Remove "see" before section or figure reference

2-perception/ar-textures/1-introduction.tex

@@ -33,4 +33,4 @@ Being able to coherently substitute the visuo-haptic texture of an everyday surf
 
 In this paper, we investigate how users perceive a tangible surface touched with the index finger when it is augmented with a visuo-haptic roughness texture using immersive optical see-through AR (OST-AR) and wearable vibrotactile stimuli provided on the index.
 %
-In a user study, twenty participants freely explored and evaluated the coherence, realism and roughness of the combination of nine representative pairs of visuo-haptic texture augmentations (see \figref{setup}, left) from the HaTT database~\cite{culbertson2014one}.
+In a user study, twenty participants freely explored and evaluated the coherence, realism and roughness of the combination of nine representative pairs of visuo-haptic texture augmentations (\figref{setup}, left) from the HaTT database~\cite{culbertson2014one}.

2-perception/ar-textures/2-experiment.tex

@@ -34,7 +34,7 @@ The 100 visuo-haptic texture pairs of the HaTT database~\cite{culbertson2014one}
 %
 These texture models were chosen as they are visuo-haptic representations of a wide range of real textures that are publicly available online.
 %
-Nine texture pairs were selected (see \figref{setup}, left) to cover various perceived roughness, from rough to smooth, as listed: Metal Mesh, Sandpaper~100, Brick~2, Cork, Sandpaper~320, Velcro Hooks, Plastic Mesh~1, Terra Cotta, Coffee Filter.
+Nine texture pairs were selected (\figref{setup}, left) to cover various perceived roughness, from rough to smooth, as listed: Metal Mesh, Sandpaper~100, Brick~2, Cork, Sandpaper~320, Velcro Hooks, Plastic Mesh~1, Terra Cotta, Coffee Filter.
 %
 All these visual and haptic textures are isotropic: their rendering (appearance or roughness) is the same whatever the direction of the movement on the surface, \ie there are no local deformations (holes, bumps, or breaks).
 
@@ -52,7 +52,7 @@ Similarly, a 2-cm-square fiducial marker was glued on top of the vibrotactile ac
 %
 Positioned \qty{20}{\cm} above the surfaces, a webcam (StreamCam, Logitech) filmed the markers to track finger movements relative to the surfaces.
 %
-The visual textures were displayed on the tangible surfaces using the HoloLens~2 OST-AR headset (see \figref{setup}, middle and right) within a \qtyproduct{43 x 29}{\degree} field of view at \qty{60}{\Hz}; a set of empirical tests enabled us to choose the best rendering characteristics in terms of transparency and brightness for the visual textures, that were used throughout the user study.
+The visual textures were displayed on the tangible surfaces using the HoloLens~2 OST-AR headset (\figref{setup}, middle and right) within a \qtyproduct{43 x 29}{\degree} field of view at \qty{60}{\Hz}; a set of empirical tests enabled us to choose the best rendering characteristics in terms of transparency and brightness for the visual textures, that were used throughout the user study.
 %
 When a haptic texture was touched, a \qty{48}{kHz} audio signal was generated using the corresponding HaTT haptic texture model and the measured tangential speed of the finger, using the rendering procedure described in Culbertson \etal~\cite{culbertson2014modeling}.
 %

2-perception/ar-textures/3-results.tex

@@ -86,11 +86,11 @@ These results indicate, with \figref{results_matching_ranking} (right), that the
 \label{results_similarity}
 
 \begin{subfigs}{results_similarity}{%
-        (Left) Correspondence analysis of the matching task confusion matrix (see \figref{results_matching_ranking}, left).
+        (Left) Correspondence analysis of the matching task confusion matrix (\figref{results_matching_ranking}, left).
         The visual textures are represented as blue squares, the haptic textures as red circles. %
         The closer the textures are, the more similar they were judged. %
         The first dimension (horizontal axis) explains 60~\% of the variance, the second dimension (vertical axis) explains 30~\% of the variance.
-        (Right) Dendrograms of the hierarchical clusterings of the haptic textures (left) and visual textures (right) of the matching task confusion matrix (see \figref{results_matching_ranking}, left), using Euclidian distance and Ward's method. %
+        (Right) Dendrograms of the hierarchical clusterings of the haptic textures (left) and visual textures (right) of the matching task confusion matrix (\figref{results_matching_ranking}, left), using Euclidian distance and Ward's method. %
         The height of the dendrograms represents the distance between the clusters. %
     }
     \begin{minipage}[c]{0.50\linewidth}%
@@ -105,15 +105,15 @@ These results indicate, with \figref{results_matching_ranking} (right), that the
     \end{minipage}%
 \end{subfigs}
 
