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

Better figures

Browse Source
This commit is contained in:
Erwan Normand
2024-09-24 15:07:13 +02:00
parent 9ba5d344a5
commit b8b799df3d
18 changed files with 383 additions and 418 deletions
Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

18
1-introduction/related-work/4-visuo-haptic-ar.tex
View File

@@ -43,7 +43,9 @@ The objective was to determine a \PSE between the comparison and reference bars,
%\figref{ernst2002humans_within} shows the discrimination of participants with only the haptic or visual feedback, and how much the estimation becomes difficult (thus higher variance) when noise is added to the visual feedback.
\figref{ernst2004merging_results} shows that when the visual noise was low, the visual feedback had more weight, but as visual noise increased, haptic feedback gained more weight, as predicted by the \MLE model.
\begin{subfigs}{ernst2002humans}{Visuo-haptic perception of height of a virtual bar \cite{ernst2002humans}. }[
\begin{subfigs}{ernst2002humans}{
Visuo-haptic perception of height of a virtual bar \cite{ernst2002humans}.
}[][
\item Experimental setup.%: Participants estimated height visually with an \OST-\AR display and haptically with force-feedback devices worn on the thumb and index fingers.
%\item with only haptic feedback (red) or only visual feedback (blue, with different added noise),
%\item combined visuo-haptic feedback (purple, with different visual noises).
@@ -82,7 +84,7 @@ For example, in a fixed \VST-\AR screen (\secref{ar_displays}), by visually defo
\textcite{punpongsanon2015softar} used this technique in spatial \AR (\secref{ar_displays}) to induce a softness illusion of a hard tangible object by superimposing a virtual texture that deforms when pressed by the hand (\figref{punpongsanon2015softar}).
\textcite{ujitoko2019modulating} increased the perceived roughness of a virtual patterned texture rendered as vibrations through a hand-held stylus (\secref{texture_rendering}) by adding small oscillations to the visual feedback of the stylus on a screen.
\begin{subfigs}{pseudo_haptic}{Pseudo-haptic feedback in \AR. }[
\begin{subfigs}{pseudo_haptic}{Pseudo-haptic feedback in \AR. }[][
\item A virtual soft texture projected on a table and that deforms when pressed by the hand \cite{punpongsanon2015softar}.
\item Modifying visually a tangible object and the hand touching it in \VST-\AR to modify its perceived shape \cite{ban2014displaying}.
]
@@ -104,7 +106,9 @@ In a \TIFC task (\secref{sensations_perception}), participants pressed two pisto
One had a reference stiffness but an additional visual or haptic delay, while the other varied with a comparison stiffness but had no delay. \footnote{Participants were not told about the delays and stiffness tested, nor which piston was the reference or comparison. The order of the pistons (which one was pressed first) was also randomized.}
Adding a visual delay increased the perceived stiffness of the reference piston, while adding a haptic delay decreased it, and adding both delays cancelled each other out (\figref{knorlein2009influence_2}).
\begin{subfigs}{visuo-haptic-stiffness}{Perception of haptic stiffness in \VST-\AR \cite{knorlein2009influence}. }[
\begin{subfigs}{visuo-haptic-stiffness}{
Perception of haptic stiffness in \VST-\AR \cite{knorlein2009influence}.
}[][
\item Participant pressing a virtual piston rendered by a force-feedback device with their hand.
\item Proportion of comparison piston perceived as stiffer than reference piston (vertical axis) as a function of the comparison stiffness (horizontal axis) and visual and haptic delays of the reference (colors).
]
@@ -125,7 +129,7 @@ The reference piston was judged to be stiffer when seen in \VR than in \AR, with
This suggests that the haptic stiffness of \VOs feels \enquote{softer} in an \AE than in a full \VE.
%Two differences that could be worth investigating with the two previous studies are the type of \AR (visuo or optical) and to see the hand touching the \VO.
\begin{subfigs}{gaffary2017ar}{Perception of haptic stiffness in \OST-\AR \vs \VR \cite{gaffary2017ar}. }[
\begin{subfigs}{gaffary2017ar}{Perception of haptic stiffness in \OST-\AR \vs \VR \cite{gaffary2017ar}. }[][
\item Experimental setup: a virtual piston was pressed with a force-feedback placed to the side of the participant.
\item View of the virtual piston seen in front of the participant in \OST-\AR and
\item in \VR.
@@ -178,7 +182,7 @@ However, as with \textcite{teng2021touch}, finger speed was not taken into accou
Finally, \textcite{preechayasomboon2021haplets} (\figref{preechayasomboon2021haplets}) and \textcite{sabnis2023haptic} designed Haplets and Haptic Servo, respectively: These are very compact and lightweight vibrotactile \LRA devices designed to provide both integrated finger motion sensing and very low latency haptic feedback (\qty{<5}{ms}).
However, no proper user study has been conducted to evaluate these devices in \AR.
\begin{subfigs}{ar_wearable}{Nail-mounted wearable haptic devices designed for \AR. }[
\begin{subfigs}{ar_wearable}{Nail-mounted wearable haptic devices designed for \AR. }[][
%\item A voice-coil rendering a virtual haptic texture on a real sheet of paper \cite{ando2007fingernailmounted}.
\item Touch\&Fold provide contact pressure and vibrations on demand to the fingertip \cite{teng2021touch}.
\item Fingeret is a finger-side wearable haptic device that pulls and pushs the fingertip skin \cite{maeda2022fingeret}.
@@ -211,7 +215,7 @@ The haptic ring was also perceived as more effective than the moving platform.
However, the measured difference in performance could be due to either the device or the device position (proximal vs fingertip), or both.
These two studies were also conducted in non-immersive setups, where users viewed a screen displaying the visual interactions, and only compared the haptic and visual rendering of the hand-object contacts, but did not examine them together.
\begin{subfigs}{ar_rings}{Wearable haptic ring devices for \AR. }[
\begin{subfigs}{ar_rings}{Wearable haptic ring devices for \AR. }[][
\item Rendering weight of a virtual cube placed on a real surface \cite{scheggi2010shape}.
\item Rendering the contact force exerted by the fingers on a virtual cube \cite{maisto2017evaluation,meli2018combining}.
]
@@ -233,7 +237,7 @@ A user study was conducted in \VR to compare the perception of visuo-haptic stif
%This suggests that in \VR, the haptic pressure is more important perceptual cue than the visual displacement to render stiffness.
%A short vibration (\qty{25}{\ms} \qty{175}{\Hz} square-wave) was also rendered when contacting the button, but kept constant across all conditions: It may have affected the overall perception when only the visual stiffness changed.
%\begin{subfigs}{pezent2019tasbi}{Visuo-haptic stiffness rendering of a virtual button in \VR with the Tasbi bracelet. }[
%\begin{subfigs}{pezent2019tasbi}{Visuo-haptic stiffness rendering of a virtual button in \VR with the Tasbi bracelet. }[][
% \item The \VE seen by the user: the virtual hand (in beige) is constrained by the virtual button. The displacement is proportional to the visual stiffness. The real hand (in green) is hidden by the \VE.
% \item When the rendered visuo-haptic stiffness are coherents (in purple) or only the haptic stiffness change (in blue), participants easily discrimated the different levels.
% \item When varying only the visual stiffness (in red) but keeping the haptic stiffness constant, participants were not able to discriminate the different stiffness levels.