skip to main content
10.1145/997817.997846acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagessocgConference Proceedingsconference-collections
Article

An empirical comparison of techniques for updating Delaunay triangulations

Published:08 June 2004Publication History

ABSTRACT

The computation of Delaunay triangulations from static point sets has been extensively studied in computational geometry. When the points move with known trajectories, kinetic data structures can be used to maintain the triangulation. However, there has been little work so far on how to maintain the triangulation when the points move without explicit motion plans, as in the case of a physical simulation. In this paper we examine how to update Delaunay triangulations after small displacements of the defining points, as might be provided by a physics-based integrator. We have implemented a variety of update algorithms, many new, toward this purpose. We ran these algorithms on a corpus of data sets to provide running time comparisons and determined that updating Delaunay can be significantly faster than recomputing.

References

  1. M. Abellanas, F. Hurtado, and P. A. Ramos. Structural tolerance and Delaunay triangulation. Information Processing Let-ters, 71(5-6):221--227, 1999. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. N. Amenta and M. W. Bern. Surface reconstruction by voronoi filtering. In Symp. on Comp. Geom., pages 39--48, 1998. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. N. Amenta, S. Choi, and G. Rote. Incremental constructions con BRIO. In Proc. of the 19th conference on Comp. geometry, pages 211--219, 2003. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. D. Attali, J.-D. Boissonnat, and A. Lieutier. Complexity of the delaunay triangulation of points on surfaces the smooth case. In Proc. of the 19th conference on Comp. geometry, pages 201--210. ACM Press, 2003. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. F. Aurenhammer. Power diagrams: properties, algorithms, and applications. SIAM J. on Computing, 16:78--96, 1987. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. D. Bandyopadhyay and J. Snoeyink. Almost-Delaunay simplices: Nearest neighbor relations for imprecise points. In ACM-SIAM Symp. on Discrete Algorithms, pages 403--412, 2004. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. J. Basch, L. Guibas, and J. Hershberger. Data structures for mobile data. In ACM-SIAM Symp. on Discrete Algorithms, pages 747--756, 1997. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. J. Basch, L. J. Guibas, and J. Hershberger. Data structures for mobile data. In ACM-SIAM symp. on discrete algorithms, pages 747--756. Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics, 1997. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. J. Basch, L. J. Guibas, C. D. Silverstein, and L. Zhang. A practical evaluation of kinetic data structures. In Proc. of the 13th annual symp. on Comp. geometry, pages 388--390, 1997. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. P. Cignoni, C. Montani, and R. Scopigno. A fast divide and conquer Delaunay triangulation algorithm in Ed. Computer Aided Design, 30:333--341, 1998.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. O. Devillers. Improved incremental randomized Delaunay triangulation. In Proc. of the 14th annual symp. on comp. geometry, 1998. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. O. Devillers and S. Pion. Efficient exact geometric predicates for delaunay triangulations. In Proc. 5th Workshop Algorithm Engineering Experiments, pages 37--44, 2003.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. O. Devillers and M. Teillaud. Perturbations and vertex removal in a 3d Delaunay triangulation. In ACM-SIAM symp. on Discrete algorithms, pages 313--319. Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics, 2003. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. H. Edelsbrunner. The union of balls and its dual shape. Discrete Comp. Geom., 13:415--440, 1995.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. H. Edelsbrunner and P. Koehl. The weighted volume derivative of a space-filling diagram. In Proc. of the National Academy of Science, volume 100, pages 2203--2208, 2003.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  16. H. Edelsbrunner and R. Seidel. Voronoi diagrams and arrangements. In Proc. of the 1st annual symp. on comp. geometry, pages 251--262. ACM Press, 1985. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. H. Edelsbrunner and N. R. Shah. Incremental topological flipping works for regular triangulations. In Proc. of the 8th annual symp. on comp. geometry, pages 43--52. ACM Press, 1992. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. J. Erickson. Local polyhedra and geometric graphs. In Proc. of the 19th annual conference on Comp. geometry, pages 171--180. ACM Press, 2003. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. J. Erikson. Dense point sets have sparse Delaunay triangulations. In ACM-SIAM Symp. on Discrete Algorithms, pages 125--134, 2002. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. G. D. Fabritiis and P. V. Coveney. Dynamical geometry for multiscale dissipative particle dynamics. arXiv:cond-mat: 0301378.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. J. Gao, L. Guibas, and A. Nguyen. Deformable spanners and their applications. 2004.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. M. Gavrilova and J. Rokne. Collision detection optimization in a multi-particle system. International Workshop on Comp. Geom. and Applications, 2331:105--114, 2002. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. GNU scientific library. http://www.gnu.org/software/gsl/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. E. Guendelman, R. Bridson, and R. Fedkiw. Nonconvex rigid bodies with stacking. ACM Transactions on Graphics, 22(3):871--878, 2003. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. L. Guibas. Kinetic data structures: A state of the art report. In Proc. 3rd Workshop on Algorithmic Foundations of Robotics, 1998. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. L. Guibas and M. Karavelas. Interval methods for kinetic simulations. In Proc. of the 15th annual symp. on comp. geometry, pages 255--264, 1999. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. L. Guibas, M. Karaveles, and D. Russel. A comp. framework for handling motion. In ALENEX 2004, Lecture notes in Computer science, 2004. to appear.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. L. Guibas, D. Knuth, and M. Sharir. Randomized incremental construction of Delaunay and Voronoi diagrams. Algorithmica, 7:381--413, 1992.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. L. Guibas, A. Nguyen, D. Russel, and L. Zhang. Collision detection for deforming necklaces. In Proc. of the 18th annual symp. on comp. geom, pages 33--42. ACM Press, 2002. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  30. L. J. Guibas and L. Zhang. Euclidean proximity and power diagrams. In Canadian Conference on Comp. Geom., pages 90--91, 1998.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. B. Joe. Three-dimensional triangulations from local transformations. SIAM J. on Scientific and Statistical Computing, 10:718--741, 1989. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  32. J. R. Shewchuk. A condition guaranteeing the existence of higher-dimensional constrained Delaunay triangulations. In Proc. of the 14th annual symp. on Comp. geometry, pages 76--85, 1998. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  33. P. Su and R. L. D. III. A comparison of sequential Delaunay triangulation algorithms. In Proc. of the 11th annual symp. on Comp. Geom., pages 61--70, 1995. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  34. Tinker molecular simulation package. http://dasher.wustl.edu/tinker/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  35. R. C. Whaley, A. Petitet, and J. Dongarra. Automated empirical optimizations of software and the ATLAS project. Parallel Computing, 27(1-2):3--35, 2001.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. An empirical comparison of techniques for updating Delaunay triangulations

