Subjective Evaluation of a Semi-Automatic Optical See-Through Head-Mounted Display Calibration Technique

Abstract

With the growing availability of optical see-through (OST) head-mounted displays (HMDs) there is a present need for robust, uncomplicated, and automatic calibration methods suited for non-expert users. This work presents the results of a user study which both objectively and subjectively examines registration accuracy produced by three OST HMD calibration methods: (1) SPAAM, (2) Degraded SPAAM, and (3) Recycled INDICA, a recently developed semi-automatic calibration method. Accuracy metrics used for evaluation include subject provided quality values and error between perceived and absolute registration coordinates. Our results show all three calibration methods produce very accurate registration in the horizontal direction but caused subjects to perceive the distance of virtual objects to be closer than intended. Surprisingly, the semi-automatic calibration method produced more accurate registration vertically and in perceived object distance overall. User assessed quality values were also the highest for Recycled INDICA, particularly when objects were shown at distance. The results of this study confirm that Recycled INDICA is capable of producing equal or superior on-screen registration compared to common OST HMD calibration methods. We also identify a potential hazard in using reprojection error as a quantitative analysis technique to predict registration accuracy. We conclude with discussing the further need for examining INDICA calibration in binocular HMD systems, and the present possibility for creation of a closed-loop continuous calibration method for OST Augmented Reality.

Augmented reality technology in the manufacturing industry: A review of the last decade

“…An OST-HMD is a wearable device that has the capability of reflecting projected images, as well as allowing the user to see through it using AR. Eye-tracking and OST-HMD have been examined jointly by Moser et al (2015), who carried out a user study to evaluate the registration accuracy produced by three OST-HMD calibration methods, from both an objective (quantitative) and subjective (qualitative) perspective. Similarly, Orlosky et al (2015) have proposed ModulAR, a hardware and software framework designed to improve flexibility and hands-free control of video see-through AR displays; the framework integrates eye-tracking for on-demand control of vision augmentations, such as optical zoom or field of view expansion.…”

“…Calibration of AR devices has been dealt with by Canessa et al (2014) for the case of a color camera, Liu et al (2016) for an AR guiding system, Kellner et al (2012) for an HMD, and Eck et al (2015), Itoh et al (2015) and Moser et al (2015) for OSTHDMs. Ergonomic issues were instead examined by Schega et al (2014), who evaluated the effect of different HMDs on visual performance of the users, and Tuma et al (2016) who used AR to evaluate the ergonomic state of a workplace.…”

Light-Field Correction for Spatial Calibration of Optical See-Through Head-Mounted Displays

“…What would help to justify this last hypothesis is to conduct the same experiment with many different subjects in a very controlled environment such as in [24]. Perhaps such a study can create a benchmark dataset as a by product.…”

“…Future work directions involve: considering the distortion of the virtual screen [20,21,27] which is assumed to be planer in this paper, deepening the understanding of the eye-dependent parameters [28], investigating the possibility of automated frame-wise OST-HMD calibrations, establishing and refining ways to compare different calibration methods with both subjective [24] and objective error measurements, overcoming the latency issue which is also another dominant aspects directly affects to the spatial registration quality [37], and so on.…”

Task‐driven latent active correction for physics‐inspired input method in near‐field mixed reality applications

“…obtained the position and orientation of a built‐in camera in offline stage, which was similar to the method of Makibuchi et al ., then the user should adjust the position of his eyes by means of a slider‐based interface to align the contours of the virtual marker and the real borders of the real marker. Moser et al . conducted an experiment to obtain the baseline accuracy and precision values as well as avoid the human postural sway error, and then they performed a subjective evaluation for the SPAAM, degraded SPAAM, and recycled INDICA.…”