Research Papers

Determining Probability of Importance of Features in a Sketch

[+] Author and Article Information
Ricardo Cruz-Lozano

Department of Mechanical Engineering,
Texas Tech University,
Lubbock, TX 49409
e-mail: ricardo.cruz-lozano@ttu.edu

Fisseha M. Alemayehu

School of Engineering,
Computer Science and Mathematics,
West Texas A&M University,
Canyon, TX 79016
e-mail: falemayehu@wtamu.edu

Stephen Ekwaro-Osire

Department of Mechanical Engineering,
Texas Tech University,
Lubbock, TX 79409
e-mail: stephen.ekwaro-osire@ttu.edu

Haileyesus B. Endeshaw

Department of Mechanical Engineering,
Texas Tech University,
Lubbock, TX 79409
e-mail: haile.endeshaw@ttu.edu

1Corresponding author.

Manuscript received January 28, 2016; final manuscript received January 28, 2017; published online June 13, 2017. Assoc. Editor: Jeremy M. Gernand.

ASME J. Risk Uncertainty Part B 3(4), 041003 (Jun 13, 2017) (13 pages) Paper No: RISK-16-1051; doi: 10.1115/1.4035867 History: Received January 28, 2016; Revised January 28, 2017

Sketches can be categorized as personal, shared, persuasive, and handover sketches. Depending on each category, their level of ambiguity also varies. The applications of sketches include conceptual design, eliciting user preferences, shape retrieval, and sketch-based modeling (SBM). There is a need for quantification of uncertainty in sketches in mapping of sketches to three-dimensional (3D) models in sketch-based modeling, in eliciting user preferences, and in tuning the level of uncertainty in sketches at the conceptual design stage. This paper investigates the role of probability of importance in quantifying the level of uncertainty in sketches by raising the following three research questions: How are the features in a sketch ranked? What is the probability of importance of features in a sketch? What is the level of uncertainty in a sketch? This paper presents an improved framework for uncertainty quantification in sketches. The framework is capable of identifying and ranking the features in the sketch, determining their probability of importance, and finally quantifying the level of uncertainty in the sketch. Ranking the features of a sketch is performed by a hierarchical approach, whereas probability of importance is determined by assessing the probability of likeliness using a shape matching approach and a probability transformation. Quantification of uncertainty is accomplished by using the principle of normalization of entropy. A case study of a bicycle sketch is used to demonstrate that the framework eliminates the need of expert input in assessment of uncertainty in sketches and, hence, can be used by design practitioners with limited experience.

Copyright © 2017 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.


