erwan/phd-thesis
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Actions Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

Visual hand {rendering => augmentation}

Browse Source
This commit is contained in:
Erwan Normand
2024-11-04 14:37:23 +01:00
parent 613e683902
commit 5dc3e33a15
15 changed files with 93 additions and 79 deletions
Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

6
4-manipulation/visuo-haptic-hand/2-method.tex
View File

@@ -45,7 +45,7 @@ Similarly, we designed the distance vibration technique (Dist) so that interpene
\label{method}
This user study aims to evaluate whether a visuo-haptic rendering of the hand affects the user performance and experience of manipulation of virtual objects with bare hands in \OST-\AR.
The chosen visuo-haptic hand renderings are the combination of the two most representative visual hand renderings established in the \chapref{visual_hand}, \ie \level{Skeleton} and \level{No Hand}, described in \secref[visual_hand]{hands}, with the two contact vibration techniques provided at the four delocalized positions on the hand described in \secref{vibration}.
The chosen visuo-haptic hand renderings are the combination of the two most representative visual hand augmentations established in the \chapref{visual_hand}, \ie \level{Skeleton} and \level{No Hand}, described in \secref[visual_hand]{hands}, with the two contact vibration techniques provided at the four delocalized positions on the hand described in \secref{vibration}.
\subsection{Experimental Design}
\label{design}
@@ -55,7 +55,7 @@ We considered the same two \level{Push} and \level{Grasp} tasks as described in
\begin{itemize}
\item \factor{Positioning}: the five positionings for providing vibrotactile hand rendering of the virtual contacts, as described in \secref{positioning}.
\item \factor{Vibration Technique}: the two contact vibration techniques, as described in \secref{technique}.
\item \factor{Hand}: two visual hand renderings from the \chapref{visual_hand}, \level{Skeleton} (Skel) and \level{No Hand}, as described in \secref[visual_hand]{hands}; we considered \level{Skeleton} as it performed the best in terms of performance and perceived effectiveness and \level{No Hand} as reference.
\item \factor{Hand}: two visual hand augmentations from the \chapref{visual_hand}, \level{Skeleton} (Skel) and \level{No Hand}, as described in \secref[visual_hand]{hands}; we considered \level{Skeleton} as it performed the best in terms of performance and perceived effectiveness and \level{No Hand} as reference.
\item \factor{Target}: we considered the target volumes (\figref{tasks}), from the participant's point of view, located at:
\begin{itemize}
\item left-bottom (\level{LB}) and left-right (\level{LF}) during the \level{Push} task; and
@@ -78,7 +78,7 @@ To account for learning and fatigue effects, the order of the \factor{Positionin
In these ten blocks, all possible \factor{Technique} \x \factor{Hand} \x \factor{Target} combination conditions were repeated three times in a random order.
As we did not find any relevant effect of the order in which the tasks were performed in the \chapref{visual_hand}, we fixed the order of the tasks: first, the \level{Push} task and then the \level{Grasp} task.
This design led to a total of 5 vibrotactile positionings \x 2 vibration contact techniques \x 2 visual hand rendering \x (2 targets on the Push task + 4 targets on the Grasp task) \x 3 repetitions $=$ 420 trials per participant.
This design led to a total of 5 vibrotactile positionings \x 2 vibration contact techniques \x 2 visual hand augmentation \x (2 targets on the Push task + 4 targets on the Grasp task) \x 3 repetitions $=$ 420 trials per participant.
\subsection{Apparatus and Procedure}
\label{apparatus}