DOCSLIB.ORG

Design and Evaluation of a Perceptually Adaptive Rendering System for Immersive Virtual Reality Environments Kimberly Ann Weaver Iowa State University

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Design and Evaluation of a Perceptually Adaptive Rendering System for Immersive Virtual Reality Environments Kimberly Ann Weaver Iowa State University Iowa State University Capstones, Theses and Retrospective Theses and Dissertations Dissertations 2007 Design and evaluation of a perceptually adaptive rendering system for immersive virtual reality environments Kimberly Ann Weaver Iowa State University Follow this and additional works at: https://lib.dr.iastate.edu/rtd Part of the Cognitive Psychology Commons, and the Computer Sciences Commons Recommended Citation Weaver, Kimberly Ann, "Design and evaluation of a perceptually adaptive rendering system for immersive virtual reality environments" (2007). Retrospective Theses and Dissertations. 14895. https://lib.dr.iastate.edu/rtd/14895 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Iowa State University Capstones, Theses and Dissertations at Iowa State University Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Retrospective Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Iowa State University Digital Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Design and evaluation of a perceptually adaptive rendering system for immersive virtual reality environments by Kimberly Ann Weaver A thesis submitted to the graduate faculty in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE Major: Human Computer Interaction Program of Study Committee: Derrick Parkhurst (Major Professor) Chris Harding Shana Smith Iowa State University Ames, Iowa 2007 Copyright © Kimberly Ann Weaver, 2007. All rights reserved. UMI Number: 1449653 Copyright 2007 by Weaver, Kimberly Ann All rights reserved. UMI Microform 1449653 Copyright 2008 by ProQuest Information and Learning Company. All rights reserved. This microform edition is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code. ProQuest Information and Learning Company 300 North Zeeb Road P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, MI 48106-1346 ii TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF FIGURES ...............................................................................................................v LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................................................. vii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ............................................................................................... viii ABSTRACT ........................................................................................................................ ix CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................1 1.1. Computer Graphics Background .......................................................3 1.1.1. Representing Models as Triangular Meshes ..........................3 1.1.2. The Graphics Pipeline ..........................................................4 1.1.3. Targets for Simplification.....................................................7 1.1.4. Representing Geometric Levels of Detail ........................... 17 1.2. Visual Perception Background ....................................................... 20 1.2.1. Anatomy of the Retina ....................................................... 20 1.2.2. Attention ............................................................................ 22 1.2.3. Scene Perception ................................................................ 23 1.3. Level of Detail Selection Techniques ............................................. 26 1.3.1. Reactive Level of Detail Selection...................................... 26 1.3.2. Predictive Level of Detail Selection ................................... 34 1.3.3. Summary............................................................................ 35 1.4. Immersive Virtual Reality Environments ........................................ 36 1.5. Research Approach ........................................................................ 38 CHAPTER 2. THE RENDERING SYSTEM ........................................................ 41 2.1. Interaction Modes ........................................................................... 41 2.1.1. Simulation Mode ................................................................ 42 2.1.2. Exploration ........................................................................ 43 2.1.3. Edit .................................................................................... 44 2.1.4. Experiment......................................................................... 47 2.2. Level of Detail Selection ................................................................ 47 2.2.1. Eccentricity ........................................................................ 47 2.2.2. Attentional Hysteresis ........................................................ 48 2.3. Using Models ................................................................................. 50 2.3.1. Model Acquisition.............................................................. 50 2.3.2. Model Simplification ......................................................... 50 2.4. XML Scripting ............................................................................... 51 2.4.1. Master Configuration ......................................................... 51 2.4.2. Scene Graph Configuration ................................................ 52 2.4.3. Architecture Configuration ................................................. 53 2.4.4. Light Configuration ............................................................ 54 2.4.5. Camera Configuration ........................................................ 