|
PVDECONV: POINT-VOXEL DECONVOLUTION FOR AUTOENCODING CAD |
|
CONSTRUCTION IN 3D |
|
Kseniya Cherenkova?yDjamila Aouada?Gleb Gusevy |
|
?SnT, University of LuxembourgyArtec3D |
|
ABSTRACT |
|
We propose a Point-V oxel DeConvolution ( PVDeConv ) mod- |
|
ule for 3D data autoencoder. To demonstrate its efficiency we |
|
learn to synthesize high-resolution point clouds of 10k points |
|
that densely describe the underlying geometry of Computer |
|
Aided Design (CAD) models. Scanning artifacts, such as pro- |
|
trusions, missing parts, smoothed edges and holes, inevitably |
|
appear in real 3D scans of fabricated CAD objects. Learning |
|
the original CAD model construction from a 3D scan requires |
|
a ground truth to be available together with the corresponding |
|
3D scan of an object. To solve the gap, we introduce a new |
|
dedicated dataset, the CC3D, containing 50k+ pairs of CAD |
|
models and their corresponding 3D meshes. This dataset is |
|
used to learn a convolutional autoencoder for point clouds |
|
sampled from the pairs of 3D scans - CAD models. The chal- |
|
lenges of this new dataset are demonstrated in comparison |
|
with other generative point cloud sampling models trained on |
|
ShapeNet. The CC3D autoencoder is efficient with respect to |
|
memory consumption and training time as compared to state- |
|
of-the-art models for 3D data generation. |
|
Index Terms —CC3D, point cloud autoencoder, CAD |
|
models generation, Scan2CAD. |
|
1. INTRODUCTION |
|
Recently, deep learning (DL) for 3D data analysis has seen |
|
a boost in successful and competitive solutions for segmen- |
|
tation, detection and classification [1], and real-life applica- |
|
tions, such as self-driving, robotics, medicine, and augmented |
|
reality. In industrial manufacturing, 3D scanning of fabricated |
|
parts is an essential step of product quality control, when the |
|
3D scans of real objects are compared to the original Com- |
|
puter Aided Design (CAD) models. While most consumer |
|
solutions for 3D scanning are good enough for capturing |
|
the general shape of an object, artifacts can be introduced |
|
in the parts of the object that are physically inaccessible for |
|
3D scanning, resulting in the loss of sharp features and fine |
|
details. |
|
This paper focuses on recovering scanning artifacts in an |
|
autoencoding data-driven manner. In addition to presenting a |
|
new point cloud autoencoder, we introduce a new 3D dataset, |
|
referred to as CC3D , which stands for CAD Construction |
|
Fig. 1 . Examples of CC3D data: From left to right, CAD |
|
models, corresponding 3D scans, 10k input point clouds and |
|
results of the proposed autoencoder. |
|
in 3D . We further provide an analysis focused on real 3D |
|
scanned data, keeping in mind real-world constraints, i.e., |
|
variability, complexity, artifacts, memory and speed require- |
|
ments. The first two columns in Fig. 1 give some examples |
|
from CC3D data; the CAD model and its 3D scanned version |
|
in triangular mesh format. While the most recent existing |
|
solutions [2, 3, 4, 5] on 3D data autoencoders mostly focus |
|
on low-resolution data configuration (approximately 2500 |
|
points), we see it more beneficial for real data to experiment |
|
in higher-dimension. It is what brings the important 3D object |
|
details into the big data learning perspective. |
|
Several publicly available datasets related to CAD mod- |
|
elling, such as ModelNet [6], ShapeNet [7], and ABC [8], |
|
have been released in the last years. The summary of the fea- |
|
tures they offer can be found in Table 1. These datasets have |
|
boosted the research on deep learning on 3D point clouds |
|
mainly. |
|
Similarly, our CC3D dataset should support research ef- |
|
forts in addressing real-world challenges. Indeed, this dataset |
|
