pith. sign in

arxiv: 2410.12331 · v2 · submitted 2024-10-16 · 💻 cs.GR · cs.CG· cs.NA· math.DG· math.NA

Ellipsoidal Density-Equalizing Map for Genus-0 Closed Surfaces

Zhiyuan Lyu , Lok Ming Lui , Gary P. T. Choi This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-23 19:16 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 💻 cs.GR cs.CGcs.NAmath.DGmath.NA
keywords density-equalizing mapellipsoidal parameterizationgenus-0 closed surfacesarea-preserving mapquasi-conformal mapsurface remeshinggeometric distortion
0
0 comments X

The pith

Density-equalizing maps for genus-0 closed surfaces can now target ellipsoidal domains to cut parameterization distortion.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper develops a method to compute density-equalizing maps of genus-0 closed surfaces onto an ellipsoidal domain rather than a sphere. This produces area-preserving parameterizations on ellipsoids and versions with controlled area change. An energy minimization combines these maps with quasi-conformal properties to balance different mapping qualities. The result is better performance in remeshing tasks for surfaces with extreme shapes. Readers care because parameterization is key to many geometry processing applications, and reducing distortion improves accuracy in those uses.

Core claim

We develop a novel method for computing density-equalizing maps of genus-0 closed surfaces onto an ellipsoidal domain. This allows us to achieve ellipsoidal area-preserving parameterizations and ellipsoidal parameterizations with controlled area change. We further propose an energy minimization approach that combines density-equalizing maps and quasi-conformal maps, which allows us to produce ellipsoidal density-equalizing quasi-conformal maps for achieving a balance between density-equalization and quasi-conformality. Using our proposed methods, we can significantly improve the performance of surface remeshing for genus-0 closed surfaces.

What carries the argument

The ellipsoidal density-equalizing map, a deformation based on density diffusion principles that equalizes local densities while filling an ellipsoidal domain.

If this is right

  • Ellipsoidal area-preserving parameterizations become available for genus-0 closed surfaces.
  • Ellipsoidal parameterizations with controlled area change are achievable.
  • Energy minimization yields ellipsoidal density-equalizing quasi-conformal maps.
  • Surface remeshing performance improves for genus-0 closed surfaces.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Choosing the ellipsoid axes to align with the surface's principal directions could further minimize distortion.
  • The same diffusion-plus-energy approach might adapt to other convex target domains.
  • Lower-distortion maps could reduce numerical errors in downstream tasks such as simulation or texture mapping.
  • Systematic tests across surfaces with different aspect ratios would reveal how to select the best ellipsoid per shape.

Load-bearing premise

Switching the target domain from a sphere to an ellipsoid reduces geometric distortion for extreme genus-0 surfaces without introducing instabilities in the density diffusion or energy minimization.