57 iii 2.4.6. Sound Configuration .......................................................... 57 2.4.7. Skeleton Configuration ...................................................... 58 2.4.8. Script Configuration ........................................................... 58 2.4.9. Level of Detail Schema Configuration................................ 60 2.5. Code Structure................................................................................ 62 2.5.1. Command Design Pattern ................................................... 62 2.5.2. The Scene Graph ................................................................ 65 2.6. Software Libraries .......................................................................... 67 2.6.1. VR Juggler ......................................................................... 67 2.6.2. OpenSG ............................................................................. 68 2.6.3. Libxml2 ............................................................................. 69 2.6.4. OPAL and ODE ................................................................. 69 2.7. Hardware Description ..................................................................... 70 CHAPTER 3. PILOT STUDY .............................................................................. 73 3.1. Methods ......................................................................................... 73 3.1.1. Participants ........................................................................ 73 3.1.2. Task ................................................................................... 73 3.1.3. Procedure ........................................................................... 76 3.1.4. Experimental Design .......................................................... 80 3.2. Results ........................................................................................... 83 3.2.1. Visual Acuity ..................................................................... 83 3.2.2. Simulator Sickness ............................................................. 85 3.2.3. Perceptual Measures........................................................... 89 3.2.4. Performance Measures ....................................................... 94 3.3. Discussion ...................................................................................... 98 CHAPTER 4. FULL STUDY ............................................................................. 102 4.1. Methods ....................................................................................... 102 4.1.1. Participants ...................................................................... 102 4.1.2. Task ................................................................................. 103 4.1.3. Procedure ......................................................................... 106 4.1.4. Experimental Design ........................................................ 108 4.2. Results ......................................................................................... 109 4.2.1. Visual Acuity ................................................................... 109 4.2.2. Simulator Sickness ........................................................... 111 4.2.3. Qualitative Measures ........................................................ 113 4.2.4. Part 1 Quantitative Results ............................................... 113 4.2.5. Part 2 Quantitative Results ............................................... 117 4.3. Discussion .................................................................................... 121 CHAPTER 5. CONCLUSION ............................................................................ 124 5.1. Summary ...................................................................................... 124 5.2. Benefit in Older and Newer Systems ............................................ 126 5.3. Clustered Systems ........................................................................ 127 5.4. Future Directions .........................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Application of Virtual Reality in Engineering Education
    applied sciences Review The Application of Virtual Reality in Engineering Education Maged Soliman 1 , Apostolos Pesyridis 2,3, Damon Dalaymani-Zad 1,*, Mohammed Gronfula 2 and Miltiadis Kourmpetis 2 1 College of Engineering, Design and Physical Sciences, Brunel University London, London UB3 3PH, UK; [email protected] 2 College of Engineering, Alasala University, King Fahad Bin Abdulaziz Rd., Dammam 31483, Saudi Arabia; [email protected] (A.P.); [email protected] (M.G.); [email protected] (M.K.) 3 Metapower Limited, Northwood, London HA6 2NP, UK * Correspondence: [email protected] Abstract: The advancement of VR technology through the increase in its processing power and decrease in its cost and form factor induced the research and market interest away from the gaming industry and towards education and training. In this paper, we argue and present evidence from vast research that VR is an excellent tool in engineering education. Through our review, we deduced that VR has positive cognitive and pedagogical benefits in engineering education, which ultimately improves the students’ understanding of the subjects, performance and grades, and education experience. In addition, the benefits extend to the university/institution in terms of reduced liability, infrastructure, and cost through the use of VR as a replacement to physical laboratories. There are added benefits of equal educational experience for the students with special needs as well as distance learning students who have no access to physical labs. Furthermore, recent reviews identified that VR applications for education currently lack learning theories and objectives integration in their design.
