87. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  42. J. Vleugels. On Fatness and Fitness --- Realistic Input Models for Geometric Algorithms. Ph.D. thesis, Dept. Comput. Sci., Univ. Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands, 1997.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  43. Y. Zhou and S. Suri. Analysis of a bounding box heuristic for object intersection. Proc. 10th Annu. ACM-SIAM Sympos. Discrete Algorithms, 830--839, 1999. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  44. A. Zomorodian and H. Edelsbrunner. Fast software for box intersection. Proc. 16th Annu. ACM Sympos. Comput. Geom., 129--138, 2000. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Local polyhedra and geometric graphs

            Recommendations

            Comments

            Login options

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

            Sign in
            • Published in

              cover image ACM Conferences
              SCG '03: Proceedings of the nineteenth annual symposium on Computational geometry
              June 2003
              398 pages
              ISBN:1581136633
              DOI:10.1145/777792

              Copyright © 2003 ACM

              Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

              Publisher

              Association for Computing Machinery

              New York, NY, United States

              Publication History

              • Published: 8 June 2003

              Permissions

              Request permissions about this article.

              Request Permissions

              Check for updates

              Qualifiers

              • Article

              Acceptance Rates

              SCG '03 Paper Acceptance Rate42of118submissions,36%Overall Acceptance Rate625of1,685submissions,37%

            PDF Format

            View or Download as a PDF file.

            PDF

            eReader

            View online with eReader.

            eReader