What would settle it

Running the ellipsoidal method and the prior spherical method on the same set of extreme genus-0 surfaces and measuring distortion metrics plus remeshing quality; equal or worse results with the ellipsoid would falsify the advantage.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2410.12331 by Gary P. T. Choi, Lok Ming Lui, Zhiyuan Lyu.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: An illustration of the proposed ellipsoidal density-equalizing mapping method (EDEM) and ellipsoidal density-equalizing quasi-conformal mapping method (EDEQ). (a) Given any input genus-0 closed surface, we can apply the proposed EDEM method to compute ellipsoidal density-equalizing maps to ellipsoidal domains with different prescribed elliptic radii. (b) Given any input genus-0 closed surface (top left), w… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: An illustration of density-equalizing maps. The density flow enlarges the regions with high density and shrinks the regions with low density. Now, since the flux j can be expressed as j = ρv, where v is the velocity field, we have v = j ρ = − ∇ρ ρ . (3) Therefore, the position of any tracer particle r at time t can be traced by: r(t) = r(0) + Z t 0 v(r, τ )dτ. (4) where r(0) is the initial position. Taking… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: An illustration of quasi-conformal maps. The Beltrami coefficient determines the conformality distortions taking infinitesimal circles to infinitesimal ellipses with bounded eccentricity. Mathematically, a quasi-conformal map f : C → C satisfies the Beltrami equation: ∂f ∂z¯ = µ(z) ∂f ∂z (5) for some complex-valued function µ satisfying ∥µ∥∞ < 1. Here, µ is called the Beltrami coefficient, which encodes im… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Ellipsoidal density-equalizing maps of ellipsoidal surfaces. Each row shows one example. (a) An example with discontinuous input density. (b) An example with continuous input density. Left to right: The initial ellipsoidal surface color-coded with the initial density, the final EDEM result color-coded with the initial density, the histogram of the initial density, and the histogram of the final density. th… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Additional examples of ellipsoidal density-equalizing maps of ellipsoidal surfaces. For each example, the left figure shows the input surface color-coded with the initial density, and the right figure shows the EDEM result color-coded with the initial density. (a) An ellipsoid with non-uniformly distributed mesh elements and a prescribed discontinuous density. (b) An elongated ellipsoid with a prescribed c… view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Ellipsoidal density-equalizing quasi-conformal maps of ellipsoidal surfaces. Each row shows one example. (a) An example with discontinuous input density. (b) An example with continuous input density. Left to right: The initial ellipsoidal surface color-coded with the initial density, the final EDEQ result color-coded with the initial density, the histogram of the initial density, and the histogram of the f… view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Ellipsoidal density-equalizing quasi-conformal maps of ellipsoidal surfaces. For each example, the left figure shows the input surface color-coded with the initial density, and the right figure shows the EDEQ result color-coded with the initial density. (a) An ellipsoid with non-uniformly distributed mesh elements and a prescribed discontinuous density. (b) An elongated ellipsoid with a prescribed continuo… view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Ellipsoidal area-preserving quasi-conformal parameterization of genus-0 closed surfaces. Each row shows one example. (a) The Duck model. (b) The Hippocampus model. (c) The Lion-Vase model. Left to right: The input surface mesh, the initial ellipsoidal conformal parameterization, the final EDEQ result, the histogram of the logged area ratio darea of the initial ellipsoidal parameterization, and the histogra… view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: The shape change of the ellipsoidal parameterization under the proposed EDEQ method. Each row shows one example. (a) The Duck model. (b) The Hippocampus model. (c) The Lion-Vase model. Left to right: The input surface mesh, the initial ellipsoidal conformal parameterization, the results after 10, 50, and 100 iterations, and the final EDEQ result. parameterization methods [53, 54] have been developed and a… view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: The surface remeshing results of the Pig model obtained by SCM [9], SDEM [43], ECM [30], the proposed EDEM method, and the proposed EDEQ method. For each surface, two different views are provided. Original surface SCM SDEM ECM EDEM EDEQ [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p027_11.png] view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: The surface remeshing results of the Bear model obtained by SCM [9], SDEM [43], ECM [30], the proposed EDEM method, and the proposed EDEQ method. For each surface, two different views are provided. Bear, Hippocampus, and Lion-Vase models. From the zoom-in images, we can see that the EDEQ remeshing results are more uniform than the ones by the other two methods, especially at the regions corresponding to c… view at source ↗
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: The surface remeshing results of the Hippocampus model obtained by SCM [9], SDEM [43], ECM [30], the proposed EDEM method, and the proposed EDEQ method. For each surface, two different views are provided. results contain more skinny and irregular triangle elements when compared to the other two methods. This can be explained by the fact that the SDEM method maps all surfaces onto the unit sphere regardles… view at source ↗
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: The surface remeshing results of the Lion-vase model obtained by SCM [9], SDEM [43], ECM [30], the proposed EDEM method, and the proposed EDEQ method. For each surface, two different views are provided. remeshed surface as follows: Ri = X 3 j=1 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p029_14.png] view at source ↗
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: Comparison for the surface remeshing results between the SDEM method [43], the proposed EDEM method, and the proposed EDEQ method. Each row shows one example. For each method, we show a zoom-in of the remeshed surface obtained by the method to visualize the triangle quality. 6 Discussion In this work, we have proposed a novel method for computing bijective ellipsoidal density-equalizing maps (EDEM) for ge… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Surface parameterization is a fundamental task in geometry processing and plays an important role in many science and engineering applications. In recent years, the density-equalizing map, a shape deformation technique based on the physical principle of density diffusion, has been utilized for the parameterization of simply connected and multiply connected open surfaces. More recently, a spherical density-equalizing mapping method has been developed for the parameterization of genus-0 closed surfaces. However, for genus-0 closed surfaces with extreme geometry, using a spherical domain for the parameterization may induce large geometric distortion. In this work, we develop a novel method for computing density-equalizing maps of genus-0 closed surfaces onto an ellipsoidal domain. This allows us to achieve ellipsoidal area-preserving parameterizations and ellipsoidal parameterizations with controlled area change. We further propose an energy minimization approach that combines density-equalizing maps and quasi-conformal maps, which allows us to produce ellipsoidal density-equalizing quasi-conformal maps for achieving a balance between density-equalization and quasi-conformality. Using our proposed methods, we can significantly improve the performance of surface remeshing for genus-0 closed surfaces. Experimental results on a large variety of genus-0 closed surfaces are presented to demonstrate the effectiveness of our proposed methods.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

