Advertisement

Resultants, Implicit Parameterizations, and Intersections of Surfaces

  • Robert H. LewisEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 10931)

Abstract

A fundamental problem in computer graphics and computer aided design is to convert between a parameterization of a surface and an implicit representation of it. Almost as fundamental is to derive a parameterization for the intersection of two surfaces.

In these problems, it seems that resultants, specifically the Dixon resultant, have been underappreciated. Indeed, several well known papers from ten to twenty years ago reported unsuitability of resultant techniques. To the contrary, we show that the Dixon resultant is an extremely effective and efficient method to compute an implicit representation.

To use resultants to compute a parameterization of an intersection, we introduce the concept of an “implicit parameterization.” Unlike the conventional parameterization of a curve where xy, and z are each explicitly given as functions of, say, t, we have three implicit functions, one each for (xt), (yt), and (zt). This concept has rarely been mentioned before. We show that given a (conventional) parameterization for one surface and either an implicit equation for the second, or a parameterization for it, it is straightforward to compute an implicit parameterization for the intersection. Doing so is very easy for the Dixon resultant, but can be very daunting even for well respected Gröbner bases programs.

Further, we demonstrate that such implicit parameterizations are useful. We use builtin 3D plotting utilities of a computer algebra system to graph the intersection using our implicit parameterization. We do this for examples that are more complex than the quadric examples usually discussed in intersection papers.

Keywords

Surface Polynomial system Resultant Dixon Parameters Intersection Gröbner basis 

References

  1. 1.
    Buse, L., Elkadi, M., Mourrain, B.: Generalized resultants over unirational algebraic varieties. J. Symbolic Comp. 29, 515–526 (2000)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Cox, D., Goldman, R., Zhang, M.: On the validity of implicitization by moving quadrics for rational surfaces with no base points. J. Symbolic Comput. 29(3), 419–440 (2000)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cox, D., Little, J., O’Shea, D.: Using Algebraic Geometry. In: Graduate Texts in Mathematics, vol. 185. Springer, New York (1998).  https://doi.org/10.1007/b138611
  4. 4.
    Dixon, A.L.: The eliminant of three quantics in two independent variables. Proc. London Math. Soc. 6, 468–478 (1908)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kapur, D., Saxena, T., Yang, L.: Algebraic and geometric reasoning using Dixon resultants. In: Proceedings of the International Symposium on Symbolic and Algebraic Computation. ACM Press (1994)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Lazard, S., Peñaranda, L., Petitjean, S.: Intersecting quadrics: an efficient and exact implementation. Comput. Geom. 35(1–2), 74–99 (2006)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Lewis, R.H.: Heuristics to accelerate the Dixon resultant. Math. Comput. Simul. 77(4), 400–407 (2008)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Lewis, R.H.: Computer algebra system Fermat. http://home.bway.net/lewis/
  9. 9.
    Lewis, R.H.: Fermat code for Dixon-EDF. http://home.bway.net/lewis/dixon
  10. 10.
    Li, Q., Zhang, S., Ye, X.: Algebraic algorithms for computing intersections between torus and natural quadrics. Comput. Aided Des. Appl. 1(1–4), 459–467 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Lichtblau, D.: Personal Communication (2018)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
  13. 13.
    Quadric intersections website. http://vegas.loria.fr/qi/
  14. 14.
    Sendra, J.R., Sevilla, D., Villarino, C.: Algebraic and algorithmic aspects of radical parameterizations. Comput. Aided Geom. Des. 55, 1–14 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Shen, L.-Y., Cheng, J.-S., Xiaohong, J.: Homeomorphic approximation of the intersection curve of two rational surfaces. Comput. Aided Geom. Des. 29(8), 613–625 (2012)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Shen, L., Goldman, R.: Implicitizing rational tensor product surfaces using the resultant of three moving planes. ACM Trans. Graph. 36(5), 1–14 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Shi, X., Wang, X., Goldman, R.: Using \(\mu \)-bases to implicitize rational surfaces with a pair of orthogonal directrices. Comput. Aided Geom. Des. 29(7), 541–554 (2012)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Sturmfels, B.: Solving systems of polynomial equations. In: CBMS Regional Conference Series in Mathematics, vol. 97. American Mathematical Society (2003)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Wang, D.: A simple method for implicitizing rational curves and surfaces. J. Symbolic Comput. 38, 899–914 (2004)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Fordham UniversityNew YorkUSA

Personalised recommendations