2006 3D Shape Retrieval Contest Remco Veltkamp, Utrecht University

Participants 1. Chaouch et al., INRIA, France, 2. Daras et al., Thessaloniki, Greece, 3. Jayanti et al., Purdue University, Indiana, 4. Laga et al., NAIST, Japan, 5. Makadia et al., University of Pennsylvania, 6. Papadakis et al., Athens, Greece, 7. Shilane et al., Princeton University, New Jersey, 8. Zaharia et al., INT, France,

Test collection  Princeton Shape Benchmark, training set + test set  1814 models, renamed, reordered, flattened  PSB classification: 197 classes

Queries

Performance evaluation  Highly relevant: score 2 Marginally relevant: score 1  Precision, Recall  First, Second Tier  (Normalized) (Discounted) Cumulated Gain  Average Dynamic Recall

Performance evaluation Cumulated gain [1,100]

Performance evaluation

Mean average dynamic recall

Conclusions  Excellent opportunity to compare algorithms and analyze strengths and weaknesses  More tracks wanted (polygon soup/watertight, whole/partial, 3D face, molecules?)  More test collections and ground truths wanted

Resources Proceedings, all performance numbers, test collection, queries available via:

What’s next  SHREC2007  SMI2007

Thanks … … to all participants!