Geodesic
Closed surfaces with different shapes that are indistinguishable by the SRNF
Archivum mathematicum, Tome 56 (2020) no. 2, pp. 107-114 Cet article a éte moissonné depuis la source Czech Digital Mathematics Library

Voir la notice de l'article

The Square Root Normal Field (SRNF), introduced by Jermyn et al. in [5], provides a way of representing immersed surfaces in $\mathbb{R}^3$, and equipping the set of these immersions with a “distance function" (to be precise, a pseudometric) that is easy to compute. Importantly, this distance function is invariant under reparametrizations (i.e., under self-diffeomorphisms of the domain surface) and under rigid motions of $\mathbb{R}^3$. Thus, it induces a distance function on the shape space of immersions, i.e., the space of immersions modulo reparametrizations and rigid motions of $\mathbb{R}^3$. In this paper, we give examples of the degeneracy of this distance function, i.e., examples of immersed surfaces (some closed and some open) that have the same SRNF, but are not the same up to reparametrization and rigid motions. We also prove that the SRNF does distinguish the shape of a standard sphere from the shape of any other immersed surface, and does distinguish between the shapes of any two embedded strictly convex surfaces.
The Square Root Normal Field (SRNF), introduced by Jermyn et al. in [5], provides a way of representing immersed surfaces in $\mathbb{R}^3$, and equipping the set of these immersions with a “distance function" (to be precise, a pseudometric) that is easy to compute. Importantly, this distance function is invariant under reparametrizations (i.e., under self-diffeomorphisms of the domain surface) and under rigid motions of $\mathbb{R}^3$. Thus, it induces a distance function on the shape space of immersions, i.e., the space of immersions modulo reparametrizations and rigid motions of $\mathbb{R}^3$. In this paper, we give examples of the degeneracy of this distance function, i.e., examples of immersed surfaces (some closed and some open) that have the same SRNF, but are not the same up to reparametrization and rigid motions. We also prove that the SRNF does distinguish the shape of a standard sphere from the shape of any other immersed surface, and does distinguish between the shapes of any two embedded strictly convex surfaces.
DOI : 10.5817/AM2020-2-107
Classification : 53A05, 58D15
Keywords: shape space; square root normal field 
@article{10_5817_AM2020_2_107,
     author = {Klassen, Eric and Michor, Peter W.},
     title = {Closed surfaces with different shapes that are indistinguishable by the {SRNF}},
     journal = {Archivum mathematicum},
     pages = {107--114},
     year = {2020},
     volume = {56},
     number = {2},
     doi = {10.5817/AM2020-2-107},
     mrnumber = {4115086},
     zbl = {07217116},
     language = {en},
     url = {http://geodesic.mathdoc.fr/articles/10.5817/AM2020-2-107/}
}
TY  - JOUR
AU  - Klassen, Eric
AU  - Michor, Peter W.
TI  - Closed surfaces with different shapes that are indistinguishable by the SRNF
JO  - Archivum mathematicum
PY  - 2020
SP  - 107
EP  - 114
VL  - 56
IS  - 2
UR  - http://geodesic.mathdoc.fr/articles/10.5817/AM2020-2-107/
DO  - 10.5817/AM2020-2-107
LA  - en
ID  - 10_5817_AM2020_2_107
ER  - 
%0 Journal Article
%A Klassen, Eric
%A Michor, Peter W.
%T Closed surfaces with different shapes that are indistinguishable by the SRNF
%J Archivum mathematicum
%D 2020
%P 107-114
%V 56
%N 2
%U http://geodesic.mathdoc.fr/articles/10.5817/AM2020-2-107/
%R 10.5817/AM2020-2-107
%G en
%F 10_5817_AM2020_2_107
Klassen, Eric; Michor, Peter W. Closed surfaces with different shapes that are indistinguishable by the SRNF. Archivum mathematicum, Tome 56 (2020) no. 2, pp. 107-114. doi: 10.5817/AM2020-2-107

[1] Aledo, J.A., Alias, L.J., Romero, A.: A New Proof of Liebmann Classical Rigidity Theorem for Surfaces in Space Forms. Rocky Mountain J. Math. 35 (6) (2005), 1811–1824. | DOI | MR

[2] Bauer, M., Charon, N., Harms, P.: Inexact Elastic Shape Matching in the Square Root Normal Field Framework. Geometric Science of Information (Nielsen, F., Barbaresco, F., eds.), 2019, pp. 13–21.

[3] Hirsch, M.W.: Differential Topology. Springer-Verlag, 1996. | MR

[4] Jermyn, I., Kurtek, S., Laga, H., Srivastava, A: Elastic shape analysis of three-dimensional objects. Synthesis Lectures on Computer Vision 7 (2017), 1–185. | DOI

[5] Jermyn, I.H., Kurtek, S., Klassen, E., Srivastava, A.: Elastic shape matching of parameterized surfaces using square root normal fields. Computer Vision – ECCV 2012 (2012), 804–817.

[6] Laga, H., Qian, X., Jermyn, I., Srivastava, A.: Numerical Inversion of SRNF Maps for Elastic Shape Analysis of Genus-Zero Surfaces. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence 39 (2016), 2451–2464. | DOI

[7] Michor, P.W.: Topics in differential geometry. Graduate Studies in Mathematics, vol. 93, American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 2008. | DOI | MR

[8] Michor, P.W.: Manifolds of mappings for continuum mechanics. Geometric Continuum Mechanics (Segev, R., Epstein, M., eds.), Birkhäuser, June 2020, arxiv:1909.00445, pp. 3–75. | MR

[9] Minkowski, H.: Volumen und Oberfläche. Math. Ann. 57 (4) (1903), 447–495. | DOI | MR

Cité par Sources :