Estimating 3-D rigid body transformations: a comparison of four major algorithms

A common need in machine vision is to compute the 3-D rigid body transformation that aligns two sets of points for which correspondence is known. A comparative analysis is presented here of four popular and efficient algorithms, each of which computes the translational and rotational components of t...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Machine vision and applications 1997-01, Vol.9 (5-6), p.272-290
Hauptverfasser: Eggert, D.W., Lorusso, A., Fisher, R.B.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 290
container_issue 5-6
container_start_page 272
container_title Machine vision and applications
container_volume 9
creator Eggert, D.W.
Lorusso, A.
Fisher, R.B.
description A common need in machine vision is to compute the 3-D rigid body transformation that aligns two sets of points for which correspondence is known. A comparative analysis is presented here of four popular and efficient algorithms, each of which computes the translational and rotational components of the transform in closed form, as the solution to a least squares formulation of the problem. They differ in terms of the transformation representation used and the mathematical derivation of the solution, using respectively singular value decomposition or eigensystem computation based on the standard [R, T] representation, and the eigensystem analysis of matrices derived from unit and dual quaternion forms of the transform. This comparison presents both qualitative and quantitative results of several experiments designed to determine (1) the accuracy and robustness of each algorithm in the presence of different levels of noise, (2) the stability with respect to degenerate data sets, and (3) relative computation time of each approach under different conditions. The results indicate that under `ideal' data conditions (no noise) certain distinctions in accuracy and stability can be seen. But for `typical, real-world' noise levels, there is no difference in the robustness of the final solutions (contrary to certain previously published results). Efficiency, in terms of execution time, is found to be highly dependent on the computer system setup.
doi_str_mv 10.1007/s001380050048
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_27365535</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>27365535</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c266t-986566b7928d6d3eecfe1233c8e0140488d4d64ddd47bccd49c469d6c7660e2b3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpVkL1PwzAUxC0EEqUwsntiCzx_xHbYUGkBqRIMMEeO7RRXSVz80qH_PanKwnQn3U-n946QWwb3DEA_IAATBqAEkOaMzJgUvGBaVedkBtXkDVT8klwhbmFCtJYz8rHEMfZ2jMOGiuKZ5riJnjbJH-iY7YBtysc0DfhILXWp39kcMQ00tbRN-0x7u02Z2m6Tchy_e7wmF63tMNz86Zx8rZafi9di_f7ytnhaF44rNRaVUaVSja648cqLEFwbGBfCmQBMTvcbL72S3nupG-e8rJxUlVdOKwWBN2JO7k69u5x-9gHHuo_oQtfZIaQ91lwLVZainMDiBLqcEHNo612ePs6HmkF93K3-t5v4Bb8GYCI</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>27365535</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Estimating 3-D rigid body transformations: a comparison of four major algorithms</title><source>SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings</source><creator>Eggert, D.W. ; Lorusso, A. ; Fisher, R.B.</creator><creatorcontrib>Eggert, D.W. ; Lorusso, A. ; Fisher, R.B.</creatorcontrib><description>A common need in machine vision is to compute the 3-D rigid body transformation that aligns two sets of points for which correspondence is known. A comparative analysis is presented here of four popular and efficient algorithms, each of which computes the translational and rotational components of the transform in closed form, as the solution to a least squares formulation of the problem. They differ in terms of the transformation representation used and the mathematical derivation of the solution, using respectively singular value decomposition or eigensystem computation based on the standard [R, T] representation, and the eigensystem analysis of matrices derived from unit and dual quaternion forms of the transform. This comparison presents both qualitative and quantitative results of several experiments designed to determine (1) the accuracy and robustness of each algorithm in the presence of different levels of noise, (2) the stability with respect to degenerate data sets, and (3) relative computation time of each approach under different conditions. The results indicate that under `ideal' data conditions (no noise) certain distinctions in accuracy and stability can be seen. But for `typical, real-world' noise levels, there is no difference in the robustness of the final solutions (contrary to certain previously published results). Efficiency, in terms of execution time, is found to be highly dependent on the computer system setup.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0932-8092</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1432-1769</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s001380050048</identifier><language>eng</language><ispartof>Machine vision and applications, 1997-01, Vol.9 (5-6), p.272-290</ispartof><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c266t-986566b7928d6d3eecfe1233c8e0140488d4d64ddd47bccd49c469d6c7660e2b3</citedby></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27923,27924</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Eggert, D.W.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lorusso, A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fisher, R.B.