Torso versus gaze direction to navigate a VE by walking in place

Abstract

In this work, we present a simple method of "walking in place" (WIP) using the Microsoft Kinect to explore a virtual environment (VE) with a head-mounted display (HMD). Other studies have shown that WIP to explore a VE is equivalent to normal walking in terms of spatial orientation. This suggests that WIP is a promising way to explore a large VE. The Microsoft Kinect sensor is a great tool for implementing WIP because it enables real time skeletal tracking and is relatively inexpensive (150 USD). However, the skeletal information obtained from Kinect sensors can be noisy. Thus, in this work, we discuss how we combined the data from two Kinects to implement a robust WIP algorithm. As part of our analysis on how best to implement WIP with the Kinect, we compare Gaze direction locomotion to Torso direction locomotion. We report that participants' spatial orientation was better when they translated forward in the VE in the direction they were looking.

Perceiving Absolute Scale in Virtual Environments: How Theory and Application Have Mutually Informed the Role of Body-Based Perception

“…For example, the Oculus Rift, a low-cost (w$300) HMD, could make immersive VEs accessible for many spatially based applications such as architectural design, where the perceived scale of an environment is critical. Likewise, devices such as the Microsoft Kinect and the Nintendo Wii Fit Balance Board are beginning to be used by researchers to track movements of users so that they may interact with virtual displays (Williams, Bailey, Narasimham, Li, & Bodenheimer, 2011;Williams, McCaleb, Strachan, & Zheng, 2013) and visual avatars also have the potential to be integrated within these systems (Raj, Creem-Regehr, Stefanucci, & Thompson, 2012).…”

Walking in Place Through Virtual Worlds

“…The direction of heading can either be derived from the data used for proxy step detection, as was the case in relation to the physical platforms described in subsection 3.1, or it can be obtained from additional trackers mounted on the user. At least five different approaches to steering during WIP locomotion have been used: joystick-controlled steering, gaze-directed steering, torso-directed steering, hip-directed steering, and feetdirected steering [9,14,33,34]. A potential limitation of using joysticks or similar peripherals for steering is that this will deprive the user of the proprioceptive and kinesthetic feedback produced by whole body turns [28].…”

“…A limitation of this approach is that it limits the user's ability to look around the environment while walking [33]. Nevertheless, it has been documented that gaze-directed steering may be experinced as preferable and perform better than torso-directed steering in regards to certain spatial orienting tasks [34]. Notably, in relation to torso-directed steering, trackers are often placed on the chest [9].…”

A comparison of different methods for reducing the unintended positional drift accompanying walking-in-place locomotion

“…Williams et al [35] present a study comparing gaze directed and torso direct WIP locomotion. While the study did not explicitly assess UPD, the authors do present the measure they took in order to minimize positional drift.…”

“…The authors refer to this phenomenon as Unintended Positional Drift (UPD). Notably, the problem of UPD has also been addressed by Williams et al [35] and positional drift has previously been observed on behalf of blindfolded individuals walking or running in place after they have been walking or running on a treadmill [1,21]. If WIP interaction techniques are to be considered meaningful solutions to the problem of incompatible real and virtual spaces, it is crucial that the users remain stationary.…”