-The high level of agreement between participants on the three haptic, visual and visuo-haptic rankings (see \secref{results_ranking}), as well as the similarity of the within-participant rankings, suggests that participants perceived the roughness of the textures similarly, but differed in their strategies for matching the haptic and visual textures in the matching task (see \secref{results_matching}).
+The high level of agreement between participants on the three haptic, visual and visuo-haptic rankings (\secref{results_ranking}), as well as the similarity of the within-participant rankings, suggests that participants perceived the roughness of the textures similarly, but differed in their strategies for matching the haptic and visual textures in the matching task (\secref{results_matching}).
 %
-To further investigate the perceived similarity of the haptic and visual textures and to identify groups of textures that were perceived as similar on the matching task, a correspondence analysis and a hierarchical clustering were performed on the matching task confusion matrix (see \figref{results_matching_ranking}, left).
+To further investigate the perceived similarity of the haptic and visual textures and to identify groups of textures that were perceived as similar on the matching task, a correspondence analysis and a hierarchical clustering were performed on the matching task confusion matrix (\figref{results_matching_ranking}, left).
 
 The correspondence analysis captured 60~\% and 29~\% of the variance in the first and second dimensions, respectively, with the remaining dimensions each accounting for less than 5~\% each.
 %
 \figref{results_similarity} (left) shows the first two dimensions with the 18 haptic and visual textures.
 %
-The first dimension was similar to the rankings (see \figref{results_matching_ranking}, right), distributing the textures according to their perceived roughness.
+The first dimension was similar to the rankings (\figref{results_matching_ranking}, right), distributing the textures according to their perceived roughness.
 %
 It seems that the second dimension opposed textures that were perceived as hard with those perceived as softer, as also reported by participants.
 %
@@ -121,13 +121,13 @@ Stiffness is indeed an important perceptual dimension of a material~\cite{okamot
 
 \figref{results_similarity} (right) shows the dendrograms of the two hierarchical clusterings of the haptic and visual textures, constructed using the Euclidean distance and the Ward's method on squared distance.
 %
-The four identified haptic texture clusters were: "Roughest" \{Metal Mesh, Sandpaper~100, Brick~2, Cork\}; "Rougher" \{Sandpaper~320, Velcro Hooks\}; "Smoother" \{Plastic Mesh~1, Terra Cotta\}; "Smoothest" \{Coffee Filter\} (see \figref{results_similarity}, top-right).
+The four identified haptic texture clusters were: "Roughest" \{Metal Mesh, Sandpaper~100, Brick~2, Cork\}; "Rougher" \{Sandpaper~320, Velcro Hooks\}; "Smoother" \{Plastic Mesh~1, Terra Cotta\}; "Smoothest" \{Coffee Filter\} (\figref{results_similarity}, top-right).
 %
-Similar to the haptic ranks (see \figref{results_matching_ranking}, right), the clusters could have been named according to their perceived roughness.
+Similar to the haptic ranks (\figref{results_matching_ranking}, right), the clusters could have been named according to their perceived roughness.
 %
 It also shows that the participants compared and ranked the haptic textures during the matching task to select the one that best matched the given visual texture.
 %
-The five identified visual texture clusters were: "Roughest" \{Metal Mesh\}; "Rougher" \{Sandpaper~100, Brick~2, Velcro Hooks\}; "Medium" \{Cork, Plastic Mesh~1\}; "Smoother" \{Sandpaper~320, Terra Cotta\}; "Smoothest" \{Coffee Filter\} (see \figref{results_similarity}, bottom-right).
+The five identified visual texture clusters were: "Roughest" \{Metal Mesh\}; "Rougher" \{Sandpaper~100, Brick~2, Velcro Hooks\}; "Medium" \{Cork, Plastic Mesh~1\}; "Smoother" \{Sandpaper~320, Terra Cotta\}; "Smoothest" \{Coffee Filter\} (\figref{results_similarity}, bottom-right).
 %
 They are also easily identifiable on the visual ranking results, which also made it possible to name them.
 

2-perception/ar-textures/4-discussion.tex

@@ -11,7 +11,7 @@ The visual textures were displayed statically on the tangible surface, while the
 %
 In addition, the interaction with the textures was designed to be as natural as possible, without imposing a specific speed of finger movement, as in similar studies~\cite{asano2015vibrotactile,friesen2024perceived}.
 