    [Show full text]
  • Lightdb: a DBMS for Virtual Reality Video
    LightDB: A DBMS for Virtual Reality Video Brandon Haynes, Amrita Mazumdar, Armin Alaghi, Magdalena Balazinska, Luis Ceze, Alvin Cheung Paul G. Allen School of Computer Science & Engineering University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA {bhaynes, amrita, armin, magda, luisceze, akcheung}@cs.washington.edu http://lightdb.uwdb.io ABSTRACT spherical panoramic VR videos (a.k.a. 360◦ videos), encoding one We present the data model, architecture, and evaluation of stereoscopic frame of video can involve processing up to 18× more LightDB, a database management system designed to efficiently bytes than an ordinary 2D video [30]. manage virtual, augmented, and mixed reality (VAMR) video con- AR and MR video applications, on the other hand, often mix tent. VAMR video differs from its two-dimensional counterpart smaller amounts of synthetic video with the world around a user. in that it is spherical with periodic angular dimensions, is nonuni- Similar to VR, however, these applications have extremely de- formly and continuously sampled, and applications that consume manding latency and throughput requirements since they must react such videos often have demanding latency and throughput require- to the real world in real time. ments. To address these challenges, LightDB treats VAMR video To address these challenges, various specialized VAMR sys- data as a logically-continuous six-dimensional light field. Further- tems have been introduced for preparing and serving VAMR video more, LightDB supports a rich set of operations over light fields, data (e.g., VRView [71], Facebook Surround 360 [20], YouTube and automatically transforms declarative queries into executable VR [75], Google Poly [25], Lytro VR [41], Magic Leap Cre- physical plans.
    [Show full text]
  • The Missing Link Between Information Visualization and Art
    Visualization Criticism – The Missing Link Between Information Visualization and Art Robert Kosara The University of North Carolina at Charlotte [email protected] Abstract of what constitutes visualization and a foundational theory are still missing. Even for the practical work that is be- Classifications of visualization are often based on tech- ing done, there is very little discussion of approaches, with nical criteria, and leave out artistic ways of visualizing in- many techniques being developed ad hoc or as incremental formation. Understanding the differences between informa- improvements of previous work. tion visualization and other forms of visual communication Since this is not a technical problem, a purely techni- provides important insights into the way the field works, cal approach cannot solve it. We therefore propose a third though, and also shows the path to new approaches. way of doing information visualization that not only takes We propose a classification of several types of informa- ideas from both artistic and pragmatic visualization, but uni- tion visualization based on aesthetic criteria. The notions fies them through the common concepts of critical thinking of artistic and pragmatic visualization are introduced, and and criticism. Visualization criticism can be applied to both their properties discussed. Finally, the idea of visualiza- artistic and pragmatic visualization, and will help to develop tion criticism is proposed, and its rules are laid out. Visu- the tools to build a bridge between them. alization criticism bridges the gap between design, art, and technical/pragmatic information visualization. It guides the view away from implementation details and single mouse 2 Related Work clicks to the meaning of a visualization.
    [Show full text]
  • Virtual Reality and Audiovisual Experience in the Audiovirtualizer Adinda Van ’T Klooster1* & Nick Collins2
    EAI Endorsed Transactions on Creative Technologies Research Article Virtual Reality and Audiovisual Experience in the AudioVirtualizer Adinda van ’t Klooster1* & Nick Collins2 1Durham University (2019) and independent artist, UK 2 Durham University Music Department, UK Abstract INTRODUCTION: Virtual Reality (VR) provides new possibilities for interaction, immersiveness, and audiovisual combination, potentially facilitating novel aesthetic experiences. OBJECTIVES: In this project we created a VR AudioVirtualizer able to generate graphics in response to any sound input in a visual style similar to a body of drawings by the first author. METHODS: In order to be able to make the system able to respond to any given musical input we developed a Unity plugin that employs real-time machine listening on low level and medium-level audio features. The VR deployment utilized SteamVR to allow the use of HTC Vive Pro and Oculus Rift headsets. RESULTS: We presented our system to a small audience at PROTO in Gateshead in September 2019 and observed people’s preferred ways of interacting with the system. Although our system can respond to any sound input, for ease of interaction we chose four previously created audio compositions by the authors of this paper and microphone input as a restricted set of sound input options for the user to explore. CONCLUSION: We found that people’s previous experience with VR or gaming influenced how much interaction they used in the system. Whilst it was possible to navigate within the scenes and jump to different scenes by selecting a 3D sculpture in the scene, people with no previous VR or gaming experience often preferred to just let the visuals surprise them.
