scholarly journals Augmented Reality-Based Indoor Navigation Using Google Glass as a Wearable Head-Mounted Display

2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Umair Rehman ◽  
Shi Cao
Keyword(s):  
Augmented Reality ◽  
Indoor Navigation ◽  
Google Glass ◽  
Head Mounted Display

scholarly journals Head-Mounted Display Use in Surgery: A Systematic Review

2019 ◽  
Vol 27 (1) ◽  
pp. 88-100 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rafa Rahman ◽  
Matthew E. Wood ◽  
Long Qian ◽  
Carrie L. Price ◽  
Alex A. Johnson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Augmented Reality ◽  
Image Guidance ◽  
English Language ◽  
Web Of Science ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Google Glass ◽  
Surgical Specialty ◽  
The Real ◽  
Head Mounted Display ◽  
Real Environment

Purpose. We analyzed the literature to determine (1) the surgically relevant applications for which head-mounted display (HMD) use is reported; (2) the types of HMD most commonly reported; and (3) the surgical specialties in which HMD use is reported. Methods. The PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases were searched through August 27, 2017, for publications describing HMD use during surgically relevant applications. We identified 120 relevant English-language, non-opinion publications for inclusion. HMD types were categorized as “heads-up” (nontransparent HMD display and direct visualization of the real environment), “see-through” (visualization of the HMD display overlaid on the real environment), or “non–see-through” (visualization of only the nontransparent HMD display). Results. HMDs were used for image guidance and augmented reality (70 publications), data display (63 publications), communication (34 publications), and education/training (18 publications). See-through HMDs were described in 55 publications, heads-up HMDs in 41 publications, and non–see-through HMDs in 27 publications. Google Glass, a see-through HMD, was the most frequently used model, reported in 32 publications. The specialties with the highest frequency of published HMD use were urology (20 publications), neurosurgery (17 publications), and unspecified surgical specialty (20 publications). Conclusion. Image guidance and augmented reality were the most commonly reported applications for which HMDs were used. See-through HMDs were the most commonly reported type used in surgically relevant applications. Urology and neurosurgery were the specialties with greatest published HMD use.

Augmented Reality Procedure Assistance System for Operator Training and Simulation

2020 ◽  
Vol 64 (1) ◽  
pp. 1176-1180
Author(s):  
Eugene Hayden ◽  
Kang Wang ◽  
Chengjie Wu ◽  
Shi Cao
Keyword(s):  
Augmented Reality ◽  
Situation Awareness ◽  
Mental Workload ◽  
Field Of View ◽  
Task Completion ◽  
Operator Training ◽  
Head Mounted Display ◽  
Subject Design ◽  
Procedural Tasks ◽  
Speed Accuracy

This study explores the design, implementation, and evaluation of an Augmented Reality (AR) prototype that assists novice operators in performing procedural tasks in simulator environments. The prototype uses an optical see-through head-mounted display (OST HMD) in conjunction with a simulator display to supplement sequences of interactive visual and attention-guiding cues to the operator’s field of view. We used a 2x2 within-subject design to test two conditions: with/without AR-cues, each condition had a voice assistant and two procedural tasks (preflight and landing). An experiment examined twenty-six novice operators. The results demonstrated that augmented reality had benefits in terms of improved situation awareness and accuracy, however, it yielded longer task completion time by creating a speed-accuracy trade-off effect in favour of accuracy. No significant effect on mental workload is found. The results suggest that augmented reality systems have the potential to be used by a wider audience of operators.

scholarly journals Fooling the size–weight illusion—Using augmented reality to eliminate the effect of size on perceptions of heaviness and sensorimotor prediction

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nina Rohrbach ◽  
Joachim Hermsdörfer ◽  
Lisa-Marie Huber ◽  
Annika Thierfelder ◽  
Gavin Buckingham
Keyword(s):  
Augmented Reality ◽  
Visual Cues ◽  
Equal Mass ◽  
Small Object ◽  
Verbal Reports ◽  
Fully Integrated ◽  
Head Mounted Display ◽  
Lift Off ◽  
Cognitive Knowledge ◽  
Weight Illusion