provides various 3D scanned objects, with their ground-truth |
|
CAD models. The models collected in CC3D dataset are |
|
not restricted to any object’s category and/or complexity. 3D |
|
scans offer challenging cases of missing data, smoothed ge-arXiv:2101.04493v1 [cs.CV] 12 Jan 2021ometry and fusion artefacts in the form of varying protrusions |
|
and swept holes. Moreover, the resolution of 3D scans is typ- |
|
ically high with more than 100k faces in the mesh. |
|
In summary, the contributions of this paper include: (1) |
|
A 3D dataset, CC3D, a collection of 50k+ aligned pairs of |
|
meshes, a CAD model and its virtually 3D scanned coun- |
|
terpart with corresponding scanning artifacts; (2) A CC3D |
|
autoencoder architecture on 10k point clouds learned from |
|
CC3D data; (3) A Point-V oxel DeConvolution ( PVDeConv ) |
|
block for the decoder part of our model, combining point fea- |
|
tures on coarse and fine levels of the data. |
|
The remainder of the paper is organized as follows: Sec- |
|
tion 2 reviews relevant state-of-the-art works in 3D data au- |
|
toencoding. In Section 3 we give a brief overview of the |
|
core components our work is built upon. Section 4 describes |
|
the main contributions of this paper in more details. In Sec- |
|
tion 5 the results and comparison with related methods are |
|
presented. Section 6 gives the conclusions. |
|
2. RELATED WORK |
|
The choice of DL architecture and 3D data representation is |
|
usually defined by existing practices and available datasets |
|
for learning [9]. V oxel-based representations have pioneered |
|
3D data analysis, applying 3D Convolution Neural Network |
|
(CNN) directly on a regular voxel grid [10]. Despite the im- |
|
proved models in terms of memory consumption, e.g., [11], |
|
their inability to resolve fine object details remains the main |
|
limiting factor in practical use. |
|
Other works introduce convolutions directly on graph |
|
structures, e.g., [12]. They attempt to generalize DL models |
|
to non-Euclidean domains such as graphs and manifolds [13], |
|
and offer the analogs of pooling/unpooling operations as |
|
well [14]. However, they are not applicable for learning on |
|
real unconstrained data as they require either meshes to be |
|
registered to a common template, or inefficiently deal with |
|
meshes of up to several thousand faces, or are specific to |
|
segmentation or classification tasks only. |
|
Recent advances in developing efficient architectures for |
|
3D data analysis are mainly related to point cloud based meth- |
|
ods [15, 16]. Decoders [17, 2, 18, 3, 19] have made point |
|
clouds a highly promising representation for 3D object gen- |
|
eration and completion using neural networks. Successful |
|
works in generative adversarial network (GAN) (e.g.,[20]), |
|
show the applicability of different GAN models operating on |
|
the raw point clouds. |
|
In this paper, we comply with the common autoencoder |
|
approach, i.e., we use a point cloud encoder to embed the |
|
point cloud input, and design a decoder to generate a complete |
|
point cloud from the embedding of the encoder.3. BACKGROUND AND MOTIVATION |
|
We herein present the fundamental building blocks that com- |
|
prise the core of this paper, namely, the point cloud, metric on |
|
it, and the DL backbone. All together, these elements make |
|
the CC3D autoencoder perform efficiently on high-resolution |
|
3D data. |
|
A point cloud Scan be represented as S=f(pk; fk)g, |
|
where each pkis the 3D coordinates of the kthinput point, |
|
andfkis the feature corresponding to it, and the size of fk |
|
defines the dimensionality of the points feature space. Note |
|
that while it is straightforward to include auxiliary informa- |
|
tion (such as points’ normals) to our architecture, in this paper |
|
