Currents and finite elements as tools for shape space

The nonlinear spaces of shapes (unparameterized immersed curves or submanifolds) are of interest for many applications in image analysis, such as the identification of shapes that are similar modulo the action of some group. In this paper we study a general representation of shapes that is based on linear spaces and is suitable for numerical discretization, being robust to noise. We develop the theory of currents for shape spaces by considering both the analytic and numerical aspects of the problem. In particular, we study the analytical properties of the current map and the $H^{-s}$ norm that it induces on shapes. We determine the conditions under which the current determines the shape. We then provide a finite element discretization of the currents that is a practical computational tool for shapes. Finally, we demonstrate this approach on a variety of examples

A relaxed approach for curve matching with elastic metrics

In this paper we study a class of Riemannian metrics on the space of unparametrized curves and develop a method to compute geodesics with given boundary conditions. It extends previous works on this topic in several important ways. The model and resulting matching algorithm integrate within one common setting both the family of $H^2$-metrics with constant coefficients and scale-invariant $H^2$-metrics on both open and closed immersed curves. These families include as particular cases the class of first-order elastic metrics. An essential difference with prior approaches is the way that boundary constraints are dealt with. By leveraging varifold-based similarity metrics we propose a relaxed variational formulation for the matching problem that avoids the necessity of optimizing over the reparametrization group. Furthermore, we show that we can also quotient out finite-dimensional similarity groups such as translation, rotation and scaling groups. The different properties and advantages are illustrated through numerical examples in which we also provide a comparison with related diffeomorphic methods used in shape registration.Comment: 27 page