</creatorcontrib><title>Estimating 3-D rigid body transformations: a comparison of four major algorithms</title><title>Machine vision and applications</title><description>A common need in machine vision is to compute the 3-D rigid body transformation that aligns two sets of points for which correspondence is known. A comparative analysis is presented here of four popular and efficient algorithms, each of which computes the translational and rotational components of the transform in closed form, as the solution to a least squares formulation of the problem. They differ in terms of the transformation representation used and the mathematical derivation of the solution, using respectively singular value decomposition or eigensystem computation based on the standard [R, T] representation, and the eigensystem analysis of matrices derived from unit and dual quaternion forms of the transform. This comparison presents both qualitative and quantitative results of several experiments designed to determine (1) the accuracy and robustness of each algorithm in the presence of different levels of noise, (2) the stability with respect to degenerate data sets, and (3) relative computation time of each approach under different conditions. The results indicate that under `ideal' data conditions (no noise) certain distinctions in accuracy and stability can be seen. But for `typical, real-world' noise levels, there is no difference in the robustness of the final solutions (contrary to certain previously published results). Efficiency, in terms of execution time, is found to be highly dependent on the computer system setup.</description><issn>0932-8092</issn><issn>1432-1769</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>1997</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNpVkL1PwzAUxC0EEqUwsntiCzx_xHbYUGkBqRIMMEeO7RRXSVz80qH_PanKwnQn3U-n946QWwb3DEA_IAATBqAEkOaMzJgUvGBaVedkBtXkDVT8klwhbmFCtJYz8rHEMfZ2jMOGiuKZ5riJnjbJH-iY7YBtysc0DfhILXWp39kcMQ00tbRN-0x7u02Z2m6Tchy_e7wmF63tMNz86Zx8rZafi9di_f7ytnhaF44rNRaVUaVSja648cqLEFwbGBfCmQBMTvcbL72S3nupG-e8rJxUlVdOKwWBN2JO7k69u5x-9gHHuo_oQtfZIaQ91lwLVZainMDiBLqcEHNo612ePs6HmkF93K3-t5v4Bb8GYCI</recordid><startdate>19970101</startdate><enddate>19970101</enddate><creator>Eggert, D.W.</creator><creator>Lorusso, A.</creator><creator>Fisher, R.B.</creator><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7SC</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>JQ2</scope><scope>L7M</scope><scope>L~C</scope><scope>L~D</scope></search><sort><creationdate>19970101</creationdate><title>Estimating 3-D rigid body transformations: a comparison of four major algorithms</title><author>Eggert, D.W. ; Lorusso, A. ; Fisher, R.B.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c266t-986566b7928d6d3eecfe1233c8e0140488d4d64ddd47bccd49c469d6c7660e2b3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>1997</creationdate><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Eggert, D.W.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lorusso, A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fisher, R.B.</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Computer and Information Systems Abstracts</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Computer Science Collection</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies Database with Aerospace</collection><collection>Computer and Information Systems Abstracts – Academic</collection><collection>Computer and Information Systems Abstracts Professional</collection><jtitle>Machine vision and applications</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Eggert, D.W.</au><au>Lorusso, A.</au><au>Fisher, R.B.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Estimating 3-D rigid body transformations: a comparison of four major algorithms</atitle><jtitle>Machine vision and applications</jtitle><date>1997-01-01</date><risdate>1997</risdate><volume>9</volume><issue>5-6</issue><spage>272</spage><epage>290</epage><pages>272-290</pages><issn>0932-8092</issn><eissn>1432-1769</eissn><abstract>A common need in machine vision is to compute the 3-D rigid body transformation that aligns two sets of points for which correspondence is known. A comparative analysis is presented here of four popular and efficient algorithms, each of which computes the translational and rotational components of the transform in closed form, as the solution to a least squares formulation of the problem. They differ in terms of the transformation representation used and the mathematical derivation of the solution, using respectively singular value decomposition or eigensystem computation based on the standard [R, T] representation, and the eigensystem analysis of matrices derived from unit and dual quaternion forms of the transform. This comparison presents both qualitative and quantitative results of several experiments designed to determine (1) the accuracy and robustness of each algorithm in the presence of different levels of noise, (2) the stability with respect to degenerate data sets, and (3) relative computation time of each approach under different conditions. The results indicate that under `ideal' data conditions (no noise) certain distinctions in accuracy and stability can be seen. But for `typical, real-world' noise levels, there is no difference in the robustness of the final solutions (contrary to certain previously published results). Efficiency, in terms of execution time, is found to be highly dependent on the computer system setup.</abstract><doi>10.1007/s001380050048</doi><tpages>19</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0932-8092
ispartof Machine vision and applications, 1997-01, Vol.9 (5-6), p.272-290
issn 0932-8092
1432-1769
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_27365535
source SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings
title Estimating 3-D rigid body transformations: a comparison of four major algorithms
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-08T19%3A14%3A38IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Estimating%203-D%20rigid%20body%20transformations:%20a%20comparison%20of%20four%20major%20algorithms&rft.jtitle=Machine%20vision%20and%20applications&rft.au=Eggert,%20D.W.&rft.date=1997-01-01&rft.volume=9&rft.issue=5-6&rft.spage=272&rft.epage=290&rft.pages=272-290&rft.issn=0932-8092&rft.eissn=1432-1769&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s001380050048&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E27365535%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=27365535&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true