    [Show full text]
  • Biological Agency in Art
    1 Vol 16 Issue 2 – 3 Biological Agency in Art Allison N. Kudla Artist, PhD Student Center for Digital Arts and Experimental Media: DXARTS, University of Washington 207 Raitt Hall Seattle, WA 98195 USA allisonx[at]u[dot]washington[dot]edu Keywords Agency, Semiotics, Biology, Technology, Emulation, Behavioral, Emergent, Earth Art, Systems Art, Bio-Tech Art Abstract This paper will discuss how the pictorial dilemma guided traditional art towards formalism and again guides new media art away from the screen and towards the generation of physical, phenomenologically based and often bio-technological artistic systems. This takes art into experiential territories, as it is no longer an illusory representation of an idea but an actual instantiation of its beauty and significance. Thus the process of making art is reinstated as a marker to physically manifest and accentuate an experience that takes the perceivers to their own edges so as to see themselves as open systems within a vast and interweaving non-linear network. Introduction “The artist is a positive force in perceiving how technology can be translated to new environments to serve needs and provide variety and enrichment of life.” Billy Klüver, Pavilion ([13] p x). “Art is not a mirror held up to reality, but a hammer with which to shape it.” Bertolt Brecht [2] When looking at the history of art through the lens of a new media artist engaged in several disciplines that interlace fields as varying as biology, algorithmic programming and signal processing, a fairly recent paradigm for art emerges that takes artistic practice away from depiction and towards a more systems based and biologically driven approach.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 7 Visual Rendering
    Chapter 7 Visual Rendering Steven M. LaValle University of Oulu Copyright Steven M. LaValle 2019 Available for downloading at http://vr.cs.uiuc.edu/ 186 S. M. LaValle: Virtual Reality screen (this was depicted in Figure 3.13). The next steps are to determine which screen pixels are covered by the transformed triangle and then illuminate them according to the physics of the virtual world. An important condition must also be checked: For each pixel, is the triangle even visible to the eye, or will it be blocked by part of another triangle? This classic visibility computation problem dramatically complicates the rendering pro- Chapter 7 cess. The general problem is to determine for any pair of points in the virtual world, whether the line segment that connects them intersects with any objects (triangles). If an intersection occurs, then the line-of-sight visibility between the Visual Rendering two points is blocked. The main difference between the two major families of rendering methods is how visibility is handled. This chapter addresses visual rendering, which specifies what the visual display Object-order versus image-order rendering For rendering, we need to con- should show through an interface to the virtual world generator (VWG). Chapter sider all combinations of objects and pixels. This suggests a nested loop. One 3 already provided the mathematical parts, which express where the objects in way to resolve the visibility is to iterate over the list of all triangles and attempt the virtual world should appear on the screen. This was based on geometric to render each one to the screen.
    [Show full text]
  • A Review of Extended Reality (XR) Technologies for Manufacturing Training
    technologies Article A Review of Extended Reality (XR) Technologies for Manufacturing Training Sanika Doolani * , Callen Wessels, Varun Kanal, Christos Sevastopoulos, Ashish Jaiswal and Harish Nambiappan and Fillia Makedon * Department of Computer Science and Engineering, The University of Texas at Arlington, Arlington, TX 76019, USA; [email protected] (C.W.); [email protected] (V.K.); [email protected] (C.S.); [email protected] (A.J.); [email protected] (H.N.) * Correspondence: [email protected] (S.D.); [email protected] (F.M.) Received: 30 October 2020; Accepted: 5 December 2020; Published: 10 December 2020 Abstract: Recently, the use of extended reality (XR) systems has been on the rise, to tackle various domains such as training, education, safety, etc. With the recent advances in augmented reality (AR), virtual reality (VR) and mixed reality (MR) technologies and ease of availability of high-end, commercially available hardware, the manufacturing industry has seen a rise in the use of advanced XR technologies to train its workforce. While several research publications exist on applications of XR in manufacturing training, a comprehensive review of recent works and applications is lacking to present a clear progress in using such advance technologies. To this end, we present a review of the current state-of-the-art of use of XR technologies in training personnel in the field of manufacturing. First, we put forth the need of XR in manufacturing. We then present several key application domains where XR is being currently applied, notably in maintenance training and in performing assembly task.
