ACM SIGGRAPH 2017 Posters 2017
DOI: 10.1145/3102163.3102243
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Visualization of 3D sound field using see-through head mounted display

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
3
1

Relationship

1
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 1 publication
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The stereoscopic view and free viewpoint move-ment can help realize the 3D assessment of sound propagation. We developed two types of sound field visualization systems using different STHMDs and technologies for AR/MR and then created a 3D sound intensity map as a visualization target for sound information [16,17]. We also verified the effectiveness of the proposed visualization systems.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 91%
“…The stereoscopic view and free viewpoint move-ment can help realize the 3D assessment of sound propagation. We developed two types of sound field visualization systems using different STHMDs and technologies for AR/MR and then created a 3D sound intensity map as a visualization target for sound information [16,17]. We also verified the effectiveness of the proposed visualization systems.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 91%
“…Advances in AR headsets create opportunities to present the environment to users in new and novel ways. Much research in this area focuses on using headset displays to visualize parts of the environment not normally seen, such as the visualization of sound fields [10] or visualizations for spatially locating sound [11]. Less research exists on presenting local environmental information (such as spatial mapping data) using audio.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Radar method (clock, compass, white noise, scale) Block (1,2,3) Trial (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10) As well, group was a between-subjects factor for counterbalancing the radar method condition. There were four groups with nine participants in each group.…”
Section: Designmentioning
confidence: 99%