Cited by 3113D Shape Modeling and AnalysisAdvanced Graph Neural NetworksAdvanced Neural Network Applications

RGCNN: Regularized Graph CNN for Point Cloud Segmentation

Te, Gusi, Hu, Wei, Zheng, Amin, Guo, Zongming·2018·Proceedings of the 26th ACM international conference on Multimedia

Abstract

Point cloud, an efficient 3D object representation, has become popular with the development of depth sensing and 3D laser scanning techniques. It has attracted attention in various applications such as 3D tele-presence, navigation for unmanned vehicles and heritage reconstruction. The understanding of point clouds, such as point cloud segmentation, is crucial in exploiting the informative value of point clouds for such applications. Due to the irregularity of the data format, previous deep learning works often convert point clouds to regular 3D voxel grids or collections of images before feeding them into neural networks, which leads to voluminous data and quantization artifacts. In this paper, we instead propose a regularized graph convolutional neural network (RGCNN) that directly consumes point clouds. Leveraging on spectral graph theory, we treat features of points in a point cloud as signals on graph, and define the convolution over graph by Chebyshev polynomial approximation. In particular, we update the graph Laplacian matrix that describes the connectivity of features in each layer according to the corresponding learned features, which adaptively captures the structure of dynamic graphs. Further, we deploy a graph-signal smoothness prior in the loss function, thus regularizing the learning process. Experimental results on the ShapeNet part dataset show that the proposed approach significantly reduces the computational complexity while achieving competitive performance with the state of the art. Also, experiments show RGCNN is much more robust to both noise and point cloud density in comparison with other methods. We further apply RGCNN to point cloud classification and achieve competitive results on ModelNet40 dataset.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1145/3240508.3240621

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 29 · Cited by 311

Authors
Te, G., Hu, W., Zheng, A., & Guo, Z.
Affiliations
  • Peking University (CN)
  • Meituan (China) (CN)
Venue
Proceedings of the 26th ACM international conference on Multimedia
Publisher
ACM
Published
2018-10-15
Pages
746-754
OpenAlex
W2963312728
Cited by
311
References
29
Citations by year
2026: 12 · 2025: 26 · 2024: 53 · 2023: 46 · 2022: 59 · 2021: 50 · 2020: 44 · 2019: 19 · 2018: 2
FWCI
41.97
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
ACM International Conference on Multimedia (ACM MM) (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Microsoft Research Asia (FY18-Research-Sponsorship-029)
  • Alibaba (XTG201800108)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Computational Mechanics › 3D Shape Modeling and Analysis
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Advanced Graph Neural Networks
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Advanced Neural Network Applications
Keywords
point cloud segmentation, graph convolutional networks, uniform approximation, graph Laplacian, 3D object representation, point cloud classification, dynamic graphs, noise robustness, point cloud density

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review