we exclusively employ the xyzcoordinates of pkas the input |
|
data. |
|
We base on Point-V oxel Convolution (PVConv), a mem- |
|
ory efficient architecture for learning on 3D point cloud pre- |
|
sented in [21]. To the best of our knowledge, it is the first de- |
|
velopment of autoencoder based on PVCNN as the encoder. |
|
Briefly, PVConv combines the fine-grained feature transfor- |
|
mation on points with the coarse-grained neighboring feature |
|
aggregation in the voxel space of point cloud. Three basic op- |
|
erations are performed in the coarse branch, namely, voxeliza- |
|
tion, followed by voxel-based 3D convolution, and the devox- |
|
elization. The point-based branch aggregates the features for |
|
each individual with multilayer perceptron (MLP), providing |
|
high resolution details. The features from both branches are |
|
aggregated into a hidden feature representation. |
|
The formulation of convolution in both voxel-based and |
|
point-based cases is the following: |
|
yk=X |
|
xi2N(xk)K(xk; xi)F(xi); (1) |
|
where for each center xk, and its neighborhood N(xk), the |
|
neighboring features F(xi)are convolved with the kernel |
|
K(xk; xi). The choice of PVCNN is due to its efficiency |
|
in training on high-resolution 3D data. Indeed, it makes it |
|
a good candidate for working with real-life data. As it is |
|
stated in [21], PVConv combines advantages of point-based |
|
methods, reducing memory consumption, and voxel-based, |
|
improving the data locality and regularity. |
|
For the loss function, Chamfer distance [22] is used to |
|
measure the quality of the autoencoder. It is a differentiable |
|
metric, invariant to permutation of points in both ground-truth |
|
and target point clouds, SGandS, respectively. It is defined |
|
as follows: |
|
dCD(S; SG) =X |
|
x2Smin |
|
y2SGkx yk2+X |
|
y2SGmin |
|
x2Skx yk2: |
|
(2) |
|
As it follows from its definition, no correspondence or equal |
|
number of points in SandSGis required for the computation |
|
ofdCD, making it possible to work within different resolu- |
|
tions for the encoder and decoder.4. PROPOSED AUTOENCODING OF 3D SCANS TO |
|
CAD MODELS |
|
This paper studies the problem of 3D point cloud autoencod- |
|
ing in a deep learning setup, and in particular, the choice |
|
of the architecture of a 3D point cloud decoder for efficient |
|
reconstruction of point clouds sampled from corresponding |
|
pairs of 3D scans and CAD models. |
|
4.1. CC3D dataset |
|
The CC3D dataset of 3D CAD models was collected from a |
|
free online service for sharing CAD designs [23]. In total, |
|
the collected dataset contains 50k+ models in STEP format, |
|
unrestricted to any category, with varying complexity from |
|
simple to highly detailed designs (see examples in Fig. 1). |
|
These CAD models are converted to meshes, and each mesh |
|
was virtually scanned using proprietary 3D scanning pipeline |
|
developed by Artec3D [24]. The typical size of the result- |
|
ing scans is in the order of 100K points and faces, while the |
|
meshes converted from CAD models are usually more than |
|
an order of magnitude lighter. |
|
In order to illustrate the uniqueness of our dataset, Ta- |
|
ble 1 summarizes the available CAD-like datasets and se- |
|
mantic information they provide. Unlike ShapeNet [7] and |
|
ModelNet [6], the CC3D dataset is a collection of 3D ob- |
|
jects unrestricted to any category, with the complexity vary- |
|
ing from very basic to highly detailed models. One of the |
|
most recent datasets, the ABC dataset [8] would have been a |
|
valuable collection due to its size for our task if it had con- |
|
tained 3D scanned models alongside with ground-truth CAD |
|
objects. The availability of CAD-3D scan pairings, the high- |
|
resolution of meshes and variability of the models make the |
|
CC3D dataset stand out among other alternatives. The CC3D |