Ferguson, E. S. , 1992, Engineering and the Mind’s Eye, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
Eckert, C. , Blackwell, A. F. , Stacey, M. , Earl, C. , and Church, L. , 2012, “ Sketching Across Design Domains: Roles and Formalities,” Artif. Intell. Eng. Des. Anal. Manuf., 26(3), pp. 245–266. [CrossRef]
Pei, E. , Campbell, I. R. , and Evans, M. A. , 2011, “ A Taxonomic Classification of Visual Design Representations Used by Industrial Designers and Engineering Designers,” Des. J., 14(1), pp. 61–91.
Yang, M. C. , and Cham, J. G. , 2007, “ An Analysis of Sketching Skill and Its Role in Early Stage Engineering Design,” ASME J. Mech. Des., 129(5), p. 476. [CrossRef]
Westmoreland, S. , Ruocco, A. , and Schmidt, L. , 2011, “ Analysis of Capstone Design Reports: Visual Representations,” ASME J. Mech. Des., 133(5), p. 051010.
Faas, D. , Bao, Q. , and Yang, M. C. , 2014, “ Preliminary Sketching and Prototyping: Comparisons in Exploratory Design-and-Build Activities,” ASME Paper No. DETC2014-34928.
Menezes, A. , and Lawson, B. , 2006, “ How Designers Perceive Sketches,” Des. Stud., 27(5), pp. 571–585. [CrossRef]
Atilola, O. , Tomko, M. , and Linsey, J. S. , 2016, “ The Effects of Representation on Idea Generation and Design Fixation: A Study Comparing Sketches and Function Trees,” Des. Stud., 42, pp. 110–136. [CrossRef]
Tseng, W. S. W. , and Ball, L. J. , 2011, “ How Uncertainty Helps Sketch Interpretation in a Design Task,” Design Creativity 2010, T. Taura and Y. Nagai , eds., Springer, London, pp. 257–264.
Häggman, A. , Tsai, G. , Elsen, C. , Honda, T. , and Yang, M. C. , 2015, “ Connections Between the Design Tool, Design Attributes, and User Preferences in Early Stage Design,” ASME J. Mech. Des., 137(7), p. 71408. [CrossRef]
Macomber, B. , and Yang, M. , 2011, “ The Role of Sketch Finish and Style in User Responses to Early,” ASME Paper No. DETC2011-48714.
Reid, T. , MacDonald, E. , and Du, P. , 2012, “ Impact of Product Design Representation on Customer Judgment With Associated Eye Gaze Patterns,” ASME Paper No. DETC2012-70734.
Johnson, G. , Gross, M. D. , Hong, J. , Johnson, G. , Gross, M. D. , Hong, J. , and Do, E. Y. , 2008, “ Computational Support for Sketching in Design: A Review,” Found. Trends Hum.-Comput. Interact., 2(1), pp. 1–93. [CrossRef]
Qi, Y. , Guo, J. , Song, Y. , Xiang, T. , Zhang, H. , and Tan, Z. , 2015, “ Im2Sketch: Sketch Generation by Unconflicted Perceptual Grouping,” Neurocomputing, 165, pp. 338–349. [CrossRef]
Li, B. , Lu, Y. , Godil, A. , Schreck, T. , Bustos, B. , Ferreira, A. , Furuya, T. , Fonseca, M. J. , Johan, H. , Matsuda, T. , Ohbuchi, R. , Pascoal, P. B. , and Saavedra, J. M. , 2014, “ A Comparison of Methods for Sketch-Based 3D Shape Retrieval,” Comput. Vision Image Understanding, 119, pp. 57–80. [CrossRef]
Yang, M. , Kpalma, K. , Ronsin, J. , Yang, M. , Kpalma, K. , Ronsin, J. , Survey, A. , and Feature, S. , 2008, “ A Survey of Shape Feature Extraction Techniques,” Pattern Recognition Techniques, Technology and Applications, P. Peng-Yeng , ed., I-TECH, Vienna, Austria, pp. 43–90.
Eitz, M. , Richter, R. , Boubekeur, T. , Hildebrand, K. , and Alexa, M. , 2012, “ Sketch-Based Shape Retrieval,” ACM Trans. Graphics, 31(4), pp. 1–10.
Entem, E. , Barthe, L. , Cani, M. , Cordier, F. , and van de Panne, M. , 2015, “ Modeling 3D Animals From a Side-View Sketch,” Comput. Graphics, 46, pp. 221–230. [CrossRef]
Xie, X. , Xu, K. , Mitra, N. J. , Cohen-Or, D. , Gong, W. , Su, Q. , and Chen, B. , 2013, “ Sketch-to-Design: Context-Based Part Assembly,” Comput. Graphics Forum, 32(8), pp. 233–245. [CrossRef]
Zou, C. , Peng, X. , Lv, H. , Chen, S. , Fu, H. , and Liu, J. , 2015, “ Sketch-Based 3-D Modeling for Piecewise Planar Objects in Single Images,” Comput. Graphics, 46(8), pp. 130–137. [CrossRef]
Olsen, L. , Samavati, F. F. , Sousa, M. C. , and Jorge, J. A. , 2009, “ Sketch-Based Modeling: A Survey,” Comput. Graphics, 33(1), pp. 85–103. [CrossRef]
Zhang, D. , and Lu, G. , 2004, “ Review of Shape Representation and Description Techniques,” Pattern Recognit., 37(1), pp. 1–19. [CrossRef]
Sá Junior, J. J. D. M. , and Backes, A. R. , 2015, “ Shape Classification Using Line Segment Statistics,” Inf. Sci., 305, pp. 349–356. [CrossRef]
Belongie, S. , Malik, J. , and Puzicha, J. , 2002, “ Shape Matching and Object Recognition Using Shape Contexts,” IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell., 24(24), pp. 509–522. [CrossRef]
Feng, J. , Ip, H. H. S. , Lai, L. Y. , and Linney, A. , 2008, “ Robust Point Correspondence Matching and Similarity Measuring for 3D Models by Relative Angle-Context Distributions,” Image Vision Comput., 26(6), pp. 761–775. [CrossRef]
Daliri, M. R. , and Torre, V. , 2008, “ Robust Symbolic Representation for Shape Recognition and Retrieval,” Pattern Recognit., 41(5), pp. 1799–1815. [CrossRef]
van de Panne, M. , and Sharon, D. , 2011, “ Flexible Parts-Based Sketch Recognition,” Sketch-Based Interfaces and Modeling, J. Jorge and F. Samavati , eds., Springer, London, pp. 153–179.
Lugo, J. E. , Schmiedeler, J. P. , Batill, S. M. , and Carlson, L. , 2015, “ Quantification of Classical Gestalt Principles in Two-Dimensional Product Representations,” ASME J. Mech. Des., 137(9), p. 94502. [CrossRef]
