RealityCheck: A Tool to Evaluate Spatial Inconsistency in Augmented Reality

Slocum, Carter; Ran, Xukan; Chen, Jiasi

doi:10.1109/ism52913.2021.00018

Cited by 6 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Because AR overlays virtual objects onto the physical environment, the headset would need to consistently keep track of the physical environment and constantly update the rendered virtual object based on the participant's location to maintain the spatial relationship. However, the headset's interpretation of the physical environment may not always be consistent, which would result in the drifting of the virtual object (Carter et al, 2021). In the current context, although the AR display was anchored using a QR code at the beginning of the experiment, it could have drifted during the experiment, leading to inconsistent movement endpoints.…”

Section: Kinematic Characteristics Across Modalitiesmentioning

confidence: 88%

Mixed Reality Alters Motor Planning and Control

Wang,

Nitsche,

Resch

et al. 2024

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Compared to physical, unmediated reality (UR), mixed reality technologies, such as Virtual (VR) and Augmented (AR) Reality, entail perturbations across multiple sensory modalities (visual, haptic, etc.) that could alter how actors move within the different environments. Because of the mediated nature, goal-directed movements in VR and AR may rely on planning and control processes that are different from movements in UR, resulting in less efficient motor control. The current study involved participants performing manual aiming movements on Müller-Lyer illusion stimuli to examine the relative contributions of movement planning and online control in UR, VR, and AR. Compared to UR, movements in VR were slower but were equally variable with a comparable level of online control, whereas movements in AR showed comparable speed but exhibited higher variability and less online control. Further, movements in VR and AR demonstrated a greater illusory effect in endpoint accuracy relative to UR. These findings suggested that participants in VR adopted an active compensation strategy to overcome the impact of less efficient online control, whereas those in AR did not. The findings that VR and AR fundamentally alter movement planning and execution provide valuable insights into the potential neural systems engaged during movements in different realities.

show abstract

Section: Kinematic Characteristics Across Modalitiesmentioning

confidence: 88%

Mixed Reality Alters Motor Planning and Control

Wang,

Nitsche,

Resch

et al. 2024

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As outlined in the xReality framework (Rauschnabel, Babin, et al, 2022), a core distinctive factor on the AR continuum is the local presence (Lavoye et al, 2021). J. V. Chen et al (2021) use the term "local presence" to describe an AR user's perception that an AR element is "here". Y.…”

Section: Augmented Reality and Marketingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…From the user's perspective, AR depends on accurate and world‐stable content in which virtual objects are rendered appropriately in relation to the real world (Keil et al, 2019). Some current technologies are plagued by “AR drift” (i.e., virtual objects that shift unrealistically), which leads to a largely diminished user experience (Slocum et al, 2021; tom Dieck & Jung, 2018).…”

Section: Theory and Prior Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…AR also facilitates access to the metaverse, which refers to an immersive three‐dimensional environment that is able to integrate physical and virtual worlds (Dwivedi et al, 2022, 2023). At the same time, AR faces important challenges, such as privacy and security concerns (S. Chen et al, 2018; Cowan et al, 2021) and the need to create a visually convincing and accurate integration of virtual objects with the physical environment (Slocum et al, 2021; tom Dieck & Jung, 2018).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Context in augmented reality marketing: Does the place of use matter?

Rauschnabel

Felix

et al. 2023

Psychology and Marketing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Augmented reality (AR) integrates virtual content into a consumer's perception of the real world. While academic interest in AR is growing, most prior research has focused on consumer evaluations of AR content and neglected the physical context in which AR content is consumed. Addressing this research gap, two experimental studies showed that context (e.g., experiencing a virtual sofa at home vs. in a university classroom) impacts consumer judgments and evaluations. The results reveal two primary effects of context. First, contexts in which virtual objects meet users' personal and cultural expectations associated with a specific location (e.g., a sofa in a living room) increase plausibility. However, such functionally appropriate contexts (counterintuitively) decrease local presence (i.e., the perception that the virtual product is “here”). Study 2 extends this model by showing that plausibility (a rational and deliberate assessment of AR content) and local presence both impact utilitarian benefits, whereas local presence has a stronger effect on perceived physical tangibility. The findings extend prior theory on the psychological mechanisms impacting judgment and presence in AR, and they provide managers with important insights regarding the influence of context on downstream variables in their AR and metaverse marketing strategies.

show abstract

“…One small scale study, using an optically-tracked stylus, found drift on the HoloLens 1 of 0.5-0.6cm [10], but only in one environment: this method is impractical for many settings. We have developed an alternative methodology using fiducial markers and measured a virtual object position error of 6cm on a Samsung Galaxy S20 [11]; however, this technique requires modifications to the real-world environment. Here we use a method based on placing virtual objects near a real reference point, that we introduced in [12].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Here To Stay: A Quantitative Comparison of Virtual Object Stability in Markerless Mobile AR

Scargill

Premsankar

Chen

et al. 2022

2022 2nd International Workshop on Cyber-Physical-Human System Design and Implementation (CPHS)

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Mobile augmented reality (AR) has the potential to enable immersive, natural interactions between humans and cyberphysical systems. In particular markerless AR, by not relying on fiducial markers or predefined images, provides great convenience and flexibility for users. However, unwanted virtual object movement frequently occurs in markerless smartphone AR due to inaccurate scene understanding, and resulting errors in device pose tracking. We examine the factors which may affect virtual object stability, design experiments to measure it, and conduct systematic quantitative characterizations across six different user actions and five different smartphone configurations. Our study demonstrates noticeable instances of spatial instability in virtual objects in all but the simplest settings (with position errors of greater than 10cm even on the best-performing smartphones), and underscores the need for further enhancements to pose tracking algorithms for smartphone-based markerless AR.

show abstract

RealityCheck: A Tool to Evaluate Spatial Inconsistency in Augmented Reality

Cited by 6 publications

References 17 publications

Mixed Reality Alters Motor Planning and Control

Mixed Reality Alters Motor Planning and Control

Context in augmented reality marketing: Does the place of use matter?

Here To Stay: A Quantitative Comparison of Virtual Object Stability in Markerless Mobile AR

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About