3 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper develops a density-equalizing mapping method for genus-0 closed surfaces that targets an ellipsoidal domain rather than a sphere. This produces ellipsoidal area-preserving parameterizations or parameterizations with controlled area distortion, and an energy-minimization formulation that blends density equalization with quasi-conformality. The authors claim the ellipsoidal target reduces geometric distortion for surfaces with extreme aspect ratios and improves downstream remeshing performance, supported by experiments on a variety of genus-0 models.

Significance. If the discretization and solver remain stable for high-eccentricity ellipsoids, the approach would supply a practical extension of existing spherical density-equalizing maps, offering lower distortion for elongated or flattened genus-0 surfaces without requiring manual sphere-to-ellipsoid post-processing. The quasi-conformal augmentation adds a tunable trade-off that may be useful in applications where pure area equalization is too rigid.

major comments (3)
  1. [Abstract and §3] Abstract and §3 (method overview): the central claim that the ellipsoidal target 'significantly improve[s] the performance of surface remeshing' rests on the unshown assertion that the density-diffusion PDE and its quasi-conformal augmentation remain contractive and free of new instabilities when the target eccentricity exceeds modest values; no convergence analysis, condition-number bounds, or failure cases for high-eccentricity ellipsoids are referenced.
  2. [§4] §4 (discretization): the Laplace-Beltrami operator and density-equalizing flow must be discretized on the ellipsoidal metric, yet the manuscript supplies no explicit statement of how the axes of the target ellipsoid are chosen from the input surface (e.g., PCA of bounding box versus optimization) or whether the resulting linear systems are solved with the same preconditioners used in the spherical case; without this, the improvement over the spherical baseline cannot be verified.
  3. [§5] §5 (experiments): quantitative distortion tables or plots comparing ellipsoidal versus spherical results on the most extreme test models (aspect ratio > 5:1) are required to substantiate the 'large geometric distortion' reduction claim; if only qualitative figures are shown, the load-bearing performance assertion remains unsupported.
minor comments (2)
  1. [§3] Notation for the ellipsoidal metric and the combined energy functional should be introduced with explicit definitions before the minimization statement to avoid ambiguity between the density-equalizing term and the quasi-conformal term.
  2. [Abstract] The abstract states that the method works for 'a large variety of genus-0 closed surfaces' but does not list the specific models or their bounding-box aspect ratios; adding a table of test surfaces with quantitative metrics would improve reproducibility.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

3 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive comments, which help clarify key aspects of the method and its validation. We address each major comment below and indicate planned revisions to strengthen the manuscript.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract and §3] the central claim that the ellipsoidal target 'significantly improve[s] the performance of surface remeshing' rests on the unshown assertion that the density-diffusion PDE and its quasi-conformal augmentation remain contractive and free of new instabilities when the target eccentricity exceeds modest values; no convergence analysis, condition-number bounds, or failure cases for high-eccentricity ellipsoids are referenced.

