This paper introduces an emerging motion planning problem by considering a human that is immersed into the viewing perspective of a remote robot. The challenge is to make the experience both effective (such as delivering a sense of presence) and comfortable (such as avoiding adverse sickness symptoms, including nausea). We refer this challenging new area as human perception-optimized planning and propose a general multiobjective optimization framework that can be instantiated in many envisioned scenarios. We then consider a specific VR telepresence task as a case of human perceptionoptimized planning, in which we simulate a robot that sends 360 video to a remote user to be viewed through a headmounted display. In this particular task, we plan trajectories that minimize VR sickness (and thereby maximize comfort). An A* type method is used to create a Pareto-optimal collection of piecewise linear trajectories while taking into account criteria that improve comfort. We conducted a study with human subjects touring a virtual museum, in which paths computed by our algorithm are compared against a reference RRT-based trajectory. Generally, users suffered less from VR sickness and preferred the paths created by the presented algorithm.

Objective: To examine the hypothesis that constant speed is more comfortable than variable speed profiles and may minimize cybersickness. Background: Current best practices for virtual reality (VR) content creation suggest keeping any form of acceleration as short and infrequent as possible to mitigate cybersickness. Methods: In Experiment 1, participants experienced repetitions of simulated linear motion, and in Experiment 2, they experienced repetitions of a circular motion. Three speed profiles were tested in each experiment. Each trial lasted 2 min while standing. Cybersickness was measured using the Simulator Sickness Questionnaire (SSQ) and operationally defined in terms of total severity scores. Postural stability was measured using a Wii Balance Board and operationally defined in terms of center of pressure (COP) path length. Postural measures were decomposed into anterior-posterior and medial-lateral axes and subjected to detrended fluctuation analysis. Results: For both experiments, no significant differences were observed between the three speed profiles in terms of cybersickness or postural stability, and none of the baseline postural measures could predict SSQ scores for the speed profile conditions. An axis effect was observed in both experiments such that normalized COP movement was significantly greater along the anterior-posterior axis than the medial-lateral axis. Conclusion: Results showed no convincing evidence to support the common belief that constant speed is more comfortable than variable speed profiles for scenarios typical of VR applications. Application: The present findings offer guidelines for the design of locomotion techniques involving traversal in VR environments.

No abstract

No abstract