-In the matching task, participants were not able to effectively match the original visual and haptic texture pairs (see \figref{results_matching_ranking}, left), except for the Coffee Filter texture, which was the smoothest both visually and haptically.
+In the matching task, participants were not able to effectively match the original visual and haptic texture pairs (\figref{results_matching_ranking}, left), except for the Coffee Filter texture, which was the smoothest both visually and haptically.
 %
 However, almost all visual textures, except Sandpaper~100, were matched with at least one haptic texture at a level above chance.
 %
@@ -23,13 +23,13 @@ Indeed, the majority of users explained that, based on the roughness, granularit
 %
 Several strategies were used, as some participants reported using vibration frequency and/or amplitude to match a haptic texture.
 %
-It should be noted that the task was rather difficult (see \figref{results_questions}), as participants had no prior knowledge of the textures, there were no additional visual cues such as the shape of an object, and the term \enquote{roughness} had not been used by the experimenter prior to the ranking task.
+It should be noted that the task was rather difficult (\figref{results_questions}), as participants had no prior knowledge of the textures, there were no additional visual cues such as the shape of an object, and the term \enquote{roughness} had not been used by the experimenter prior to the ranking task.
 
-The correspondence analysis (see \figref{results_similarity}, left) highlighted that participants did indeed match visual and haptic textures primarily on the basis of their perceived roughness (60\% of variance), which is in line with previous perception studies on real~\cite{baumgartner2013visual} and virtual~\cite{culbertson2014modeling} textures.
+The correspondence analysis (\figref{results_similarity}, left) highlighted that participants did indeed match visual and haptic textures primarily on the basis of their perceived roughness (60\% of variance), which is in line with previous perception studies on real~\cite{baumgartner2013visual} and virtual~\cite{culbertson2014modeling} textures.
 %
-The rankings (see \figref{results_matching_ranking}, right) confirmed that the participants all perceived the roughness of haptic textures very similarly, but that there was less consensus for visual textures, which is also in line with roughness rankings for real haptic and visual textures~\cite{bergmanntiest2007haptic}.
+The rankings (\figref{results_matching_ranking}, right) confirmed that the participants all perceived the roughness of haptic textures very similarly, but that there was less consensus for visual textures, which is also in line with roughness rankings for real haptic and visual textures~\cite{bergmanntiest2007haptic}.
 %
-These results made it possible to identify and name groups of textures in the form of clusters, and to construct confusion matrices between these clusters and between visual texture ranks with haptic clusters, showing that participants consistently identified and matched haptic and visual textures (see \figref{results_clusters}).
+These results made it possible to identify and name groups of textures in the form of clusters, and to construct confusion matrices between these clusters and between visual texture ranks with haptic clusters, showing that participants consistently identified and matched haptic and visual textures (\figref{results_clusters}).
 %
 Interestingly, 30\% of the matching variance was captured with a second dimension, opposing the roughest textures (Metal Mesh, Sandpaper~100), and to a lesser extent the smoothest (Coffee Filter, Sandpaper~320), with all other textures.
 %
@@ -37,7 +37,7 @@ One hypothesis is that this dimension could be the perceived stiffness of the te
 %
 Stiffness is, with roughness, one of the main characteristics perceived by the vision and touch of real materials~\cite{baumgartner2013visual,vardar2019fingertip}, but also on virtual haptic textures~\cite{culbertson2014modeling,degraen2019enhancing}.
 %
-The last visuo-haptic roughness ranking (see \figref{results_matching_ranking}, right) showed that both haptic and visual sensory information were well integrated as the resulting roughness ranking was being in between the two individual haptic and visual rankings.
+The last visuo-haptic roughness ranking (\figref{results_matching_ranking}, right) showed that both haptic and visual sensory information were well integrated as the resulting roughness ranking was being in between the two individual haptic and visual rankings.
 %
 Several strategies were reported: some participants first classified visually and then corrected with haptics, others classified haptically and then integrated visuals.
 %
@@ -51,7 +51,7 @@ A few participants even reported that they clearly sensed patterns on haptic tex
 %
 However, the visual and haptic textures used were isotropic and homogeneous models of real texture captures, \ie their rendered roughness was constant and did not depend on the direction of movement but only on the speed of the finger.
 %
-Overall, the haptic device was judged to be comfortable, and the visual and haptic textures were judged to be fairly realistic and to work well together (see \figref{results_questions}).
+Overall, the haptic device was judged to be comfortable, and the visual and haptic textures were judged to be fairly realistic and to work well together (\figref{results_questions}).
 
 These results have of course some limitations as they addressed a small set of visuo-haptic textures augmenting the perception of smooth white tangible surfaces.
 %