Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
2000 character limit reached

Simulating Wearable Urban Augmented Reality Experiences in VR: Lessons Learnt from Designing Two Future Urban Interfaces (2403.11377v1)

Published 18 Mar 2024 in cs.HC

Abstract: Augmented reality (AR) has the potential to fundamentally change how people engage with increasingly interactive urban environments. However, many challenges exist in designing and evaluating these new urban AR experiences, such as technical constraints and safety concerns associated with outdoor AR. We contribute to this domain by assessing the use of virtual reality (VR) for simulating wearable urban AR experiences, allowing participants to interact with future AR interfaces in a realistic, safe and controlled setting. This paper describes two wearable urban AR applications (pedestrian navigation and autonomous mobility) simulated in VR. Based on a thematic analysis of interview data collected across the two studies, we found that the VR simulation successfully elicited feedback on the functional benefits of AR concepts and the potential impact of urban contextual factors, such as safety concerns, attentional capacity, and social considerations. At the same time, we highlighted the limitations of this approach in terms of assessing the AR interface's visual quality and providing exhaustive contextual information. The paper concludes with recommendations for simulating wearable urban AR experiences in VR.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (88)
  1. A prototyping method to simulate wearable augmented reality interaction in a virtual environment-a pilot study. International Journal of Virtual Worlds and Human Computer Interaction 3 (2015), 18–28.
  2. Awareness of the real-world environment when using augmented reality head-mounted display. Applied ergonomics 88 (2020), 103145.
  3. Ronald T Azuma. 1997. A survey of augmented reality. Presence: teleoperators & virtual environments 6, 4 (1997), 355–385.
  4. Ronald T Azuma. 1999. The challenge of making augmented reality work outdoors. Mixed reality: Merging real and virtual worlds 1 (1999), 379–390.
  5. Ronald T Azuma. 2019. The road to ubiquitous consumer augmented reality systems. Human Behavior and Emerging Technologies 1, 1 (2019), 26–32.
  6. Implementing user-centered methods and virtual reality to rapidly prototype augmented reality tools for firefighters. In International Conference on Augmented Cognition. Springer, 135–144.
  7. pARnorama: 360 degree interactive video for augmented reality prototyping. In Proceedings of the 2013 ACM conference on Pervasive and ubiquitous computing adjunct publication. 1471–1474.
  8. Mark Billinghurst. 2021. Grand Challenges for Augmented Reality. Frontiers in Virtual Reality 2 (2021), 12.
  9. Costas Boletsis and Jarl Erik Cedergren. 2019. VR locomotion in the new era of virtual reality: an empirical comparison of prevalent techniques. Advances in Human-Computer Interaction 2019 (2019).
  10. Evaluating effectiveness in virtual environments with MR simulation. In Interservice/Industry Training, Simulation, and Education Conference, Vol. 4. 44.
  11. Virginia Braun and Victoria Clarke. 2006. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative research in psychology 3, 2 (2006), 77–101.
  12. Marion Buchenau and Jane Fulton Suri. 2000. Experience prototyping. In Proceedings of the 3rd conference on Designing interactive systems: processes, practices, methods, and techniques. 424–433.
  13. Utilizing VR and gaze tracking to develop AR solutions for industrial maintenance. In Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1–13.
  14. Effects of Semantic Segmentation Visualization on Trust, Situation Awareness, and Cognitive Load in Highly Automated Vehicles. In Proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1–11.
  15. Unveiling the Lack of Scalability in Research on External Communication of Autonomous Vehicles. In Extended Abstracts of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Honolulu, HI, USA) (CHI EA ’20). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1145/3334480.3382865
  16. Efficacy of virtual reality in pedestrian safety research. Applied ergonomics 65 (2017), 449–460.