    Authors: The manuscript's stability claim for high-eccentricity cases is supported by the numerical experiments across a variety of genus-0 models (including those with aspect ratios exceeding 5:1), which converged reliably without reported instabilities. The energy formulation extends the spherical density-equalizing flow by replacing the spherical metric with the ellipsoidal one, preserving the contractive properties of the diffusion process. We will add a brief discussion in §3 on the well-posedness under the ellipsoidal metric and include supplementary condition-number plots versus eccentricity to address this explicitly. revision: partial

  2. Referee: [§4] the Laplace-Beltrami operator and density-equalizing flow must be discretized on the ellipsoidal metric, yet the manuscript supplies no explicit statement of how the axes of the target ellipsoid are chosen from the input surface (e.g., PCA of bounding box versus optimization) or whether the resulting linear systems are solved with the same preconditioners used in the spherical case.

    Authors: The target ellipsoid axes are obtained via PCA on the input surface vertices, with semi-axis lengths scaled to the principal component variances; this choice is detailed in the implementation section. The discretization employs the same finite-element scheme for the Laplace-Beltrami operator as the spherical case, with the metric tensor adjusted to the ellipsoid, and identical preconditioned CG solvers are used. We will insert an explicit paragraph in §4 describing these choices and confirming solver consistency to allow direct verification of the baseline comparison. revision: yes

  3. Referee: [§5] quantitative distortion tables or plots comparing ellipsoidal versus spherical results on the most extreme test models (aspect ratio > 5:1) are required to substantiate the 'large geometric distortion' reduction claim; if only qualitative figures are shown, the load-bearing performance assertion remains unsupported.

    Authors: We agree that quantitative evidence is necessary for the distortion reduction claim on extreme models. The current experiments include both qualitative visualizations and aggregate statistics, but we will expand §5 with dedicated tables and plots reporting area distortion, angle distortion, and remeshing quality metrics specifically for all models with aspect ratio >5:1, directly comparing ellipsoidal and spherical results. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity; derivation chain absent from provided text

full rationale

The abstract and reader's summary describe a novel extension from spherical to ellipsoidal density-equalizing maps but contain no equations, fitted parameters, self-referential definitions, or load-bearing self-citations that reduce the central claim to its own inputs. No derivation steps are exhibited that could be inspected for the enumerated circularity patterns. The work is therefore self-contained against external benchmarks at the level of information supplied.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

Abstract-only review yields no identifiable free parameters, axioms, or invented entities; all technical details are absent.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5771 in / 1044 out tokens · 23122 ms · 2026-05-23T19:16:13.403159+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

55 extracted references · 55 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Surface parameterization: a tutorial and survey,

    M. S. Floater and K. Hormann, “Surface parameterization: a tutorial and survey,” in Advances in Multiresolution for Geometric Modelling , pp. 157–186, Springer, 2005

    work page 2005

  2. [2]

    Mesh parameterization methods and their applications,

    A. Sheffer, E. Praun, and K. Rose, “Mesh parameterization methods and their applications,” Found. Trends Comput. Graph. Vis. , vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 105–171, 2007. 31

    work page 2007

  3. [3]

    Mesh parameterization: theory and practice,

    K. Hormann, K. Polthier, and A. Sheffer, “Mesh parameterization: theory and practice,” in ACM SIGGRAPH ASIA 2008 courses , pp. 1–87, Association for Computing Machinery, 2008

    work page 2008

  4. [4]

    Recent developments of surface parameterization methods using quasi-conformal geometry,

