You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Your paper is really an enlightening work and thanks for sharing your code. But I wonder is there any difference between the graph feature extraction module and EdgeConv in DGCNN. After reading your code, I believe the graph feature extraction function is the same as EdgeConv in DGCNN.
You strengthened that the graph feature extraction module in your work is rotation invariant. And you gave a mathematical explanation through the conversion between (10) and (12) in your paper. This part confuses me a lot, however, would you mind give a detailed explanation about the conversion?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Hi, thanks for your interest. Yes. we used the same EdgeConv layer as in DGCNN. In our paper, we just showed why the EdgeConv itself could extract multi-view features, which could be used to classify the rotated point cloud. However, we cannot ensure that the EdgeConv to be absolutely rotation invariant. We can only say EdgeConv may be approximately rotation invariant if it can extract multi-view features.
Hi Kuangen,
Your paper is really an enlightening work and thanks for sharing your code. But I wonder is there any difference between the graph feature extraction module and EdgeConv in DGCNN. After reading your code, I believe the graph feature extraction function is the same as EdgeConv in DGCNN.
You strengthened that the graph feature extraction module in your work is rotation invariant. And you gave a mathematical explanation through the conversion between (10) and (12) in your paper. This part confuses me a lot, however, would you mind give a detailed explanation about the conversion?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: