Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
The iterative closest point (ICP) algorithm is widely used in three-dimensional (3D) point cloud registration, and it is very stable and robust. However, its biggest drawback is being easily trapped in a local optimal solution, which results in the incorrect registration result. Currently, there is neither a clear effective range to define whether the ICP algorithm will fall into a local optimum nor a study providing a comprehensive evaluation of the ICP algorithm. In this paper, we take the overlap ratio, angle, distance, and noise as the influencing factors of ICP and evaluate the validity, robustness, accuracy, and efficiency of point-to-point and point-to-plane ICP by using four datasets. We first analyze the effective ranges of the two ICP algorithms with respect to overlap ratio, angle, and distance and then propose a universal effective range for the three factors. Next, the effect of Gaussian noise on the validity and accuracy of two ICPs is evaluated. We also analyze the factors influencing ICP accuracy and explain their changing rules. We finally study the effect of different parameters on the efficiency. All results are compared by using point-to-point and point-to-plane ICP algorithms. The results show that the overlap ratio has no effect on validity, but it has a significant influence on accuracy. The angle has a great impact on the validity and efficiency of ICP but has no effect on accuracy. The distance only affects validity, has a limited effect on efficiency and no effect on accuracy. Meanwhile, Gaussian noise has a little effect on the validity. In addition, the general effective range of point-to-point ICP is larger than that of point-to-plane ICP, but the point-to-plane ICP algorithm presents a better efficiency. The point-to-point ICP is more robust to Gaussian noise with respect to validity, while the point-to-plane is more resistant in terms of accuracy.
Li et al. (Wed,) studied this question.