Frequency-domain oversampling for multi-resolution surface reconstruction: towards digital modeling of cultural heritage
Source abstract
Abstract
Surface reconstruction enables the generation of continuous three-dimensional surfaces from discrete point cloud data and is fundamental to digital modeling and scientific visualization. However, existing methods often suffer from surface irregularities and the loss of complex geometric features, particularly in cultural heritage digitization. Here, we propose a multi-resolution surface reconstruction framework based on frequency domain oversampling. The method introduces a novel implicit global fitting formulation with strict gradient constraints to jointly enforce surface smoothness and geometric consistency across scales. By incorporating frequency domain oversampling, we further develop a curvature adaptive octree subdivision strategy that improves spatial sampling accuracy and supports faithful recovery of fine-scale geometric details. Extensive experiments on diverse point cloud datasets and applications to cultural heritage data acquired from computed tomography and laser scanning demonstrate higher reconstruction accuracy while preserving computational efficiency, enabling high-resolution digital models and reliable support for heritage documentation and restoration.
Source: openalex_inverted_index · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: 3D Shape Modeling and Analysis · Computer Graphics and Visualization Techniques · Image Processing and 3D Reconstruction
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (44)
Show source-provided references
1. Bruno, F. et al. From 3d reconstruction to virtual reality: a complete methodology for digital archaeological exhibition. J. Cult. Herit. 11, 42–49 (2010).10.1016/j.culher.2009.02.006 ↗
2. Bossema, F. G. et al. Integrating expert feedback on the spot in a time-efficient explorative ct scanning workflow for cultural heritage objects. J. Cult. Herit. 49, 38–47 (2021).10.1016/j.culher.2021.03.004 ↗
3. Liu, S. & Bin Mamat, M. J. Application of 3d laser scanning technology for mapping and accuracy assessment of the point cloud model for the great achievement palace heritage building. Herit. Sci. 12, 153 (2024).10.1186/s40494-024-01252-y ↗
4. Lorensen, W. E. & Cline, H. E. Marching cubes: a high resolution 3d surface construction algorithm. In Proc. 14th Annual Conference on Computer Graphics and Interactive Techniques, 347–353 (ACM Press, 1998).10.1145/280811.281026 ↗
5. Lim, S. P. & Haron, H. Surface reconstruction techniques: a review. Artif. Intell. Rev. 42, 59–78 (2014).10.1007/s10462-012-9329-z ↗
6. Amenta, N., Bern, M. & Kamvysselis, M. A new voronoi-based surface reconstruction algorithm. In Proc. 25th Annual Conference on Computer Graphics and Interactive Techniques, 415–421 (ACM Press, 1998).10.1145/280814.280947 ↗
7. Amenta, N., Choi, S. & Kolluri, R. K. The power crust, unions of balls, and the medial axis transform. Comput. Geom. 19, 127–153 (2001).10.1016/S0925-7721(01)00017-7 ↗
8. Kolluri, R., Shewchuk, J. R. & O’Brien, J. F. Spectral surface reconstruction from noisy point clouds. In Proc. 2004 Eurographics/ACM SIGGRAPH symposium on Geometry processing 11–21 (ACM Press, 2004).10.1145/1057432.1057434 ↗
9. Kazhdan, M., Bolitho, M. & Hoppe, H. Poisson surface reconstruction. In Proc. Fourth Eurographics Symposium on Geometry Processing, Vol. 7 (Eurographics Association, 2006).
10. Carr, J. C. et al. Reconstruction and representation of 3d objects with radial basis functions. In Proc. 28th Annual Conference on Computer Graphics and Interactive Techniques, 67–76 (ACM Press, 2001).10.1145/383259.383266 ↗
11. Lin, S., Xiao, D., Shi, Z. & Wang, B. Surface reconstruction from point clouds without normals by parametrizing the Gauss formula. ACM Trans. Graph. 42, 1–19 (2022).
12. Kazhdan, M. & Hoppe, H. Screened Poisson surface reconstruction. ACM Trans. Graph. 32, 1–13 (2013).10.1145/2487228.2487237 ↗
13. Kazhdan, M., Chuang, M., Rusinkiewicz, S. & Hoppe, H. Poisson surface reconstruction with envelope constraints. In Computer Graphics Forum, Vol. 39, 173–182 (Wiley Online Library, 2020).10.1111/cgf.14077 ↗
14. Ohtake, Y., Belyaev, A., Alexa, M., Turk, G. & Seidel, H.-P. Multi-level partition of unity implicits. In ACM SIGGRAPH 2005 Courses, 173–es (ACM Press, 2005).10.1145/1198555.1198649 ↗
15. Zhong, D.-Y., Wang, L.-G. & Bi, L. Implicit surface reconstruction based on generalized radial basis functions interpolant with distinct constraints. Appl. Math. Model. 71, 408–420 (2019).10.1016/j.apm.2019.02.026 ↗
16. Drake, K. P., Fuselier, E. J. & Wright, G. B. Implicit surface reconstruction with a curl-free radial basis function partition of unity method. SIAM J. Sci. Comput. 44, A3018–A3040 (2022).10.1137/22M1474485 ↗
17. Fuhrmann, S. & Goesele, M. Floating scale surface reconstruction. ACM Trans. Graph. 33, 1–11 (2014).10.1145/2601097.2601163 ↗
18. Xu, T., Wang, R., Luo, F. & Xiao, C. Multi-scale implicit surface reconstruction for outdoor scenes. In Proc. International Conference on Computational Visual Media, 59–73 (Springer, 2024).10.1007/978-981-97-2095-8_4 ↗
19. Aroudj, S., Seemann, P., Langguth, F., Guthe, S. & Goesele, M. Visibility-consistent thin surface reconstruction using multi-scale kernels. ACM Trans. Graph. 36, 1–13 (2017).10.1145/3130800.3130851 ↗
20. Hoppe, H., DeRose, T., Duchamp, T., McDonald, J. & Stuetzle, W. Surface reconstruction from unorganized points. In Proc. 19th Annual Conference on Computer Graphics and Interactive Techniques, 71–78 (ACM Press, 1992).10.1145/133994.134011 ↗
21. Calakli, F. & Taubin, G. Ssd: smooth signed distance surface reconstruction. Comput Graph. Forum. 30, 1993–2002 (2011).10.1111/j.1467-8659.2011.02058.x ↗
22. Zeng, Y. & Zhu, Y. Implicit surface reconstruction based on a new interpolation/approximation radial basis function. Comput. Aided Geom. Des. 92, 102062 (2022).10.1016/j.cagd.2021.102062 ↗
23. Liu, S. & Wang, C. C. Quasi-interpolation for surface reconstruction from scattered data with radial basis function. Comput. Aided Geom. Des. 29, 435–447 (2012).10.1016/j.cagd.2012.03.011 ↗
24. Amenta, N. & Kil, Y. J. Defining point-set surfaces. ACM Trans. Graph. (TOG) 23, 264–270 (2004).10.1145/1015706.1015713 ↗
25. Dey, T. K. & Sun, J. An adaptive mls surface for reconstruction with guarantees. In Proc. Symposium on Geometry Processing 43-52 (Eurographics Association, 2005).