  17. A systematic review of 10 years of augmented reality usability studies: 2005 to 2014. Frontiers in Robotics and AI 5 (2018), 37.
  18. Taming the eHMI jungle: A classification taxonomy to guide, compare, and assess the design principles of automated vehicles’ external human-machine interfaces. Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives 7 (2020), 100174.
  19. Locomotion vault: the extra mile in analyzing vr locomotion techniques. In Proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1–10.
  20. Lorin Dole and Wendy Ju. 2019. Face and ecological validity in simulations: lessons from search-and-rescue HRI. In Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1–8.
  21. Exploring the use of handheld AR for outdoor navigation. Computers & Graphics 36, 8 (2012), 1084–1095.
  22. UN ECOSOC. 2015. The UNECE–ITU smart sustainable cities indicators.
  23. Context-based interface prototyping and evaluation for (shared) autonomous vehicles using a lightweight immersive video-based simulator. In Proceedings of the 2020 ACM Designing Interactive Systems Conference. 1379–1390.
  24. A Systematic Review of Rapid Prototyping Tools for Augmented Reality. In 2020 22nd Symposium on Virtual and Augmented Reality (SVR). IEEE, 199–209.
  25. The effects of text drawing styles, background textures, and natural lighting on text legibility in outdoor augmented reality. Presence 15, 1 (2006), 16–32.
  26. Effects of augmented reality display settings on human wayfinding performance. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Part C (Applications and Reviews) 37, 5 (2007), 839–845.
  27. Reginald G Golledge et al. 1999. Wayfinding behavior: Cognitive mapping and other spatial processes. JHU press.
  28. Design and Simulation of Next-Generation Augmented Reality User Interfaces in Virtual Reality. In 2021 IEEE Conference on Virtual Reality and 3D User Interfaces Abstracts and Workshops (VRW). IEEE, 23–29.
  29. Towards pervasive augmented reality: Context-awareness in augmented reality. IEEE transactions on visualization and computer graphics 23, 6 (2016), 1706–1724.
  30. VRception: Rapid Prototyping of Cross-Reality Systems in Virtual Reality. In CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1–15.
  31. Marc Hassenzahl and Noam Tractinsky. 2006. User experience-a research agenda. Behaviour & information technology 25, 2 (2006), 91–97.
  32. Don’t panic! guiding pedestrians in autonomous traffic with augmented reality. In Proceedings of the 20th International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction with Mobile Devices and Services Adjunct. 261–268.
  33. Context-Based Interface Prototyping: Understanding the Effect of Prototype Representation on User Feedback. In Proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1–14.
  34. Designing a willing-to-use-in-public hand gestural interaction technique for smart glasses. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 4203–4215.
  35. Ana Javornik. 2018. Directions for studying user experience with augmented reality in public. In Augmented Reality and Virtual Reality. Springer, 199–210.
  36. Trust in AV: An uncertainty reduction model of AV-pedestrian interactions. In Companion of the 2018 ACM/IEEE international conference on human-robot interaction. 133–134.
  37. Lena Jingen Liang and Statia Elliot. 2021. A systematic review of augmented reality tourism research: What is now and what is next? Tourism and Hospitality Research 21, 1 (2021), 15–30.
  38. A comparative study of simulated augmented reality displays for vehicle navigation. In Proceedings of the 28th Australian conference on computer-human interaction. 40–48.
  39. Phillip Chu Joy. 2013. This Is What the World Looks Like Through Google Glass. https://tec.com.pe/asi-se-ve-la-vida-a-traves-de-google-glass-fotos/
  40. SeungJun Kim and Anind K Dey. 2009. Simulated augmented reality windshield display as a cognitive mapping aid for elder driver navigation. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 133–142.
  41. Jesper Kjeldskov and Mikael B Skov. 2014. Was it worth the hassle? Ten years of mobile HCI research discussions on lab and field evaluations. In Proceedings of the 16th international conference on Human-computer interaction with mobile devices & services. 43–52.
