Proceedings of the 24th ACM Symposium on Virtual Reality Software and Technology 2018
DOI: 10.1145/3281505.3281609
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Effects of low video latency between visual information and physical sensation in immersive environments

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
3
2
1

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 9 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 4 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In this interface, it takes 33-41ms from the time the user's finger moves to the time the virtual finger moves. However, according to previous research, there is a point of reduced operability ranging 24.3-44.3ms [43]. As it takes less than 10 ms to read the finger position in the environment of this interface, the time required for processing within unity is assumed to be significant.…”
Section: ) Shortcomings Of This Interfacementioning
confidence: 96%
“…In this interface, it takes 33-41ms from the time the user's finger moves to the time the virtual finger moves. However, according to previous research, there is a point of reduced operability ranging 24.3-44.3ms [43]. As it takes less than 10 ms to read the finger position in the environment of this interface, the time required for processing within unity is assumed to be significant.…”
Section: ) Shortcomings Of This Interfacementioning
confidence: 96%
“…How low the latency needs to be depends on the application. Kadowaki et al [66] studied the users' performance solving a simple pointing task with their hand being projected at diferent motion-to-photon latencies. The authors concluded that if the latency is greater than 24.3 ms, the user's performance starts to decrease.…”
Section: Seting Latency Constraintsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, unconscious effects appear to occur at lower levels. On 2D tasks, Kadowaki et al found that there was no difference in performance in a direct touch task at 4.3 and 24.4ms [32]. Friston et al found that performance was perhaps worse, or at least not better, at very low latencies, possibly explained by behaviour of the human motor system having inherent latency [17].…”
Section: Related Work 21 Direct Impacts Of Latencymentioning
confidence: 99%