44 lines
3.2 KiB
TeX
44 lines
3.2 KiB
TeX
\chapter{Conclusion}
|
|
\mainlabel{conclusion}
|
|
|
|
\section*{Summary}
|
|
|
|
In this thesis, entitled \enquote{\ThesisTitle}, we presented our research on direct hand interaction with real and virtual everyday objects, visually and haptically augmented using immersive \AR and wearable haptic devices.
|
|
|
|
\noindentskip \partref{manipulation}
|
|
|
|
\noindentskip In \chapref{visual_hand}, we addressed the challenge manipulating \VOs directly with the hand by providing visual renderings as hand augmentations.
|
|
Seen as an overlay on the user's hand, such visual hand rendering provide feedback on the hand tracking and the interaction with \VOs.
|
|
We compared the six commonly used renderings in the \AR litterature in a user study with 24 participants, where we evaluated their effect on the user performance and experience in two representative manipulation tasks.
|
|
Results showed that a visual hand rendering improved the user performance, perceived effectiveness and confidence, with a skeleton-like rendering being the most performant and effective.
|
|
This rendering provided a detailed view of the tracked phalanges while being thin enough not to hide the real hand.
|
|
|
|
\section*{Future Work}
|
|
|
|
The visuo-haptic renderings we presented and the user studies we conducted in this thesis have of course some limitations.
|
|
We present in this section some future work that could address these.
|
|
|
|
\subsection*{Visual Rendering of the Hand for Manipulating Virtual Objects in Augmented Reality}
|
|
|
|
\paragraph{Other AR Displays}
|
|
|
|
The visual hand renderings we evaluated were displayed on the Microsoft HoloLens~2, which is a common \OST-\AR headset.
|
|
|
|
\paragraph{More Ecological Conditions}
|
|
|
|
We evaluated the effect of the visual hand rendering with two manipulation tasks involving to place a virtual cube into a target volume either by pushing it on a table or by grasping it.
|
|
%While these tasks are fundamental and basics
|
|
|
|
These results have of course some limitations as they only address limited types of manipulation tasks and visual hand characteristics, evaluated in a specific \OST-\AR setup.
|
|
The two manipulation tasks were also limited to placing a virtual cube in predefined target volumes.
|
|
Testing a wider range of virtual objects and more ecological tasks \eg stacking, assembly, will ensure a greater applicability of the results obtained in this work, as well as considering bimanual manipulation.
|
|
Similarly, a broader experimental study might shed light on the role of gender and age, as our subject pool was not sufficiently diverse in this respect.
|
|
However, we believe that the results presented here provide a rather interesting overview of the most promising approaches in \AR manipulation.
|
|
|
|
\section*{Perspectives}
|
|
|
|
% systematic exploration of the parameter space of the haptic rendering to determine the most important parameters their influence on the perception
|
|
% measure the difference in sensitivity to the haptic feedback and how much it affects the perception of the object properties
|
|
% design, implement and validate procedures to automatically calibrate the haptic feedback to the user's perception in accordance to what it has been designed to represent
|
|
% + let user free to easily adjust (eg can't let adjust whole spectrum of vibrotactile, reduce to two or three dimensions with sliders using MDS)
|