  42. Elements of XR Prototyping: Characterizing the Role and Use of Prototypes in Augmented and Virtual Reality Design. In CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1–18.
  43. The role of latency in the validity of AR simulation. In 2010 IEEE Virtual Reality Conference (VR). IEEE, 11–18.
  44. A replication study testing the validity of ar simulation in vr for controlled experiments. In 2009 8th IEEE International Symposium on Mixed and Augmented Reality. IEEE, 203–204.
  45. User Preference for Navigation Instructions in Mixed Reality. In 2022 IEEE Conference on Virtual Reality and 3D User Interfaces (VR). IEEE, 802–811.
  46. Lik-Hang Lee and Pan Hui. 2018. Interaction methods for smart glasses: A survey. IEEE Access 6 (2018), 28712–28732. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2018.2831081
  47. J Lehikoinen and R Suomela. 2002. WalkMap: developing an augmented reality map application for wearable computers. Virtual Reality 6, 1 (2002), 33–44.
  48. The anatomy of prototypes: Prototypes as filters, prototypes as manifestations of design ideas. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction (TOCHI) 15, 2 (2008), 1–27.
  49. Feiyu Lu and Doug A Bowman. 2021. Evaluating the potential of glanceable ar interfaces for authentic everyday uses. In 2021 IEEE Virtual Reality and 3D User Interfaces (VR). IEEE, 768–777.
  50. Feiyu Lu and Yan Xu. 2022. Exploring Spatial UI Transition Mechanisms with Head-Worn Augmented Reality. In CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1–16.
  51. Virtual Field Studies: Conducting Studies on Public Displays in Virtual Reality. In Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Honolulu, HI, USA) (CHI ’20). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1145/3313831.3376796
  52. Effects of” Real-World” Visual Fidelity on AR Interface Assessment: A Case Study Using AR Head-Up Display Graphics in Driving. In 2019 IEEE International Symposium on Mixed and Augmented Reality (ISMAR). IEEE, 145–156.
  53. Developing a Tutorial for Improving Usability and User Skills in an Immersive Virtual Reality Experience. In International Conference on Extended Reality. Springer, 63–78.
  54. Like bees around the hive: a comparative study of a mobile augmented reality map. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems. 1889–1898.
  55. Augmented reality navigation systems. Universal Access in the Information Society 4, 3 (2006), 177–187.
  56. Michael Nebeling and Katy Madier. 2019. 360proto: Making interactive virtual reality & augmented reality prototypes from paper. In Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1–13.
  57. Oculus. 2019. Introducing Oculus Quest, our first 6DOF all-in-one VR system. https://www.oculus.com/blog/introducing-oculus-quest-our-first-6dof-all-in-one-vr-system-launching-spring-2019/
  58. The Pokémon GO experience: A location-based augmented reality mobile game goes mainstream. In Proceedings of the 2017 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems. 2493–2498.
  59. Keeping it private: an augmented reality approach to citizen participation with public displays. In Adjunct Proceedings of the 2015 ACM International Joint Conference on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing and Proceedings of the 2015 ACM International Symposium on Wearable Computers. 807–812.
  60. Nadine Pfeiffer-Leßmann and Thies Pfeiffer. 2018. ExProtoVAR: a lightweight tool for experience-focused prototyping of augmented reality applications using virtual reality. In International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction. Springer, 311–318.
  61. Comparing State-of-the-Art and Emerging Augmented Reality Interfaces for Autonomous Vehicle-to-Pedestrian Communication. IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology 70, 2 (2021), 1157–1168.
  62. Pedestrian safety, urban space and health. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.
  63. Simulation of augmented reality systems in purely virtual environments. In 2009 IEEE Virtual Reality Conference. IEEE, 287–288.