AbstractAugmented reality, whereby computer-generated images are overlaid onto the physical environment, is becoming significant part of the world of education and training. Little is known, however, about how these external images are treated by the sensorimotor system of the user – are they fully integrated into the external environmental cues, or largely ignored by low-level perceptual and motor processes? Here, we examined this question in the context of the size–weight illusion (SWI). Thirty-two participants repeatedly lifted and reported the heaviness of two cubes of unequal volume but equal mass in alternation. Half of the participants saw semi-transparent equally sized holographic cubes superimposed onto the physical cubes through a head-mounted display. Fingertip force rates were measured prior to lift-off to determine how the holograms influenced sensorimotor prediction, while verbal reports of heaviness after each lift indicated how the holographic size cues influenced the SWI. As expected, participants who lifted without augmented visual cues lifted the large object at a higher rate of force than the small object on early lifts and experienced a robust SWI across all trials. In contrast, participants who lifted the (apparently equal-sized) augmented cubes used similar force rates for each object. Furthermore, they experienced no SWI during the first lifts of the objects, with a SWI developing over repeated trials. These results indicate that holographic cues initially dominate physical cues and cognitive knowledge, but are dismissed when conflicting with cues from other senses.

Visual Coherence in Mixed Reality: A Systematic Enquiry

2017 ◽  
Vol 26 (1) ◽  
pp. 16-41 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jonny Collins ◽  
Holger Regenbrecht ◽  
Tobias Langlotz
Keyword(s):  
Augmented Reality ◽  
Mixed Reality ◽  
Focus Of Attention ◽  
User Experiences ◽  
Head Mounted Display ◽  
Virtual And Augmented Reality

Virtual and augmented reality, and other forms of mixed reality (MR), have become a focus of attention for companies and researchers. Before they can become successful in the market and in society, those MR systems must be able to deliver a convincing, novel experience for the users. By definition, the experience of mixed reality relies on the perceptually successful blending of reality and virtuality. Any MR system has to provide a sensory, in particular visually coherent, set of stimuli. Therefore, issues with visual coherence, that is, a discontinued experience of a MR environment, must be avoided. While it is very easy for a user to detect issues with visual coherence, it is very difficult to design and implement a system for coherence. This article presents a framework and exemplary implementation of a systematic enquiry into issues with visual coherence and possible solutions to address those issues. The focus is set on head-mounted display-based systems, notwithstanding its applicability to other types of MR systems. Our framework, together with a systematic discussion of tangible issues and solutions for visual coherence, aims at guiding developers of mixed reality systems for better and more effective user experiences.

scholarly journals Viewpoint Usability for Desktop Augmented Reality

2006 ◽  
Vol 5 (3) ◽  
pp. 33-39 ◽  
Author(s):  
Seokhee Jeon ◽  
Hyeongseop Shim ◽  
Gerard J. Kim
Keyword(s):  
Augmented Reality ◽  
Task Performance ◽  
Depth Perception ◽  
Object Manipulation ◽  
Head Mounted Display ◽  
Usability Problems ◽  
Head Mounted Displays ◽  
Hand Eye Coordination ◽  
Manipulation Task ◽  
Perceived Usability

In this paper, we have investigated the comparative usability among three different viewing configurations of augmented reality (AR) system that uses a desktop monitor instead of a head mounted display. In many cases, due to operational or cost reasons, the use of head mounted displays may not be viable. Such a configuration is bound to cause usability problems because of the mismatch in the user's proprioception, scale, hand eye coordination, and the reduced 3D depth perception. We asked a pool of subjects to carry out an object manipulation task in three different desktop AR set ups. We measured the subject's task performance and surveyed for the perceived usability and preference. Our results indicated that placing a fixed camera in the back of the user was the best option for convenience and attaching a camera on the user�s head for task performance. The results should provide a valuable guide for designing desktop augmented reality systems without head mounted displays

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document