3D Model Difference Detection via Object Segmentation and Sorting

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Current methods for comparing 3D models are time-consuming, error-prone, and vulnerable to human dishonesty, especially when reviewing thousands of items or conditions across different environments, such as rental housing, rental cars, and warehouses, and are incompatible with certain environments.

Innovation Solution

A computer-implemented method that receives and compares two 3D models by identifying common objects, calculating differences, and sorting them based on rules, including weighted attributes and relevance scores, to yield a list of differences, which can be implemented in a cloud-based or distributed environment using 3D rendering and image reconstruction techniques.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Measurement precision

If manual review of differences between 3D models is performed, then comprehensive comparison can be made, but the process becomes excessively time-consuming and overwhelming

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecomparison accuracyVSAvoidreview time
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The patent segments the large set of detected differences into manageable groups or categories, allowing reviewers to systematically examine differences in organized batches rather than overwhelming lists, thereby reducing review time while maintaining comprehensive coverage

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The patent introduces an automated computer-implemented system as an intermediary that performs preliminary comparison and filtering of differences between 3D models, pre-processing the data before human review to reduce the time and effort required for manual examination

Inventive Principle:
Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

2Productivity

If automated comparison of 3D models is implemented, then review time is reduced, but accuracy and reliability may be compromised

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecomparison speedVSAvoiddetection accuracy
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSMeasurement precision

Solution Approach 1:

The patent implements feedback mechanisms where the automated system's detection results are validated and refined through iterative processes, allowing the system to learn from and correct its own outputs, thereby maintaining high accuracy while preserving automated processing speed

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

Solution Approach 2:

The patent replaces manual mechanical review processes with automated computer-based algorithms for comparing 3D models, using computational methods to detect differences with consistent accuracy while dramatically increasing processing speed and productivity

Inventive Principle:
Principle #28Mechanics substitution (Replace mechanical system)

3Reliability

If comprehensive difference detection is performed across all objects, then complete inventory is achieved, but the complexity and computational resources required increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveinventory completenessVSAvoidsystem complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent extracts and focuses computational resources on detecting and processing only the relevant differences between 3D models rather than performing exhaustive analysis of all objects, removing unnecessary computational complexity while maintaining complete inventory of actual changes

Inventive Principle:
Principle #2Taking out (Extraction)

Solution Approach 2:

The patent performs preliminary scanning and identification of objects and their attributes before conducting the detailed comparison, pre-organizing data structures and relationships to simplify the subsequent difference detection process and reduce overall system complexity

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Data Source

PatentUS10318844B2Detection and presentation of differences between 3D models
Publication Date: 2019.06.11 INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS MACHINE CORPORATION
  • US10318844B2 patent drawing
  • US10318844B2 patent drawing
  • US10318844B2 patent drawing

AI summary

A computer-implemented method includes receiving a first 3D model and a second 3D model, wherein the first 3D model represents a first set of objects and the second 3D model represents includes a second set of objects. The computer-implemented method further includes scanning each of the first 3D model and the second 3D model to identify the first set of objects and the second set of objects, wherein the first set of objects and the second set of objects have at least one common object. The computer-implemented method further includes comparing the first set of objects to the second set of objects to yield one or more differences. The computer-implemented method further includes sorting each of the one or more differences based on a set of rules to yield a list of differences. A corresponding computer system and computer program product are also disclosed.