Prats, M. , Earl, C. , Garner, S. , and Jowers, I. , 2006, “ Shape Exploration of Designs in a Style: Toward Generation of Product Designs,” Artif. Intell. Eng. Des. Anal. Manuf., 20(3), pp. 201–215. [CrossRef]
Prats, M. , Lim, S. , Jowers, I. , Garner, S. W. , and Chase, S. , 2009, “ Transforming Shape in Design: Observations From Studies of Sketching,” Des. Stud., 30(5), pp. 503–520. [CrossRef]
Ranscombe, C. , Hicks, B. , Mullineux, G. , and Singh, B. , 2012, “ Visually Decomposing Vehicle Images: Exploring the Influence of Different Aesthetic Features on Consumer Perception of Brand,” Des. Stud., 33(4), pp. 319–341. [CrossRef]
Maier, A. M. , Eckert, C. M. , and Clarkson, P. J. , 2005, “ A Meta-Model for Communication in Engineering Design,” CoDesign Int. J. CoCreation Des. Arts, 1(4), pp. 243–254.
Hannah, R. , Joshi, S. , and Summers, J. D. , 2012, “ A User Study of Interpretability of Engineering Design Representations,” J. Eng. Des., 23(6), pp. 443–468. [CrossRef]
Burns, K. , 2006, “ Atoms of EVE’: A Bayesian Basis for Esthetic Analysis of Style in Sketching,” Artif. Intell. Eng. Des. Anal. Manuf., 20(3), pp. 185–199. [CrossRef]
Khan, W. A. , and Angeles, J. , 2007, “ The Role of Entropy in Design Theory and Methodology,” CEEA/ACEG 50th Paper, Winnipeg, Canada.
Shannon, C. E. , 1948, “ A Mathematical Theory of Communication,” Bell Syst. Tech. J., 27(3), pp. 379–423. [CrossRef]
Ekwaro-Osire, S. , Cruz-Lozano, R. , and Endeshaw, H. , 2015, “ Uncertainty in the Communication With a Sketch,” 2015 International Conference of Society of Design and Process Science, Society for Design and Process Science, Dallas, TX, pp. 450–456.
Cruz-Lozano, R. , Alemayehu, F. M. , Ekwaro-Osire, S. , and Endeshaw, H. , 2015, “ Determining Probability of Importance of Features in a Sketch,” ASME Paper No. IMECE2015-52807.
Cruz-Lozano, R. , Alemayehu, F. , and Ekwaro-Osire, S. , 2014, “ Quantification of Uncertainty in Sketches,” ASME Paper No. IMECE2014-39383.
Murmann, J. P. , and Frenken, K. , 2006, “ Toward a Systematic Framework for Research on Dominant Designs, Technological Innovations, and Industrial Change,” Res. Policy, 35(7), pp. 925–952. [CrossRef]
Huenteler, J. , Ossenbrink, J. , Schmidt, T. S. , and Hoffmann, V. H. , 2016, “ How a Product’s Design Hierarchy Shapes the Evolution of Technological Knowledge—Evidence From Patent-Citation Networks in Wind Power,” Res. Policy, 45(6), pp. 1195–1217. [CrossRef]
Hyun, K. H. , Lee, J.-H. , and Kim, M. , 2015, “ The Gap Between Design Intent and User Response: Identifying Typical and Novel Car Design Elements Among Car Brands for Evaluating Visual Significance,” J. Intell. Manuf., pp. 1–13.
Sallaou, M. , and Fadel, G. M. , 2016, “ Energy Based Functional Decomposition in Preliminary Design,” ASME J. Mech. Des., 133(5), p. 051101.
Jupp, J. R. , and Gero, J. S. , 2004, “ Qualitative Representation and Reasoning in Design: A Hierarchy of Shape and Spatial Languages,” Visual and Spatial Reasoning in Design III, MIT, Cambridge, MA, pp. 139–162.
Lun, Z. , Kalogerakis, E. , and Sheffer, A. , 2015, “ Elements of Style: Learning Perceptual Shape Style Similarity,” ACM Trans. Graphics, 34(4), pp. 84:1–84:14. [CrossRef]
Ling, H. , and Jacobs, D. W. , 2007, “ Shape Classification Using the Inner-Distance,” IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell., 29(2), pp. 286–299. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Gorman, J. W. , Mitchell, O. R. , and Kuhl, F. P. , 1988, “ Partial Shape Recognition Using Dynamic Programming,” IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell., 10(2), pp. 257–266. [CrossRef]
Masisi, L. , Nelwamondo, V. , and Marwala, T. , 2008, “ The Use of Entropy to Measure Structural Diversity,” IEEE International Conference on Computational Cybernetics ICCC 2008, Stara Lesn, Slovakia, Nov. 27–29, pp. 41–45.
Encyclopædia Britannica, “ Bicycle,” Britannica Academic, accessed June 28, 2016, academic.eb.com.lib-e2.lib.ttu.edu/levels/collegiate/article/79113


Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Improved framework for the quantification of uncertainty in sketches

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Sketch of a bicycle

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Identified features in the sketch of a bicycle: (a) mounting system, (b) steering system, (c) power system, and (d) rear wheel system

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Determining standard images of bicycle components

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Determining Li for the features of the sketch of a bicycle

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Uncertainty as a function of the probability of importance value of the most important feature (p1)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Uncertainty as a function of p1 and the second feature ()% of residual probability for (a) three features, (b) four features, and (c) five features

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Example of levels of uncertainty of sketches of a bicycle: (a) high uncertainty (u = 60.08%) and (b) low uncertainty (u = 10.95%)




Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Articles from Part A: Civil Engineering
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In