The invention relates to a method for clearing, in particular for removing, unwanted data from optically detected virtual representations of objects, in particular teeth and intraoral structures.
Many systems for the optical detection of the three-dimensional geometry of objects are known in particular in the area of dental treatments. They are used in, for example, the production of prostheses, crowns, inlays or the like, serve for support in the monitoring of orthodontic treatments and/or quite generally help in the observation or detection of intraoral structures. On the one hand, the major advantage of these optical systems is that they are neither invasive nor unpleasant, such as, for example, the dental impression that is often used in conventional dentistry, nor do they constitute a potential risk to patients, as can be the case, for example, in radiation-based methods, such as the x-ray. On the other hand, the data are in electronic form after acquisition and can be easily stored, for example for later comparisons, or else transmitted, for example from a dentist to a dental laboratory.
One problem that arises constantly in optical methods for detection of the three-dimensional geometry of objects, in particular teeth, is that soft parts that are present in the oral cavity, such as the inside of the cheeks or the tongue, are unintentionally acquired. Later correction of these faulty recordings is usually difficult since even in systems that provide several pictures of the same region, the faulty pictures are included in the detected or computed geometry too and corrupt it. Furthermore, unintentionally photographed surfaces constitute an unnecessary additional data volume that under certain circumstances can slow various processes, such as, for example, the visualization of the detected surface geometry.
The approaches to this problem that have been undertaken so far in the state of the art follow mainly two basic strategies. In one strategy, the surfaces that have been defectively acquired are identified as such and removed. One example of this first approach is shown by WO 2013/010910 A1. In the second strategy, empty spaces are defined or identified in which there can be no surfaces, and surfaces in which it is consequently determined that they are located in these empty spaces are either removed by the system when identification takes place after measurement, or are ignored from the start. One example of this approach is disclosed in EP 2 775 256 A1.
It is common to the two systems that during or after scanning, either incorrectly detected surfaces or empty spaces must be actively acquired or recognized as faults; this, on the one hand, requires computer resources and, on the other hand, is susceptible to errors.
Therefore, the object of the invention is to overcome the above-described disadvantages and to make available a simplified method for clearing unwanted surface regions. Preferably, it should also be possible for it to be executed independently of a surface that has been detected at the instant of clearing. This means even without the fault being able to be referenced to an at least partially “finished” surface.
This object is achieved according to the invention by a method of the initially-described type, which is characterized in that the method includes the following steps:
If the representation, for example, is a mandibular arch, the extension line which is defined in step a. essentially follows the mandibular arch. Possible ways to generate various exact extension lines are explained in later sections.
After all unwanted elements have been determined in steps b. to d., all points in space that correspond to the determined elements can be removed in step e accordingly. Subsequently, a cleared representation is obtained without incorrect or correct surfaces having had to be determined in a complicated method for this purpose.
Preferred embodiments of the invention are the subject matter of the dependent claims.
Preferred exemplary embodiments of the invention are described in more detail below using the drawings. Here:
Then, for each brick, the information as to whether the voxels of the brick contain surface information is retrieved (step 12).
If it is ascertained that at least one voxel of the brick contains surface information, a center point of the brick is notated as a location vector. Here, the location vector corresponds to a connection of an origin of a coordinate system, in which the TSDF is notated, to the center point of the brick (step 13).
If a brick does not contain any voxels that contain surface information, it is marked, for example, as “empty” (step 14).
Then, all empty bricks and location vectors are combined into a common point cloud. However, for each location vector, it is stored to which voxels it corresponds (step 15).
In the next step 32, an extension line for the representation is chosen. A highly simplified extension line is a straight line along the representation. One example of such a straight line can be the y-axis of the principal axes determined in
Examples for possible determination of curved extension lines are found in
In a next, optional step 33, the extension line can optionally be smoothed. If the extension line is a straight line, this step is, of course, not necessary.
In a subsequent step 34, at least one optimization surface is generated along the extension line. Two preferred embodiments are a cylinder with the extension line as a center axis and parallel surfaces to the extension line.
In the variant in which the optimization surface is designed in the form of a cylinder, it is preferred when it is a cylinder with an elliptical base surface. In the case of curved extension lines, corresponding “hose-like” surfaces are also considered cylinders within the scope of the invention.
In the variants in which the optimization surfaces are parallel surfaces, parallel lines to the extension line are formed and are expanded into parallel surfaces in the direction of the z-axis.
Highly simplified, schematized depictions of the two variants are shown by
In step 35, all points or voxels of the optionally simplified model that lie outside of the optimization surface(s) are marked. In this case, the side(s) of the optimization surface(s) that face the extension line are considered as “inner”, and the respective other side(s) that face away are considered as “outer”.
The distance(s) from the extension line are/is selected in such a way that between the inner surfaces or between the inner surfaces and the extension line, there is enough space that the model will not be corrupted. The distance can correspond in particular to half of the thickness up to the entire thickness of a molar, in particular ⅔ of the thickness of a molar. For this purpose, for example, a measured thickness can be used. However, if there are still too few data for such statements about the object that is to be measured, for example, statistical data can also be used in order to select a corresponding distance. However, a distance of 5 mm to 7 mm will usually be appropriate to the task.
In step 36, the points in space or data in the voxels of the TSDF that correspond to the points of the curve that were marked in the preceding step are then erased or set to “unknown” and thus are removed from the representation. With this, the clearing is completed. The process of marking a voxel as “unknown” or “unseen” is described in more detail in, for example, US 2015/0024337 A1.