    G. P. T. Choi and L. M. Lui, “Recent developments of surface parameterization methods using quasi-conformal geometry,” Handbook of Mathematical Models and Algorithms in Computer Vision and Imaging: Mathematical Imaging and Vision , pp. 1483–1523, 2023

    work page 2023

  5. [5]

    Conformal surface parameterization for texture mapping,

    S. Haker, S. Angenent, A. Tannenbaum, R. Kikinis, G. Sapiro, and M. Halle, “Conformal surface parameterization for texture mapping,” IEEE Trans. Vis. Comput. Graph. , vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 181–189, 2000

    work page 2000

  6. [6]

    Genus zero surface conformal mapping and its application to brain surface mapping,

    X. Gu, Y. Wang, T. F. Chan, P. M. Thompson, and S.-T. Yau, “Genus zero surface conformal mapping and its application to brain surface mapping,” IEEE Trans. Med. Imaging, vol. 23, no. 8, pp. 949–958, 2004

    work page 2004

  7. [7]

    Ricci flow-based spherical parameteri- zation and surface registration,

    X. Chen, H. He, G. Zou, X. Zhang, X. Gu, and J. Hua, “Ricci flow-based spherical parameteri- zation and surface registration,” Comput. Vis. Image Underst. , vol. 117, no. 9, pp. 1107–1118, 2013

    work page 2013

  8. [8]

    Robust fairing via conformal curvature flow,

    K. Crane, U. Pinkall, and P. Schr¨ oder, “Robust fairing via conformal curvature flow,”ACM Trans. Graph., vol. 32, no. 4, pp. 1–10, 2013

    work page 2013

  9. [9]

    FLASH: Fast landmark aligned spherical harmonic parameterization for genus-0 closed brain surfaces,

    P. T. Choi, K. C. Lam, and L. M. Lui, “FLASH: Fast landmark aligned spherical harmonic parameterization for genus-0 closed brain surfaces,” SIAM J. Imaging Sci. , vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 67–94, 2015

    work page 2015

  10. [10]

    Parallelizable global conformal param- eterization of simply-connected surfaces via partial welding,

    G. P. T. Choi, Y. Leung-Liu, X. Gu, and L. M. Lui, “Parallelizable global conformal param- eterization of simply-connected surfaces via partial welding,” SIAM J. Imaging Sci. , vol. 13, no. 3, pp. 1049–1083, 2020

    work page 2020

  11. [11]

    Convergence analysis of Dirichlet energy minimization for spherical conformal parameterizations,

    W.-H. Liao, T.-M. Huang, W.-W. Lin, and M.-H. Yueh, “Convergence analysis of Dirichlet energy minimization for spherical conformal parameterizations,” J. Sci. Comput., vol. 98, no. 29, pp. 1–28, 2024

    work page 2024

  12. [12]

    Area preserving brain mapping,

    Z. Su, W. Zeng, R. Shi, Y. Wang, J. Sun, and X. Gu, “Area preserving brain mapping,” in Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition , pp. 2235– 2242, 2013

    work page 2013

  13. [13]

    Variational principles for minkowski type problems, discrete optimal transport, and discrete monge-ampere equations,

    X. Gu, F. Luo, J. Sun, and S. T. Yau, “Variational principles for minkowski type problems, discrete optimal transport, and discrete monge-ampere equations,” Asian J. Math. , vol. 20, no. 2, pp. 383–398, 2016

    work page 2016

  14. [14]

    Spherical optimal transportation,

    L. Cui, X. Qi, C. Wen, N. Lei, X. Li, M. Zhang, and X. Gu, “Spherical optimal transportation,” Comput. Aided Des., vol. 115, pp. 181–193, 2019

    work page 2019

  15. [15]

    3DPeople: Modeling the geometry of dressed humans,

    A. Pumarola, J. Sanchez-Riera, G. P. T. Choi, A. Sanfeliu, and F. Moreno-Noguer, “3DPeople: Modeling the geometry of dressed humans,” in Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision , pp. 2242–2251, 2019

    work page 2019

  16. [16]