|
dataset will be shared with the research community. |
|
4.2. CC3D Autoencoder |
|
Our decoder is a modified version of PVCNN, where we |
|
cut the final classification/segmentation layer. The proposed |
|
Dataset #Models |
|
CAD |
|
Curves |
|
Patches |
|
Semantics |
|
Categories |
|
3D scan |
|
CC3D (ours) 50k+ 3 7 7 7 7 3 |
|
ABC [8] 1M+ 3 3 3 7 7 7 |
|
ShapeNet [7] 3M+ 7 7 7 3 3 7 |
|
ShapeNetCore [7] 51k+ 7 7 7 3 3 7 |
|
ShapeNetSem [7] 12k 7 7 7 3 3 7 |
|
ModelNet [6] 151k+ 7 7 7 3 3 7 |
|
Table 1 . Summary of datasets with CAD-like data. Note that |
|
only ABC and CC3D offer CAD models in b-rep (boundary |
|
representation) format in addition to triangular meshes. |
|
Fig. 2 . Overview of CC3D autoencoder architecture and |
|
PVDeConv module. The features from coarse voxel-based |
|
and fine point-based branches are fused to be unwrapped to |
|
the output point cloud. |
|
PVDeConv structure is depicted in Fig. 2. The fine point- |
|
based branch is implemented as shared transposed MLP, al- |
|
lowing to maintain the same number of points throughout the |
|
autoencoder, while the coarse branch allows the features to be |
|
aggregated at different voxel grid resolutions, thus modelling |
|
the neighborhood information at different scales. |
|
The PVDeConv block consists of 3D volumetric deconvo- |
|
lutions to aggregate the features, dropout, the batch normal- |
|
ization and the nonlinear activation function after each 3D |
|
deconvolution. Features from both branches are fused at the |
|
final level and MLP to produce the output points. |
|
The transposed 3D convolution operator, used in PVDe- |
|
Conv, multiplies each input value element-wise by a learnable |
|
kernel, and sums over the outputs from all input feature chan- |
|
nels. This operation can be seen as the gradient of 3D convo- |
|
lution, although it is not an actual deconvolution operation. |
|
5. EXPERIMENTS |
|
We evaluate the proposed autoencoder by training first on our |
|
CC3D dataset, and then on the ShapeNetCore [7] dataset. |
|
5.1. Training on CC3D |
|
Dataset. CC3D dataset is randomly split into three non- |
|
intersecting folds: 80% for training, 10% for testing and 10% |
|
for validation. Ground-truth point clouds are generated by |
|
uniformly sampling N= 10 k points on the CAD models sur- |
|
faces, while the input point clouds are sampled in the same |
|
manner from corresponding 3D scans of the models. The data |
|
is normalized to (0, 1). |
|
Implementation Details. The encoder follows the struc- |
|
ture in [21], the coarse blocks are ((64, 1, 32), (64, 2, 16), |
|
(128, 1, 16), 1024), where triplets describe voxel-based con- |
|
volutional PVConv block in terms of number of channels, |
|
number of blocks, and voxel resolution. The last number de- |
|
scribes the resulting embedding size for the coarse part, and |
|
being combined with shared MLP cloud blocks = (256, 128), |
|
gives the feature embedding size of 1472. The decoder coarse |
|
blocks are ((128, 1, 16), (64, 2, 16), (64, 1, 32), 128), whereFig. 3 . Results of our autoencoder on CC3D data with 10k |
|
points for input and output. The left of each pair of results |
|
is the input point cloud of 10k, the right is the autoencoder |
|
reconstruction of 10k points. |
|
the triplets are PVDeConv concatenated with decoder point- |
|
based fine blocks of size (256, 128). |
|
Training setup. The autoencoder is trained with Chamfer |
|
loss for 50 epochs on two Quadro P6000 with batch size 80 in |
|
data parallel mode. The overall training takes approximately |
|
15 hours. The best model is chosen based on the validation |
|
set. |
|
Evaluation. The qualitative results of our autoencoder on |
|
the CC3D data are presented in Fig. 3. We notice that the fine |
|
details are captured in these challenging cases. |
