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

Typo

Browse Source
This commit is contained in:
Erwan Normand
2024-10-10 15:51:50 +02:00
parent 90f9ab3dfe
commit e4b9fd037f
6 changed files with 8 additions and 9 deletions
Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

2
2-perception/vhar-textures/3-results.tex
View File

@@ -145,7 +145,7 @@ The coherence of the texture pairs was considered moderate (\mean{4.6}, \sd{1.2}
\begin{subfigs}{results_questions}{Boxplots of the questionnaire results for each visual hand rendering.}[
Pairwise Wilcoxon signed-rank tests with Holm-Bonferroni adjustment: * is \pinf{0.05}, ** is \pinf{0.01} and *** is \pinf{0.001}.
Lower is better for Difficulty and Uncomfortable; higher is better for Realism and Textures Match.%
Lower is better for Difficulty and Uncomfortable; higher is better for Realism and Textures Match.
][
\item By modality.
\item By task.

3
2-perception/xr-perception/4-results.tex
View File

@@ -28,8 +28,7 @@ All pairwise differences were statistically significant.
\begin{subfigs}{discrimination_accuracy}{Results of the vibrotactile texture roughness discrimination task. }[][
\item Estimated \PSE of each visual rendering, defined as the amplitude difference at which both reference and comparison textures are perceived to be equivalent. %, \ie the accuracy in discriminating vibrotactile roughness.
\item Estimated \JND of each visual rendering.
%, defined as the minimum perceptual amplitude difference, \ie the sensitivity to vibrotactile roughness differences.
\item Estimated \JND of each visual rendering. %, defined as the minimum perceptual amplitude difference, \ie the sensitivity to vibrotactile roughness differences.
]
\subfig[0.35]{results/trial_pses}
\subfig[0.35]{results/trial_jnds}

2
2-perception/xr-perception/5-discussion.tex
View File

@@ -8,7 +8,7 @@ A \PSE difference in the same range was found for perceived stiffness, with the
%However, the difference between the \level{Virtual} and \level{Mixed} conditions was not significant.
%
Surprisingly, the \PSE of the \level{Real} rendering was shifted to the right (to be "rougher", \percent{7.9}) compared to the reference texture, whereas the \PSEs of the \level{Virtual} (\percent{5.1}) and \level{Mixed} (\percent{1.9}) renderings were perceived as \enquote{smoother} and closer to the reference texture (\figref{results/trial_predictions}).
The sensitivity of participants to roughness differences also varied, with the \level{Real} rendering having the best \JND (\percent{26}), followed by the \level{Virtual} (\percent{30}) and \level{Virtual} (\percent{33}) renderings (\figref{results/trial_jnds}).
The sensitivity of participants to roughness differences also varied, with the \level{Real} rendering having the best \JND (\percent{26}), followed by the \level{Virtual} (\percent{30}) and \level{Mixed} (\percent{33}) renderings (\figref{results/trial_jnds}).
These \JND values are in line with and at the upper end of the range of previous studies \cite{choi2013vibrotactile}, which may be due to the location of the actuator on the top of the finger middle phalanx, being less sensitive to vibration than the fingertip.
Thus, compared to no visual rendering (\level{Real}), the addition of a visual rendering of the hand or environment reduced the roughness sensitivity (\JND) and the roughness perception (\PSE), as if the virtual vibrotactile textures felt \enquote{smoother}.