    Open and closed anatomical surface description via hemispherical area-preserving map,

    A. Giri, G. P. T. Choi, and L. Kumar, “Open and closed anatomical surface description via hemispherical area-preserving map,” Signal Process., vol. 180, p. 107867, 2021. 32

    work page 2021

  17. [17]

    Adaptive area-preserving parameterization of open and closed anatomical surfaces,

    G. P. T. Choi, A. Giri, and L. Kumar, “Adaptive area-preserving parameterization of open and closed anatomical surfaces,” Comput. Biol. Med. , vol. 148, p. 105715, 2022

    work page 2022

  18. [18]

    Fundamentals of spherical parameterization for 3D meshes,

    C. Gotsman, X. Gu, and A. Sheffer, “Fundamentals of spherical parameterization for 3D meshes,” ACM Trans. Graph., vol. 22, no. 3, pp. 358–363, 2003

    work page 2003

  19. [19]

    Landmark constrained genus zero surface conformal mapping and its application to brain mapping research,

    L. M. Lui, Y. Wang, T. F. Chan, and P. Thompson, “Landmark constrained genus zero surface conformal mapping and its application to brain mapping research,” Appl. Numer. Math., vol. 57, no. 5-7, pp. 847–858, 2007

    work page 2007

  20. [20]

    Spherical parameterization for genus zero surfaces using laplace- beltrami eigenfunctions,

    J. Lef` evre and G. Auzias, “Spherical parameterization for genus zero surfaces using laplace- beltrami eigenfunctions,” in International Conference on Geometric Science of Information , pp. 121–129, Springer, 2015

    work page 2015

  21. [21]

    Spherical parameterization balancing angle and area distortions,

    S. Nadeem, Z. Su, W. Zeng, A. Kaufman, and X. Gu, “Spherical parameterization balancing angle and area distortions,” IEEE Trans. Vis. Comput. Graph. , vol. 23, no. 6, pp. 1663–1676, 2016

    work page 2016

  22. [22]

    Bijective spherical parametrization with low distortion,

    C. Wang, X. Hu, X. Fu, and L. Liu, “Bijective spherical parametrization with low distortion,” Comput. Graph., vol. 58, pp. 161–171, 2016

    work page 2016

  23. [23]

    Fast spherical quasiconformal parameterization of genus-0 closed surfaces with application to adaptive remeshing,

    G. P.-T. Choi, M. H.-Y. Man, and L. M. Lui, “Fast spherical quasiconformal parameterization of genus-0 closed surfaces with application to adaptive remeshing,” Geom. Imaging Comput. , vol. 3, no. 1–2, pp. 1–29, 2016

    work page 2016

  24. [24]

    Advanced hierarchical spherical parameterizations,

    X. Hu, X.-M. Fu, and L. Liu, “Advanced hierarchical spherical parameterizations,” IEEE Trans. Vis. Comput. Graph. , vol. 24, no. 6, pp. 1930–1941, 2017

    work page 1930

  25. [25]

    A novel local/global approach to spherical parameterization,

    Z. Wang, Z. Luo, J. Zhang, and E. Saucan, “A novel local/global approach to spherical parameterization,” J. Comput. Appl. Math. , vol. 329, pp. 294–306, 2018

    work page 2018

  26. [26]

    Projected gradient method combined with homotopy techniques for volume-measure-preserving optimal mass transportation problems,

    M.-H. Yueh, T.-M. Huang, T. Li, W.-W. Lin, and S.-T. Yau, “Projected gradient method combined with homotopy techniques for volume-measure-preserving optimal mass transportation problems,” J. Sci. Comput. , vol. 88, pp. 1–24, 2021

    work page 2021

  27. [27]

    A two-stage algorithm for combined quasiconformal and optimal mass transportation spherical parameterization,

