SGP 2005 Review Summary
- The paper is sufficiently well organized and written
- Labeling scheme is novel
- The paper seems to present an innovative contribution on modeling objects through tetrahedral meshes
- Paper should be accepted
- The presentation of the algorithms is good, the use of examples and diagrams very helpful
- The paper appears to be technically sound and relatively well-written
- I think the work is potentially interesting. The algorithm can be
improved in many ways, including its speed and robustness.
- Shape cutting uses an iterative method and is an extension to an exisiting approach
- I like that this method allows multiple time intersection of a single tetrahedron using
recursive subdivision technique
- I applaud the attempt to devise a method to adopt multiple time intersection of a single
- Better motivate the advantages of the proposed technique (wrt. existing literature)
- Experimental results are not convincing
- Some references are missing (3rd reviewer), he proposed three additional ones
- Robustness is ignored in this paper (see paper by Bajaj)
- The authors avoid of showing the results because he assumes that there are artifacts
in the model. Some wired models should be shown
- Comment on the limitations of the algorithms and compare it to other approaches
- Experiments must be expanded
- The bit-wise boundary extraction, point duplication removal with hashing should be
simplified or removed (muahh)
- More performance tests or comparisons with other techniques should be provided
- Not sure about the speed improvements using bit operations. Wondering if a unique ID will give the same performance. Formal performance tests should be done.
- Timing chart for shape cutting is missing. 250ms for shape cutting is applicable for real-time applications ?
Not understood / not correct in my opinion
- 1st reviewer thought that we do surface cutting
- 2nd reviewer thought that we use a surface mesh described as a tetrahedral mesh,
which is wrong
- Concept of wedge is vague (was introduced by Hoppe!)
- The time complexity of the algorithm is too high. It needs to touch
all the elements for any cut, what appears to be wasteful, since it is
fairly easy to do better by adding even minor complexity to the
- Arbitrarily cutting up volumes does not seem very practical for
gaining much information.
- On the other hand, binary-tree representation and bit-wise indexing
efficiently represent the cutting history information. If such
information is more effectively used, the contribution will become
more significant. (???)
- Topology will also be changed by shape cutting --> no !
- Shape cutting should be informally described in the introduction
- Limitation of the assumption that 2 pieces are generated by the cut
- Ganovelli should be explained more detailed and a comparison should be carried out
- What is the domain of the simplicial complex being used ?
- Binary sequencing is also called location code
- Step-by-step description of the bounary extraction algorithm
- VMV Erlangen, DL 15.06.
- Journal Graphical Models or Journal of Graphics Tools