Fundamentals for a Turing Test of Virtual Reality

Abstract

Alan Turing developed the imitation game – the Turing Test – in which an interrogator is tasked with discriminating and identifying two subjects by asking a series of questions. Based on subject feedback, the challenge to the interrogator is to correctly identify those subjects. Applying this concept to the discrimination of reality from virtual reality is essential as simulation technology progresses toward a virtual era, in which we experience equal and greater presence in virtuality than reality. It is important to explore the conceptual and theoretical underpinnings of the Turing Test in order to avoid possible issues when adapting the test for virtual reality. This requires an understanding of how users judge virtual and real environments, and how these environments influence their judgement. Turing-type tests, the constructs of reality judgement and presence, and measurement methods for each are explored. Following this brief review, the researchers contribute a theoretical foundation for future development of a Turing-type test for virtual reality, based on the universal experience of the mundane.

Familiar size affects perception differently in virtual reality and the real world

“…R. Soc. B 378: 20210464 presence from virtual objects compared to real ones [86,87]. Some of these factors may be reduced or eliminated as VR technology improves, particularly if systems become more optically accurate through better calibration or if systems using optically veridical ray-traced images can be successfully developed.…”

“…Other distortions may arise from the nature of stimulus development software like U nity , which was developed for fast latencies in gaming rather than verisimilitude in research. In addition, there may have been other high-level factors that changed perception, including increased motion sickness in VR displays, fatigue from the VAC [ 85 ], and the reduced realism and sense of presence from virtual objects compared to real ones [ 86 , 87 ]. Some of these factors may be reduced or eliminated as VR technology improves, particularly if systems become more optically accurate through better calibration or if systems using optically veridical ray-traced images can be successfully developed.…”

Bridging the gap of work‐as‐imagined versus work‐as‐done through use of multiuser immersive virtual reality simulation

“…While VR simulation provides an improvement in replicating an immersive clinical environment, in its present form, it cannot replace the tactile reinforcement associated with caring for a live patient or fully replicate the busy clinical environment with its numerous distractions and competing priorities. 4 This is also reinforced by Zackoff Ultimately, to be successful, purveyors of VR simulation should aim to add dimension, not perfection, to the concept of simulation fidelity.…”

“…The fundamental limitation of any simulation environment is that it cannot come close to passing the Turing Test—an aspirational principle where a human participant cannot distinguish between human and artificial intelligence. While VR simulation provides an improvement in replicating an immersive clinical environment, in its present form, it cannot replace the tactile reinforcement associated with caring for a live patient or fully replicate the busy clinical environment with its numerous distractions and competing priorities 4 . This is also reinforced by Zackoff et al's.…”