26. Levin, D. Mesh-independent surface interpolation. In Geometric Modeling for Scientific Visualization, 37–49 (Springer, 2004).10.1007/978-3-662-07443-5_3 ↗
27. Edelsbrunner, H. & Mücke, E. P. Three-dimensional alpha shapes. ACM Trans. Graph. 13, 43–72 (1994).10.1145/174462.156635 ↗
28. Dey, T. K. & Goswami, S. Provable surface reconstruction from noisy samples. In Proc. Twentieth Annual Symposium on Computational Geometry, 330–339 (ACM Press, 2004).10.1145/997817.997867 ↗
29. Giesen, J. & John, M. The flow complex: a data structure for geometric modeling. SODA 3, 285–294 (2003).
30. Lazar, R. et al. Robust optimization for topological surface reconstruction. ACM Trans. Graph. 37, 1–10 (2018).10.1145/3197517.3201348 ↗
31. Hanocka, R., Metzer, G., Giryes, R. & Cohen-Or, D. Point2mesh: a self-prior for deformable meshes. Preprint at https://arxiv.org/abs/2005.11084 (2020).10.1145/3386569.3392415 ↗
32. Ren, S., Hou, J., Chen, X., He, Y. & Wang, W. Geoudf: Surface reconstruction from 3d point clouds via geometry-guided distance representation. In Proc. IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision, 14214–14224 (IEEE, 2023).10.1109/ICCV51070.2023.01307 ↗
33. Li, Q. et al. Neuralgf: unsupervised point normal estimation by learning neural gradient function. Adv. Neural Inf. Process. Syst. 36, 66006–66019 (2023).
34. Zhou, J. et al. Cap-udf: Learning unsigned distance functions progressively from raw point clouds with consistency-aware field optimization. IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell. 46, 7475-7492 (IEEE, 2024).10.1109/TPAMI.2024.3392364 ↗
35. Fainstein, M., Siless, V. & Iarussi, E. Dudf: differentiable unsigned distance fields with hyperbolic scaling. In Proc. IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 4484–4493 (IEEE, 2024).10.1109/CVPR52733.2024.00429 ↗
36. Ma, B., Han, Z., Liu, Y.-S. & Zwicker, M. Neural-pull: Learning signed distance functions from point clouds by learning to pull space onto surfaces. Preprint at https://arxiv.org/abs/2011.13495 (2020).
37. Hou, F. et al. Iterative Poisson surface reconstruction (IPSR) for unoriented points. Preprint at https://arxiv.org/abs/2209.09510 (2022).
38. Sira-Ramírez, H. & Sira-Ramírez, H. Delta-Sigma Modulation (Springer, New York, 2015).10.1007/978-3-319-17257-6_3 ↗
39. Fujimori, I. et al. A 90-dB SNR 2.5-MHz output-rate adc using cascaded multibit delta-sigma modulation at 8/spl times/oversampling ratio. IEEE J. Solid-State Circuits 35, 1820–1828 (2000).10.1109/4.890295 ↗
40. Alexa, M. et al. Point set surfaces. In Proceedings Visualization, 2001. VIS’01., 21–29 (IEEE, 2001).10.1109/VISUAL.2001.964489 ↗
41. Alexa, M. et al. Computing and rendering point set surfaces. IEEE Trans. Vis. Comput. Graph. 9, 3–15 (2003).10.1109/TVCG.2003.1175093 ↗
42. Kazhdan, M., Klein, A., Dalal, K. & Hoppe, H. Unconstrained isosurface extraction on arbitrary octrees. In Proc. Symposium on Geometry Processing, Vol. 7 (Eurographics Association, 2007).
43. Cignoni, P., Rocchini, C. & Scopigno, R. Metro: measuring error on simplified surfaces. in Computer Graphics Forum, Vol. 17, 167–174 (Wiley Online Library, 1998).10.1111/1467-8659.00236 ↗
44. Huttenlocher, D. P., Klanderman, G. A. & Rucklidge, W. J. Comparing images using the Hausdorff distance. IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell. 15, 850–863 (1993).10.1109/34.232073 ↗