Data Set for Parameterizations
This large testing benchmark contains 20712 meshes. It starts from well cut meshes D1, continues with moderately bad ones D2, and ends with extremely challenging examples D3. If you use our data set, please cite [1] and [2].
D1 (Download)

Figure 1: Gallery of some selected models from D1, which containts 10273 models. Since nearly half the models are very large, we use a program to subdivide the small sized meshes. Here we only provide the small sized meshes which are cut by our sphere-based method [2]. If you want to test your parameterization method on these large-scale models, please download the code to generate them.

Figure 2: Efficiency comparisons using two models from D1. We select the scalable locally injective maps (SLIM) [Rabinovich et al. 2017], the approximate Killing vector field method (AKVF) [Claici et al. 2017], and the composite majorization method (CM) [Shtengel et al. 2017] as the competitors.
D2 (Download)

Figure 3: Gallery of some selected models from D2, which containts 6189 models.

Figure 4: Efficiency comparisons using two models from D2.
D3 (Download)

Figure 5: Gallery of some selected models from D3, which containts 4250 models.

Figure 6: Efficiency comparisons using two models from D3.
Reference
[1]: Ligang Liu, Chunyang Ye, Ruiqi Ni, Xiao-Ming Fu. Progressive Parameterizations. ACM Transactions on Graphics (SIGGRAPH) 37(4), 2018. [Bibtex].
[2]: Shuangming Chai, Xiao-Ming Fu, Xin Hu, Yang Yang, Ligang Liu. Sphere-based Cut Construction for Planar Parameterizations. Computer & Graphics (SMI 2018). [Bibtex].