LevelEd SR: A Substitutional Reality Level Design Workflow

Beever, Lee; John, Nigel W.

doi:10.1109/vr51125.2022.00031

Cited by 6 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…An initial study [41] employed motion capture cameras to monitor real-world objects, created 3D models to match and used these to simulate virtual objects. Other studies advanced substitutional reality by incorporating smart devices to provide extra feedback to the users [58], [59] and by merging AR and VR technologies to simulate objects from the real world into a virtual environment through a software-driven mapping process [33]. Instead of creating a complete virtual world derived from the user's actual environment, one study proposed a method termed "Prop Oriented World Rotation" [34] for aligning virtual and realworld objects using predefined significant objects.…”

Section: B Physics-based Hapticsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This system used ArUco tags [61], [62] printed on both sides of the physical cards to provide haptic feedback, which allowed users to manipulate the card physically. These aforementioned software-based approaches have inherent limitations, namely computational complexity [34], [60], incompatibility with moving objects [33], [41], [58], [59], [60], limited physical movement [34], and lack of generalizability to other applications [35].…”

Section: B Physics-based Hapticsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Furthermore, their non-natural haptic feedback fails to provide a high VR simulation fidelity [32]. In recent years, the development of VR trackers and the integration of VR and motion capture systems have aided researchers in developing high-fidelity virtual replications of real-world objects (i.e., physics-based modeling), in which users are provided with real cutaneous (object geometries) and kinesthetic (force/vibration) feedback of the virtual objects (i.e., physics-based haptics) [32], [33], [34], [35], [36], [37]. Using different hardware (such as VR trackers or motion capture markers) or software to track objects in the real world and simulate them in the VE, these methods have proven to be effective in simulating high-fidelity VR training systems [32], [38], [39], [40].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Evaluating Visual-Spatiotemporal Co-Registration of a Physics-Based Virtual Reality Haptic Interface

Mubarrat,

Chowdhury,

Fernandes

2024

IEEE Access

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study aimed to evaluate the visual-spatiotemporal co-registration of the real and virtual objects' movement dynamics in a low-cost physics-based virtual reality (VR) system that provides real cutaneous and kinesthetic haptic feedback of the objects instead of computer-generated haptic feedback. Twelve healthy participants performed three human-robot collaborative (HRC) sequential pick-and-place lifting tasks while both motion capture and VR systems respectively traced the movement kinematics of the real and virtual objects. We used an iterative closest point algorithm to transform the 3D spatial point clouds of the VR system into the motion capture system. We employed a novel algorithm and principal component analysis to respectively calculate visual and spatiotemporal co-registration precisions between virtual and real objects. Results showed a high correlation (r > 0.96) between real and virtual objects' movement dynamics and linear and angular co-registration errors of less than 5 cm and 8°, respectively. The trend also revealed a low temporal registration error of <12 ms and was only found along the vertical axis. The visual registration data indicated that the real cutaneous and kinesthetic haptics provided by the physical objects in the virtual environment enhanced proprioception and visuomotor functions of the users.

show abstract

Section: B Physics-based Hapticsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: B Physics-based Hapticsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Evaluating Visual-Spatiotemporal Co-Registration of a Physics-Based Virtual Reality Haptic Interface

Mubarrat,

Chowdhury,

Fernandes

2024

IEEE Access

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Magic Leap, Inc. launched their AR headsets Magic Leap 1 and 2 in 2018 and 2022, respectively. Magic Leap 1 is primarily used as a platform for entertainment for early adopters and the development of AR applications for developers [24], while Magic Leap 2 is positioned as an enterprise-focused AR headset designed and tailored for use in professional and business settings [24]. Besides this, Apple Inc. announced its very first AR headset Apple Vision Pro with a primary focus on entertainment in June 2023 and this product is expected to be available on the market in 2024 [25].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mobile Devices or Head-Mounted Displays: A Comparative Review and Analysis of Augmented Reality in Healthcare

Oun,

Hagerdorn,

Scheideger

et al. 2024

IEEE Access

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Augmented reality (AR), which combines digital rendering with the real world, has significantly shaped the healthcare system. AR technology can be utilized through a range of devices, broadly grouped into two categories: mobile devices and head-mounted displays (HMDs). Mobile devices for AR usually include smartphones, tablets, and smartwatches; on the other hand, HMDs include different models of smart glasses and AR headsets. Each device category offers a unique way to experience AR, making the technology accessible and adaptable for various healthcare applications. However, the differences between using mobile devices and HMDs, and which is preferred under specific conditions, have yet to be determined. To address this, the survey provides a comparative review and analysis of the use of mobile-and HMDbased AR in the context of healthcare. A total of 43 relevant studies published between 2021 and July 2023 were identified from PubMed, ScienceDirect, and SpringerLink based on predetermined keywords and inclusion criteria. Of these, 9 (21%) focused on mobile-based and 34 (79%) on HMD-based AR. We provided a summary for each study, followed by an analysis and comparison of the AR functionalities that drive researchers to adopt the technology, the healthcare purposes researchers aim to address, and the study locations. Additionally, this study summarized the benefits, limitations and challenges, as well as potential future directions for these AR healthcare applications. The objective is to provide a comprehensive overview of both mobile-and HMD-based AR applications in healthcare, which assist individuals in knowing the potential uses of the technology and to aid them in choosing the suitable device for their specific needs.INDEX TERMS Augmented reality, head-mounted display, mobile devices, comparative review.

show abstract

Obstacle Avoidance and Interaction in Extended Reality: An Approach Based on 3D Object Detection

Martini,

Solari,

Chessa

2023

Lecture Notes in Computer Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

LevelEd SR: A Substitutional Reality Level Design Workflow

Cited by 6 publications

References 18 publications

Evaluating Visual-Spatiotemporal Co-Registration of a Physics-Based Virtual Reality Haptic Interface

Evaluating Visual-Spatiotemporal Co-Registration of a Physics-Based Virtual Reality Haptic Interface

Mobile Devices or Head-Mounted Displays: A Comparative Review and Analysis of Augmented Reality in Healthcare

Obstacle Avoidance and Interaction in Extended Reality: An Approach Based on 3D Object Detection

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About