|
Method Chamfer distance, 10 3 |
|
AtlasNet [2] 1.769 |
|
FoldingNet [17] 1.648 |
|
PCN [19] 1.472 |
|
TopNet [3] 0.972 |
|
Ours 0.804 |
|
Table 2 . CC3D autoencoder results on ShapeNetCore |
|
dataset: comparison against previous works ( N= 2:5k). |
|
5.2. Training on ShapeNetCore |
|
To demonstrate the competitive performance of our CC3D |
|
autoencoder, we train it on the ShapeNetCore dataset follow- |
|
ing the train/test/val split of [3], with the number of sampled |
|
point N= 2500 for a fair comparison. Since we do not have |
|
scanned models for the ShapeNet data, we add a 3% Gaussian |
|
noise to each point’s location. The rest of the training setup |
|
is replicated from the CC3D configuration. The final met- |
|
ric is the mean Chamfer distance averaged per model across |
|
all classes. The numbers for other methods are reported |
|
from [3]. The results of the evaluation of our method against |
|
state-of-the-art methods are shown in Table 2. We note that |
|
Fig. 4 . Chamfer distance distribution for our autoencoder. On |
|
test set of CC3D for point clouds of size N= 10 k, mean |
|
Chamfer distance is 1:2610 3with standard deviation of |
|
0:79410 3. ShapeNetCore test set with N= 2:5k, it is |
|
0:80410 3with standard deviation 0:76610 3. |
|
Fig. 5 . Results of our autoencoder on ShapeNetCore data. |
|
The top row is the input 2.5k point clouds, the bottom is the |
|
reconstruction of our autoencoder. |
|
our result surpasses the previous works by a significant mar- |
|
gin. Qualitative examples on ShapeNetCore data are given in |
|
Fig. 5. The distribution of distances given in Fig. 4 implies |
|
that CC3D dataset presents advanced challenges for our au- |
|
toencoder, where it performs at 1:2610 3average Chamfer |
|
distance, while it reaches 0:80410 3on ShapeNetCore. |
|
6. CONCLUSIONS |
|
In this work, we proposed a Point-V oxel Deconvolution |
|
(PVDeConv ) block for a fast and efficient deconvolution |
|
on 3D point clouds. It was used in combination with a new |
|
dataset, CC3D, for autoencoding 3D Scans to their corre- |
|
sponding synthetic CAD models. The CC3D dataset offers |
|
pairs of CAD models and 3D scans, totaling to 50k+ objects. |
|
Our CC3D autoencoder on point clouds is memory and time |
|
efficient. Furthermore, it demonstrates superior results com- |
|
pared to existing methods on ShapeNet data. As future work, |
|
different types of losses will be investigated to improve the |
|
sharpness on edges, such as quadric [5]. Testing the variants |
|
of CC3D autoencoder with different configurations of stacked |
|
PVConv and PVDeConv layers will also be considered. Fi- |
|
nally, we believe that the CC3D dataset itself could assist in |
|
real 3D scanned data analysis with deep learning methods.7. REFERENCES |
|
[1] Yulan Guo, Hanyun Wang, Qingyong Hu, Hao Liu, |
|
Li Liu, and Mohammed Bennamoun, “Deep learning for |
|
3d point clouds: A survey,” ArXiv , vol. abs/1912.12033, |
|
2019. |
|
[2] Thibault Groueix, Matthew Fisher, Vladimir G. Kim, |
|
Bryan C. Russell, and Mathieu Aubry, “Atlasnet: A |
|
papier-m ˆach´e approach to learning 3d surface genera- |
|
tion,” CoRR , vol. abs/1802.05384, 2018. |
|
[3] Lyne P Tchapmi, Vineet Kosaraju, S. Hamid |
|
Rezatofighi, Ian Reid, and Silvio Savarese, “Top- |
|
net: Structural point cloud decoder,” in The IEEE |
|
Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recogni- |
|
tion (CVPR) , 2019. |
|
[4] Isaak Lim, Moritz Ibing, and Leif Kobbelt, “A convolu- |
|
tional decoder for point clouds using adaptive instance |
|
normalization,” CoRR , vol. abs/1906.11478, 2019. |
|
[5] Nitin Agarwal, Sung-Eui Yoon, and M. Gopi, “Learning |
|
embedding of 3d models with quadric loss,” CoRR , vol. |
|
abs/1907.10250, 2019. |
|
[6] Zhirong Wu, S. Song, A. Khosla, Fisher Yu, Linguang |
|
