skip to main content
10.1145/3357251.3357579acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagessuiConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article
Public Access

Extending Virtual Reality Display Wall Environments Using Augmented Reality

Published:19 October 2019Publication History

ABSTRACT

Two major form factors for virtual reality are head-mounted displays and large display environments such as CAVE®and the LCD-based successor CAVE2®. Each of these has distinct advantages and limitations based on how they’re used. This work explores preserving the high resolution and sense of presence of CAVE2 environments in full stereoscopic mode by using a see-though augmented reality HMD to expand the user’s field of regard beyond the physical display walls. In our explorative study, we found that in a visual search task in a stereoscopic CAVE2, the addition of the HoloLens to expand the field of regard did not hinder the performance or accuracy of the participant, but promoted more physical navigation which in post-study interviews participants felt aided in their spatial awareness of the virtual environment.

Skip Supplemental Material Section

Supplemental Material

a7-nishimoto.mp4

mp4

553.6 MB

References

  1. Robert Ball, Chris North, and Doug A. Bowman. 2007. Move to improve: promoting physical navigation to increase user performance with large displays. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems - CHI ’07. ACM Press, 191. https://doi.org/10.1145/1240624.1240656Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Doug A Bowman, Tobias Höllerer, Cha Lee, Ryan P McMahan, and Regis Kopper. 2012. Evaluating effectiveness in virtual environments with MR simulation. (2012), 11.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Marco Cavallo, Mishal Dholakia, Matous Havlena, Kenneth Ocheltree, and Mark Podlaseck. 2019. Dataspace: A Reconfigurable Hybrid Reality Environment for Collaborative Information Analysis. ArXiv abs/1903.03700(2019).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. M. Cordeil, T. Dwyer, K. Klein, B. Laha, K. Marriott, and B. H. Thomas. 2017. Immersive Collaborative Analysis of Network Connectivity: CAVE-style or Head-Mounted Display?IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 23, 1 (Jan 2017), 441–450. https://doi.org/10.1109/TVCG.2016.2599107Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Alessandro Febretti, Arthur Nishimoto, Terrance Thigpen, Jonas Talandis, Lance Long, J. D. Pirtle, Tom Peterka, Alan Verlo, Maxine Brown, and Dana Plepys. 2013. CAVE2: a hybrid reality environment for immersive simulation and information analysis. In IS&T/SPIE Electronic Imaging. International Society for Optics and Photonics, 864903–864903. http://proceedings.spiedigitallibrary.org/proceeding.aspx?articleid=1660803Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Sandra G. Hart and Lowell E. Staveland. 1988. Development of NASA-TLX (Task Load Index): Results of Empirical and Theoretical Research. Human Mental Workload, Vol. 52. North-Holland, 139–183. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0166-4115(08)62386-9Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Hans-Christian Jetter, Johannes Schöning, Roman Rädle3 Harald Reiterer, and Yvonne Rogers. 2013. Collaborative Interactions in Future Crisis Rooms. In Submisson to ECML Workshop. http://hci.uni-konstanz.de/downloads/bigwallhci_jetter_et_al.pdfGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. M. Klapperstuck, T. Czauderna, C. Goncu, J. Glowacki, T. Dwyer, F. Schreiber, and K. Marriott. 2016. ContextuWall: Peer Collaboration Using (Large) Displays. In 2016 Big Data Visual Analytics (BDVA). 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1109/BDVA.2016.7787047Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Jason Leigh, Andrew Johnson, Luc Renambot, Tom Peterka, Byungil Jeong, Daniel J. Sandin, Jonas Talandis, Ratko Jagodic, Sungwon Nam, Hyejung Hur, and et al.2013. Scalable Resolution Display Walls. Proc. IEEE 101, 1 (Jan 2013), 115–129. https://doi.org/10.1109/JPROC.2012.2191609Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  10. Can Liu, Olivier Chapuis, Michel Beaudouin-Lafon, and Eric Lecolinet. 2016. Shared Interaction on a Wall-Sized Display in a Data Manipulation Task. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems(CHI ’16). ACM, 2075–2086. https://doi.org/10.1145/2858036.2858039Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Thomas Marrinan, Jillian Aurisano, Arthur Nishimoto, Krishna Bharadwaj, Victor Mateevitsi, Luc Renambot, Lance Long, Andrew Johnson, and Jason Leigh. 2014. SAGE2: A new approach for data intensive collaboration using Scalable Resolution Shared Displays. In Collaborative Computing: Networking, Applications and Worksharing (CollaborateCom), 2014 International Conference on. IEEE, 177–186. http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpls/abs_all.jsp?arnumber=7014563Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Mahdi Nabiyouni, Siroberto Scerbo, Doug A. Bowman, and Tobias Höllerer. 2017. Relative Effects of Real-world and Virtual-World Latency on an Augmented Reality Training Task: An AR Simulation Experiment. Frontiers in ICT 3(2017). https://doi.org/10.3389/fict.2016.00034Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. K. Nagao, Y. Ye, C. Wang, I. Fujishiro, and K. Ma. 2016. Enabling interactive scientific data visualization and analysis with see-through hmds and a large tiled display. In 2016 Workshop on Immersive Analytics (IA). 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1109/IMMERSIVE.2016.7932374Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  14. Markus Rittenbruch. 2014. Evaluating the Use of a Very Large-scale Presentation and Collaboration Framework. In Proceedings of The International Symposium on Pervasive Displays - PerDis ’14. ACM Press, 124–129. https://doi.org/10.1145/2611009.2611023Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. M. Rodrigue, A. Waranis, T. Wood, and T. Höllerer. 2015. Mixed reality simulation with physical mobile display devices. In 2015 IEEE Virtual Reality (VR). 105–110. https://doi.org/10.1109/VR.2015.7223331Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Thomas Schubert, Frank Friedmann, and Holger Regenbrecht. 2001. The Experience of Presence: Factor Analytic Insights. Presence 10 (Jun 2001), 266–281. https://doi.org/10.1162/105474601300343603Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Jürgen P. Schulze, Andrew Prudhomme, Philip Weber, and Thomas A. DeFanti. 2013. CalVR: an advanced open source virtual reality software framework. In IS&T/SPIE Electronic Imaging. International Society for Optics and Photonics, 864902–864902. http://proceedings.spiedigitallibrary.org/proceeding.aspx?articleid=1660802Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Recommendations

Comments

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Sign in
  • Published in

    cover image ACM Other conferences
    SUI '19: Symposium on Spatial User Interaction
    October 2019
    164 pages
    ISBN:9781450369756
    DOI:10.1145/3357251

    Copyright © 2019 ACM

    Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

    Publisher

    Association for Computing Machinery

    New York, NY, United States

    Publication History

    • Published: 19 October 2019

    Permissions

    Request permissions about this article.

    Request Permissions

    Check for updates

    Qualifiers

    • research-article
    • Research
    • Refereed limited

    Acceptance Rates

    Overall Acceptance Rate86of279submissions,31%

PDF Format

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

HTML Format

View this article in HTML Format .

View HTML Format