        Recommendations

        Reviews

        Patrick J. Ryan

        Efficient techniques for computing the Voronoi diagram and Delaunay triangulation for a finite set of points in Euclidean space E d are well known. This paper is concerned with the problem of computing the Delaunay triangulation D(P') of a perturbed point set P' when the original point set P and its Delaunay triangulation D(P) are given. Of course, an underlying assumption is that the amount by which P' differs from P is small, so that D(P') can be expected to share much of its combinatorial and topological structure with D(P) . As the title indicates, this paper is a report on empirical research comparing various algorithms for solving this problem in E 3. Two basic approaches are compared: kinetic and static. In the kinetic approach, a specific interpolation method is chosen, and the data structure is updated at events, occurring when some pair of adjacent cells no longer satisfies the necessary local criterion for being Delaunay (the "InCircle" condition, though actually "InSphere" would be more appropriate terminology in three dimensions). In the static approach, only the initial and final configurations are considered, and the algorithms use some combination of point removal and flipping on pairs of adjacent cells that do not satisfy InCircle. For each approach, various ways of setting up the algorithms are discussed (for example, how to interpolate, and when to use point removal or flipping). These are rather technical, and are not fully specified in the paper, but relevant references to other sources are given. Readers who are familiar with such techniques will find the results of the authors' extensive tests interesting. The authors discuss which parts of the computations are most costly, and where improvements might be possible. Their results show that, generally speaking, the kinetic approaches are not currently competitive with the static approaches. Online Computing Reviews Service

        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
        • Published in

          cover image ACM Conferences
          SCG '04: Proceedings of the twentieth annual symposium on Computational geometry
          June 2004
          468 pages
          ISBN:1581138857
          DOI:10.1145/997817

          Copyright © 2004 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 2004

          Permissions

          Request permissions about this article.

          Request Permissions

          Check for updates

          Qualifiers

          • Article

          Acceptance Rates

          SCG '04 Paper Acceptance Rate49of147submissions,33%Overall Acceptance Rate625of1,685submissions,37%

        PDF Format

        View or Download as a PDF file.

        PDF

        eReader

        View online with eReader.

        eReader