Style

4-conclusion/conclusion.tex

@@ -82,7 +82,7 @@ More generally, many other haptic feedbacks could be investigated in \AR \vs \VR
 The visual hand renderings we evaluated were displayed on the Microsoft HoloLens~2, which is a common \OST-\AR headset \cite{hertel2021taxonomy}.
 We purposely chose this type of display as it is with \OST-\AR that the lack of mutual occlusion between the hand and the \VO is the most challenging to solve \cite{macedo2023occlusion}.
 We thus hypothesized that a visual hand rendering would be more beneficial to users with this type of display.
-However, the user's visual perception and experience is very different with other types of displays, such as \VST-\AR, where the \RE view is seen through a screen (\secref[related_work]{ar_displays}).
+However, the user's visual perception and experience is different with other types of displays, such as \VST-\AR, where the \RE view is seen through a screen (\secref[related_work]{ar_displays}).
 While the mutual occlusion problem and the hand tracking latency can be overcome with \VST-\AR, the visual hand rendering could still be beneficial to users as it provides depth cues and feedback on the hand tracking, and should be evaluated as such.
 
 \paragraph{More Ecological Conditions}