Zhang, Xiaoou Tang, and J. Xiao, “3d shapenets: |
|
A deep representation for volumetric shapes,” in |
|
2015 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern |
|
Recognition (CVPR) , June 2015, pp. 1912–1920. |
|
[7] Angel X. Chang, Thomas Funkhouser, Leonidas |
|
Guibas, Pat Hanrahan, Qixing Huang, Zimo Li, Sil- |
|
vio Savarese, Manolis Savva, Shuran Song, Hao Su, |
|
Jianxiong Xiao, Li Yi, and Fisher Yu, “Shapenet: An |
|
information-rich 3d model repository,” 2015. |
|
[8] Sebastian Koch, Albert Matveev, Zhongshi Jiang, Fran- |
|
cis Williams, Alexey Artemov, Evgeny Burnaev, Marc |
|
Alexa, Denis Zorin, and Daniele Panozzo, “Abc: A |
|
big cad model dataset for geometric deep learning,” in |
|
The IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern |
|
Recognition (CVPR) , June 2019. |
|
[9] Eman Ahmed, Alexandre Saint, Abd El Rahman |
|
Shabayek, Kseniya Cherenkova, Rig Das, Gleb Gusev, |
|
Djamila Aouada, and Bj ¨orn E. Ottersten, “Deep learn- |
|
ing advances on different 3d data representations: A sur- |
|
vey,” ArXiv , vol. abs/1808.01462, 2018. |
|
[10] D. Maturana and S. Scherer, “V oxnet: A 3d convolu- |
|
tional neural network for real-time object recognition,” |
|
in2015 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelli- |
|
gent Robots and Systems (IROS) , Sep. 2015, pp. 922– |
|
928.[11] Gernot Riegler, Ali Osman Ulusoy, and Andreas Geiger, |
|
“Octnet: Learning deep 3d representations at high res- |
|
olutions,” in Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on |
|
Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition , 2017. |
|
[12] Anurag Ranjan, Timo Bolkart, Soubhik Sanyal, and |
|
Michael J. Black, “Generating 3D faces using convo- |
|
lutional mesh autoencoders,” in European Conference |
|
on Computer Vision (ECCV) , 2018, pp. 725–741. |
|
[13] M. M. Bronstein, J. Bruna, Y . LeCun, A. Szlam, and |
|
P. Vandergheynst, “Geometric deep learning: Going be- |
|
yond euclidean data,” IEEE Signal Processing Maga- |
|
zine, vol. 34, no. 4, pp. 18–42, July 2017. |
|
[14] Rana Hanocka, Amir Hertz, Noa Fish, Raja Giryes, |
|
Shachar Fleishman, and Daniel Cohen-Or, “Meshcnn: |
|
A network with an edge,” ACM Transactions on Graph- |
|
ics (TOG) , vol. 38, no. 4, pp. 90, 2019. |
|
[15] Charles Ruizhongtai Qi, Li Yi, Hao Su, and Leonidas J. |
|
Guibas, “Pointnet++: Deep hierarchical feature learn- |
|
ing on point sets in a metric space,” CoRR , vol. |
|
abs/1706.02413, 2017. |
|
[16] Yue Wang, Yongbin Sun, Ziwei Liu, Sanjay E. Sarma, |
|
Michael M. Bronstein, and Justin M. Solomon, “Dy- |
|
namic graph cnn for learning on point clouds,” ACM |
|
Trans. Graph. , vol. 38, no. 5, Oct. 2019. |
|
[17] Yaoqing Yang, Chen Feng, Yiru Shen, and Dong Tian, |
|
“Foldingnet: Interpretable unsupervised learning on 3d |
|
point clouds,” ArXiv , vol. abs/1712.07262, 2017. |
|
[18] Yongheng Zhao, Tolga Birdal, Haowen Deng, and Fed- |
|
erico Tombari, “3d point-capsule networks,” CoRR , vol. |
|
abs/1812.10775, 2018. |
|
[19] Wentao Yuan, Tejas Khot, David Held, Christoph Mertz, |
|
and Martial Hebert, “Pcn: Point completion network,” |
|
in3D Vision (3DV), 2018 International Conference on , |
|
2018. |
|
[20] Chun-Liang Li, Manzil Zaheer, Yang Zhang, Barnab ´as |
|
P´oczos, and Ruslan Salakhutdinov, “Point cloud GAN,” |
|
CoRR , vol. abs/1810.05795, 2018. |
|
[21] Zhijian Liu, Haotian Tang, Yujun Lin, and Song Han, |
|
“Point-voxel cnn for efficient 3d deep learning,” in Ad- |
|
vances in Neural Information Processing Systems , 2019. |
|
[22] Haoqiang Fan, Hao Su, and Leonidas Guibas, ,” in |
|
A Point Set Generation Network for 3D Object Recon- |
|
struction from a Single Image , 07 2017, pp. 2463–2471. |
|
[23] “3dcontentcentral,” https://www. |
|
3dcontentcentral.com , Accessed: 2020-02-02. |
|
[24] “Artec3d,” https://www.artec3d.com/ , Ac- |
|
cessed: 2020-02-020. |