After the projection region has been defined, in step 94, all points of the projection region are projected vertically (therefore following the z-axis of the coordinate system) onto the extension projection plane. This yields a 2D point cloud, which is shown symbolically and highly schematically in
Within each strip, in step 96, the largest and the smallest x-values are then determined, and in step 97, the arithmetic mean is formed. From the arithmetic mean from step 97 and the center of the strip on the y-axis, in step 98, a point that is assigned to one strip at a time and that is shown black in
If, for example, as a result of gaps in the measurement and/or the projection, a strip does not contain any points, this strip is ignored in the following steps.
Then, in step 99, a curve can be determined from the points from step 98. One especially suitable and preferred method for this purpose is the method of least squares. Other approximation methods can also be used, however. One possible approximated curve 152 that originated according to the method shown in
Furthermore,
It has been shown that an approximation to a third-degree polynomial fits especially well to the shape of a dental arch in the anterior region (incisors) of said arch. However, in the posterior region (thus in the direction of the molars) the curve deviates farther from the shape of the mandibular arch than a simple straight extension line. In order to maintain the advantages of the good approximation of the polynomial in the anterior region and to still avoid the major deviation in the posterior region, in an advanced embodiment of the method from
In the subsequent step 102, the normal vectors from step 101 are projected onto a unit sphere (Gaussian projection). The origin of the coordinate system in which the representation or its simplification is notated can be used as the center point of the unit sphere. Alternatively, the center of gravity of the representation can be used. Both variants are covered, for example, at the same time when the coordinate system, in which the representation or its simplification is notated, has been produced according to the method that is shown in
The Gaussian image that has been formed in step 102 can then be examined for free surfaces in the following step 103. In doing so, it is assumed that even if the model has gaps in which no data could have been acquired, in any case no data can be acquired in the region of the jawbone itself. Therefore to identify a larger region in which nothing has been imaged on the sphere at the same time means to identify the jaw or the “origin” of the represented tooth. If then in step 104, a center of this region is determined and then in step 105 a connection is drawn from the center point of the sphere to the center point of the region, it can be assumed that this connection corresponds essentially to the alignment of the represented teeth. Consequently, the connection that was generated in step 105 is stipulated as the direction of the z-axis. In this way, an optimum alignment of the representation to the coordinate system is effected.
One method for determining the (approximate) center of the empty region in step 104 could, for example, consist in that first the center of gravity of all imaged points on the Gaussian sphere is determined. This center of gravity of the imaged points on the Gaussian sphere is then offset somewhat from the center point and will be exactly opposite the empty region. If then a connection is drawn from the center of gravity of the imaged points on the Gaussian sphere to the center point, it points automatically in the direction of the center of the empty region. It must then only still be set to length 1 (while retaining the direction), and the above-described vector that is then stipulated as the z-axis in step 105 is obtained.
In a step 106, first the largest eigenvector of the representation is determined for the determination of the other axes of the coordinate system. It will generally not be orthogonal to the above-defined z-axis and is therefore not suited to be used itself as the axis. Therefore, in step 107, first of all a first cross-product of the largest eigenvector and the z-axis is determined. The direction of the resulting vector is then defined as the direction of the x-axis. To form the direction of the y-axis, in step 108, the cross-product of the defined z-axis from step 105 and the defined x-axis from step 107 is then simply formed.
Alternatively, in step 108, the cross-product of the x-axis that was formed in step 107 and the largest eigenvector that was determined in step 106 can be formed in order to determine a new z-axis. The largest eigenvector is then preserved as the y-axis.
The method shown in
The advanced embodiment, which was explained for
Then, in a step 162, so-called features within the representation are determined. Features are characteristics that stand out in the surface topography of the representation. They can be, for example, edges and in particular peaks, corners or even depressions of the model. Features are generally determined by identifying extreme changes in the surface curvature. To do this, all points of the model and their spatial relationship to adjacent points are examined individually. If all direct neighbors of a point lie essentially in one plane, the point also lies in one plane. If all neighbors of a point lie essentially in two planes, the point lies on an edge. If the neighbors of a point lie in three or more planes, the point lies on a peak or depression. The manner in which the features are determined is irrelevant to the invention. By way of example, but not limiting, the following methods known from the state of the art are mentioned at this point: “Harris Feature Detector”, CenSurE (“Centre Surround Extremas”), ISS (“Intrinsic Shape Signatures”), NARF (“Normal Aligned Radial Feature”), SIFT (“Scale Invariant Feature Transform”), SUSAN (“Smallest Univalue Segment Assimilating Nucleus”), and AGAST (“Adaptive and Generic Accelerated Segment Test”).
If the represented objects are teeth, the features can be, for example, protuberances, tips and/or fissures. Aside from teeth with an unusual malposition, it can usually be assumed that these features follow essentially the mandibular arch. They can therefore be used especially advantageously for construction of an extension line.
Analogously to the method that is shown in
In step 164, the determined features of the representation are projected orthogonally, viz. along the z-axis, into the extension projection plane. As also already described for
The two-dimensional point cloud that was generated in step 164 can then be used as a basis for an extension line. In step 165, the latter can be produced, for example, by the application of the Least Squares Method to the points. As already explained for
In general, the described technology can be used both after scanning and also during scanning. If the latter should be desired, for example, an image (clone) of the representation can be produced, processed in parallel to detection and can be joined together with the representation that is just being detected at a later time. A method that is suitable for this purpose is shown, for example, by the Austrian utility model with application number GM 50210/2016.
Number | Date | Country | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
16 193 818.8 | Oct 2016 | EP | regional |