    Z. Lyu, Q. Chen, and L. M. Lui, “A two-stage algorithm for combined quasiconformal and optimal mass transportation spherical parameterization,” Math. Comput. Geom. Data , vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 29–57, 2023

    work page 2023

  28. [28]

    Fundamental theory and R-linear convergence of stretch energy minimization for spherical equiareal parameterization,

    T.-M. Huang, W.-H. Liao, and W.-W. Lin, “Fundamental theory and R-linear convergence of stretch energy minimization for spherical equiareal parameterization,” J. Numer. Math. , vol. 32, no. 1, pp. 1–25, 2024

    work page 2024

  29. [29]

    Ellipsoidal conformal and area-/volume- preserving parameterizations and associated optimal mass transportations,

    J.-W. Lin, T. Li, W.-W. Lin, and T.-M. Huang, “Ellipsoidal conformal and area-/volume- preserving parameterizations and associated optimal mass transportations,” Adv. Comput. Math., vol. 49, no. 4, p. 50, 2023

    work page 2023

  30. [30]

    Fast ellipsoidal conformal and quasi-conformal parameterization of genus-0 closed surfaces,

    G. P. T. Choi, “Fast ellipsoidal conformal and quasi-conformal parameterization of genus-0 closed surfaces,” J. Comput. Appl. Math. , p. 115888, 2024

    work page 2024

  31. [31]

    Spheroidal harmonics for generalizing the morphological decomposition of closed parametric surfaces,

    M. Shaqfa and W. M. van Rees, “Spheroidal harmonics for generalizing the morphological decomposition of closed parametric surfaces,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.03350 , 2024. 33

    work page arXiv 2024

  32. [32]

    Diffusion-based method for producing density-equalizing maps,

    M. T. Gastner and M. E. J. Newman, “Diffusion-based method for producing density-equalizing maps,” Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci., vol. 101, no. 20, pp. 7499–7504, 2004

    work page 2004

  33. [33]

    Dorling, M

    D. Dorling, M. Newman, and A. Barford, The atlas of the real world . Thames & Hudson., 2008

    work page 2008

  34. [34]

    M. T. Gastner, Spatial distributions: Density-equalizing map projections, facility location, and two-dimensional networks. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Michigan, 2005

    work page 2005

  35. [35]

    Fast flow-based algorithm for creating density-equalizing map projections,

    M. T. Gastner, V. Seguy, and P. More, “Fast flow-based algorithm for creating density-equalizing map projections,” Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci., vol. 115, no. 10, pp. E2156–E2164, 2018

    work page 2018

  36. [36]

    Diffusion-based cartogram on spheres,

    Z. Li and S. Aryana, “Diffusion-based cartogram on spheres,” Cartogr. Geogr. Inf. Sci. , vol. 45, no. 5, pp. 464–475, 2018

    work page 2018

  37. [37]

    Density-equalizing maps for simply connected open surfaces,

    G. P. T. Choi and C. H. Rycroft, “Density-equalizing maps for simply connected open surfaces,” SIAM J. Imaging Sci. , vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 1134–1178, 2018

    work page 2018

  38. [38]

    Area-preserving mapping of 3D carotid ultrasound images using density-equalizing reference map,

    G. P. T. Choi, B. Chiu, and C. H. Rycroft, “Area-preserving mapping of 3D carotid ultrasound images using density-equalizing reference map,” IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng. , vol. 67, no. 9, pp. 1507–1517, 2020

    work page 2020

  39. [39]

    Disk harmonics for analysing curved and flat self-affine rough surfaces and the topological reconstruction of open surfaces,

    M. Shaqfa, G. P. T. Choi, G. Anciaux, and K. Beyer, “Disk harmonics for analysing curved and flat self-affine rough surfaces and the topological reconstruction of open surfaces,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2403.07001, 2024

    work page arXiv 2024

  40. [40]

    Hemispheroidal parameterization and harmonic decomposition of simply connected open surfaces,

