Towards lean and elegant self-motion simulation in virtual reality

Abstract

Despite recent technological advances, convincing self-motion simulation in Virtual Reality (VR) is difficult to achieve, and users often suffer from motion sickness and/or disorientation in the simulated world. Instead of trying to simulate self-motions with physical realism (as is often done for, e.g., driving or flight simulators), we propose in this paper a perceptually oriented approach towards selfmotion simulation. Following this paradigm, we performed a series of psychophysical experiments to determine essential visual, auditory, and vestibular/tactile parameters for an effective and perceptually convincing self-motion simulation. These studies are a first step towards our overall goal of achieving lean and elegant selfmotion simulation in Virtual Reality (VR) without physically moving the observer. In a series of psychophysical experiments about the self-motion illusion (circular vection), we found that (i) vection as well as presence in the simulated environment is increased by a consistent, naturalistic visual scene when compared to a sliced, inconsistent version of the identical scene, (ii) barely noticeable marks on the projection screen can increase vection as well as presence in an unobtrusive manner, (iii) physical vibrations of the observer's seat can enhance the vection illusion, and (iv) spatialized 3D audio cues embedded in the simulated environment increase the sensation of self-motion and presence. We conclude that providing consistent cues about self-motion to multiple sensory modalities can enhance vection, even if physical motion cues are absent. These results yield important implications for the design of lean and elegant self-motion simulators.

Nonvestibular Motion Cueing in a Fixed-Base Driving Simulator: Effects on Driver Braking and Cornering Performance

“…For fighter aircraft, dynamic seats have been studied extensively and have been shown to yield a positive effect on pilot flying performance and the reported realism of the simulation (Ashworth, McKissick, & Parrish, 1984;Chung, Perry, & Bengford, 2001;Flach, Riccio, McMillian, & Warren, 1986;Martin, 1986;Parrish & Steinmetz, 1983;Rutten, 1999; but see Showalter & Parris, 1980, for a counterexample). Riecke, Schulte-Pelkum, Caniard, and Bülthoff (2005) conducted experiments to achieve self-motion simulation in virtual reality without physically moving the observer. They investigated the effects of scene consistency, minor modifications of the projection screen, and multisensory cue integration using seat vibrations and auditory cues.…”

Spatial updating in virtual reality: the sufficiency of visual information

“…The current study is among the first to directly compare the potency of different visual stimuli to induce spatial updating as assessed by rapid pointing, and was designed to compare two extreme cases: A naturalistic scene that affords spatial orientation and presence (Riecke et al, 2005a;Riecke, Schulte-Pelkum, Caniard, & Bü lthoff, 2005b) versus an artificial-looking grayscale texture devoid of any reference objects. We are aware that the PURE OPTIC FLOW and FULL SCENE stimuli differed not only in terms of higher-level features (e.g., presence or absence of landmarks embedded in a familiar natural scene) but also in terms of lower-level features like spatial frequency content and motion energy, which are known to affect illusory selfmotion perception (vection) (Dichgans & Brandt, 1978;Hettinger, 2002).…”

Linear vection in virtual environments can be strengthened by discordant inertial input

“…A linearly summating model might suggest a complete cancellation of SM perception in VERT, whereas in the HOR condition we might expect an increasingly diagonal left-up and rightdown path of motion. If however the CNS engages a sensory switching or weighting strategy [1,14] or reciprocal inhibition [7,15] then one wouldn't expect compellingness of SM perception to increase with sensory discordance.…”

“…One possible reason that compellingness of non-veridical SM increased with increasing levels of inconsistent inertial cues may be due to increasing levels of machine vibration from the screw-driven linear sled [15]. Although transmission of machine vibration was minimized using velocity-sensitive foam padding and earphones with active noise reduction, detection of machine noise by the vestibular organs and tactile mechanoreceptors cannot be discounted.…”