    [Show full text]
  • Analysis of Immersive Virtual Reality Vs. Desktop 3D Games
    ANALYSIS OF IMMERSIVE VIRTUAL REALITY VS. DESKTOP 3D GAMES Thesis Presented by Prasad Raut to The College of Arts, Media and Design In partial fulfillment of the requirement for the Degree of Master of Science in Game Science and Design Northeastern University Boston, Massachusetts December, 2018 ANALYSIS OF IMMERSIVE VIRTUAL REALITY VS. DESKTOP 3D GAMES by Prasad Raut ABSTRACT Virtual Reality(VR) has become popular in the past few years. Due to this, besides video games, VR is now being used in applications designed in fields of education, fitness, healthcare, etc. to improve the effectiveness of those applications. In this research, a comparative study between immersive virtual reality and desktop real-time 3D was made to determine the various attributes and which medium of game was more effective. An analysis of quantitative and qualitative data, gathered by means of mixed methods, was performed on the responses of participants playing these immersive and non-immersive versions of the game and the results are discussed in the paper. Keywords: Virtual Reality, Desktop 3D, Think-Aloud Protocol, Video Analysis, Sentiment Analysis Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Game Science and Design in the Graduate School of the College of Arts, Media and Design of Northeastern University December, 2018 2 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would first like to thank my thesis advisor Dr. Celia Pearce for helping me with the qualitative analysis of the study and giving me feedback that helped me extensively with this research. I would next like to thank my thesis instructor Christoffer Holmgård Pedersen for the insightful feedback, words of encouragement, and being available when I needed your help.
    [Show full text]
  • Ubiquitous Computing, Virtual Worlds, and the Displacement of Property Rights
    Ubiquitous Computing, Virtual Worlds, and the Displacement of Property Rights M. ScoT BOONE* Abstract: Examining one emerging technology, virtual worlds, may provide us with insight about another emerging technology, ubiquitous computing. The rapid increase in both the popularity and economic value of virtual worlds has resulted in a conflict over whether players in these worlds have any property rights with respect to virtual world objects associated with their avatars. A close examination however reveals that even if such rights exist, they can be overridden through the combined use of contract and technology. This observation may in turn provide an insight about the future of real world property. The emerging technology of ubiquitous computing shares technological characteristics with virtual worlds such that ubiquitous computing would make a displacement of property rights in real world objects possible in the same way that virtual world technology makes such a displacement possible for potential property rights in virtual world objects. "Associate Professor of Law, Appalachian School of Law. I would like to thank Charlie Condon, Judie Barger, David Ritchie and James McGrath for their helpful comments on drafts of this article. I would also like to thank for their comments the participants of the Works-in-Progress Intellectual Property Colloquium, the participants of the Intellectual Property & Communications Law and Policy Scholars Roundtable sponsored by Michigan State University College of Law, and the participants of the annual meeting of Southeastern Association of Laws Schools. The research assistance of Russell Kloosterman and Justin Williams was also immensely helpful. I/S: A JOURNAL OF LAWAND POLICY [VOL.