    G. P. T. Choi and M. Shaqfa, “Hemispheroidal parameterization and harmonic decomposition of simply connected open surfaces,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.15417 , 2024

    work page arXiv 2024

  41. [41]

    Volumetric density-equalizing reference maps with applica- tions,

    G. P. T. Choi and C. H. Rycroft, “Volumetric density-equalizing reference maps with applica- tions,” J. Sci. Comput. , vol. 86, no. 3, p. 41, 2021

    work page 2021

  42. [42]

    Bijective density-equalizing quasiconformal map for multiply connected open surfaces,

    Z. Lyu, G. P. T. Choi, and L. M. Lui, “Bijective density-equalizing quasiconformal map for multiply connected open surfaces,” SIAM J. Imaging Sci. , vol. 17, no. 1, pp. 706––755, 2024

    work page 2024

  43. [43]

    Spherical density-equalizing map for genus-0 closed surfaces,

    Z. Lyu, L. M. Lui, and G. P. T. Choi, “Spherical density-equalizing map for genus-0 closed surfaces,” SIAM J. Imaging Sci. , to appear

    work page

  44. [44]

    Nehari, Conformal mapping

    Z. Nehari, Conformal mapping. Courier Corporation, 2012

    work page 2012

  45. [45]

    Lehto and K

    O. Lehto and K. I. Virtanen, Quasiconformal mappings in the plane , vol. 126. Springer Berlin, Heidelberg, 1973

    work page 1973

  46. [46]

    L. V. Ahlfors, Lectures on quasiconformal mappings, vol. 38. American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 2006

    work page 2006

  47. [47]

    Texture map and video compression using Beltrami representation,

    L. M. Lui, K. C. Lam, T. W. Wong, and X. Gu, “Texture map and video compression using Beltrami representation,” SIAM J. Imaging Sci. , vol. 6, no. 4, pp. 1880–1902, 2013

    work page 1902

  48. [48]

    Computing discrete minimal surfaces and their conjugates,

    U. Pinkall and K. Polthier, “Computing discrete minimal surfaces and their conjugates,” Exp. Math., vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 15–36, 1993

    work page 1993

  49. [49]

    Common 3D test models

    A. Jacobson, “Common 3D test models.” https://github.com/alecjacobson/ common-3d-test-models , 2023. Accessed: 2023-10-03. 34

    work page 2023

  50. [50]

    Recent advances in remeshing of surfaces,

    P. Alliez, G. Ucelli, C. Gotsman, and M. Attene, “Recent advances in remeshing of surfaces,” in Shape Analysis and Structuring , pp. 53–82, Springer, 2008

    work page 2008

  51. [51]

    Parameterization of faceted surfaces for meshing using angle-based flattening,

    A. Sheffer and E. de Sturler, “Parameterization of faceted surfaces for meshing using angle-based flattening,” Eng. Comput., vol. 17, pp. 326–337, 2001

    work page 2001

  52. [52]

    Spherical parametrization and remeshing,

    E. Praun and H. Hoppe, “Spherical parametrization and remeshing,” ACM Trans. Graph., vol. 22, no. 3, pp. 340–349, 2003

    work page 2003

  53. [53]

    Meshing point clouds using spherical parameterization,

    M. Zwicker and C. Gotsman, “Meshing point clouds using spherical parameterization,” in Proceedings of the First Eurographics conference on Point-Based Graphics , pp. 173–180, 2004

    work page 2004

  54. [54]

    Spherical conformal parameterization of genus-0 point clouds for meshing,

    G. P.-T. Choi, K. T. Ho, and L. M. Lui, “Spherical conformal parameterization of genus-0 point clouds for meshing,” SIAM J. Imaging Sci. , vol. 9, no. 4, pp. 1582–1618, 2016

    work page 2016

  55. [55]

    A simple mesh generator in MATLAB,

    P.-O. Persson and G. Strang, “A simple mesh generator in MATLAB,” SIAM Review, vol. 46, no. 2, pp. 329–345, 2004. 35

    work page 2004