    [Show full text]
  • A Multi-Perspective View on Immersive Virtual Environments (Ives)
    International Journal of Geo-Information Article A Multi-Perspective View on Immersive Virtual Environments (IVEs) Olaf Kühne 1, Dennis Edler 2 and Corinna Jenal 1,* 1 Department of Geosciences, Urban and Regional Development, Eberhard Karls University of Tübingen, Rümelinstr. 19-23, 72070 Tübingen, Germany; [email protected] 2 Institute of Geography, Ruhr University Bochum, Geomatics Group, Universitätsstr. 150, 44801 Bochum, Germany; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +49-(0)7071-29-77535 Abstract: In recent years, the presence of immersive virtual reality (VR) in everyday life has increased, and VR is also being studied in research. However, this research is essentially limited to technical issues, while the social relevance of VR remains largely unconsidered. Current social science research on VR remains bound to an empiricist paradigm; a theoretical framing is only done in exceptions. This article presents current social science theories related to space and landscape research, describes their application and potentials, with regard to the investigation of virtual spaces, and discusses which theoretical positions are suitable for the investigation of particular immersive VR-related questions. This investigation presents a range of approaches such as essentialism, positivism, and constructivism; theories such as critical, conflict, and discourse; and more-than-representational theories such as Phenomenology, Assemblage, and Actor-Network-Theory. Keywords: virtual reality; VR; spatial theory; landscape theory; social sciences; constructivism; more-than-representational theories; critical theory; conflict theory Citation: Kühne, O.; Edler, D.; Jenal, C. A Multi-Perspective View on Immersive Virtual Environments (IVEs). ISPRS Int. J. Geo-Inf. 2021, 10, 1. Introduction 518.
    [Show full text]
  • Creating Augmented and Virtual Reality
    Creating Augmented and Virtual Reality Applications: Current Practices, Challenges, and Opportunities Narges Ashtari1, Andrea Bunt2, Joanna McGrenere3, Michael Nebeling4, Parmit K. Chilana1 1Computing Science 2Computer Science 3Computer Science 4School of Information Simon Fraser University University of Manitoba University of British Columbia University of Michigan Burnaby, BC, Canada Winnipeg, MB, Canada Vancouver, BC, Canada Ann Arbor, MI, USA {nashtari, pchilana}@sfu.ca [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] ABSTRACT While research on novel AR/VR tools is growing within the Augmented Reality (AR) and Virtual Reality (VR) devices human-computer interaction (HCI) community, we lack are becoming easier to access and use, but the barrier to entry insights into how AR/VR creators use today’s state-of-the- for creating AR/VR applications remains high. Although the art authoring tools and the types of challenges that they face. recent spike in HCI research on novel AR/VR tools is Findings from preliminary surveys, interviews, and promising, we lack insights into how AR/VR creators use workshops with AR/VR creators mostly shed light on today’s state-of-the-art authoring tools as well as the types of isolated aspects of the proposed AR/VR authoring tools challenges that they face. We interviewed 21 AR/VR [1,15]. We especially lack an understanding of motivations, creators, which we grouped into hobbyists, domain experts, needs, and barriers of the growing population of AR/VR and professional designers. Despite having a variety of creators who have little to no technical training in the motivations and skillsets, they described similar challenges relevant technologies and programming frameworks.
    [Show full text]
  • COMPUTER GRAPHICS COURSE Virtual and Mixed Reality
    COMPUTER GRAPHICS COURSE Virtual and Mixed Reality Georgios Papaioannou - 2018 DEFINITIONS Virtual Reality (VR) (1) • The computer-generated simulation of a three-dimensional image or environment that can be interacted with in a seemingly real or physical way by a person using special electronic equipment.” • “Virtual reality is an artificial environment that is created with software and presented to the user in such a way that the user suspends belief and accepts it as a real environment.” Adapted from [Kau16] Virtual Reality (VR) (2) • Traits: – Immersive – Artificial – Interactive • Key Element: – VR technologies completely immerse a user inside a synthetic environment Reality vs Virtuality • Milgram’sReality-Virtuality Continuum (1994) Mixed Reality Real environment Augmented reality Augmented virtuality Virtual environment Adapted from [Kau16] Augmented Virtuality • Enhancing the virtual world by pictures / textures / models of the real world Adapted from [Kau16] Augmented Reality (AR) (1) • Augmented Reality (AR) is a variation of VR that allows the user to see the real world, with virtual objects superimposed upon or composited with the real world. Therefore, AR supplements reality, rather than completely replacing it • Key characteristics: – Combines real and virtual world – Interactive in real time – Registered in 3-D (real and virtual objects are in a 3D relation to each other) Augmented Reality (AR) (2) • Combined imagery can be: – A simple information overlay – Depth-sorted and clipped fusion of real and synthetic image •
    [Show full text]