  64. Who will buy smart glasses? Empirical results of two pre-market-entry studies on the role of personality in individual awareness and intended adoption of Google Glass wearables. Computers in Human Behavior 49 (2015), 635–647.
  65. Fashion or technology? A fashnology perspective on the perception and adoption of augmented reality smart glasses. i-com 15, 2 (2016), 179–194.
  66. Philipp A Rauschnabel and Young K Ro. 2016. Augmented reality smart glasses: An investigation of technology acceptance drivers. International Journal of Technology Marketing 11, 2 (2016), 123–148.
  67. A Research Agenda for Mixed Reality in Automated Vehicles. In 19th International Conference on Mobile and Ubiquitous Multimedia. 119–131.
  68. Affective interactions using virtual reality: the link between presence and emotions. Cyberpsychology & behavior 10, 1 (2007), 45–56.
  69. Why it’s worth the hassle: The value of in-situ studies when designing ubicomp. In International conference on ubiquitous computing. Springer, 336–353.
  70. Alexandros Rouchitsas and Håkan Alm. 2019. External human–machine interfaces for autonomous vehicle-to-pedestrian communication: a review of empirical work. Frontiers in psychology 10 (2019), 2757.
  71. Albrecht Schmidt and Thomas Herrmann. 2017. Intervention user interfaces: a new interaction paradigm for automated systems. Interactions 24, 5 (2017), 40–45.
  72. Sonja Schneider and Klaus Bengler. 2020. Virtually the same? Analysing pedestrian behaviour by means of virtual reality. Transportation research part F: traffic psychology and behaviour 68 (2020), 231–256.
  73. Airsim: High-fidelity visual and physical simulation for autonomous vehicles. In Field and service robotics. Springer, 621–635.
  74. Immersive Speculative Enactments: Bringing Future Scenarios and Technology to Life Using Virtual Reality. In CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1–20.
  75. Plight of the distracted pedestrian: a research synthesis and meta-analysis of mobile phone use on crossing behaviour. Injury prevention 26, 2 (2020), 170–176.
  76. CyberWalk: Enabling unconstrained omnidirectional walking through virtual environments. ACM Transactions on Applied Perception (TAP) 8, 4 (2011), 1–22.
  77. Vulnerable road users and the coming wave of automated vehicles: Expert perspectives. Transportation research interdisciplinary perspectives 9 (2021), 100293.
  78. Augmented reality interfaces for pedestrian-vehicle interactions: An online study. (2022).
  79. Tram Thi Minh Tran and Callum Parker. 2020. Designing exocentric pedestrian navigation for AR head mounted displays. In Extended Abstracts of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1–8.
  80. Martin Tomitsch. 2017. Making cities smarter. JOVIS Verlag GmbH.
  81. System and method implementing virtual pedestrian traffic lights. US Patent App. 17/190,983.
  82. A review of virtual reality studies on autonomous vehicle–pedestrian interaction. IEEE Transactions on Human-Machine Systems (2021).
  83. Designing Wearable Augmented Reality Concepts to Support Scalability in Autonomous Vehicle–Pedestrian Interaction. Frontiers in Computer Science (2022), 39.
  84. The effect of narrow field of view and information density on visual search performance in augmented reality. In 2019 IEEE Conference on Virtual Reality and 3D User Interfaces (VR). IEEE, 575–584.
  85. Online, VR, AR, Lab, and In-Situ: Comparison of Research Methods to Evaluate Smart Artifacts. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1145/3290605.3300737
  86. Bob G Witmer and Michael J Singer. 1998. Measuring presence in virtual environments: A presence questionnaire. Presence 7, 3 (1998), 225–240.
  87. Evaluating Virtual Reality as a Tool for Empathic Modelling of Vision Impairment. (2021).
  88. The effectiveness of visual and audio wayfinding guidance on smartglasses for people with low vision. In Proceedings of the 2020 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems. 1–14.
Citations (11)
View on Semantic Scholar

Summary

We haven't generated a summary for this paper yet.

Ai Sparkles Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com Summarize Now

Whiteboard

Open Problems

We haven't generated a list of open problems mentioned in this paper yet.

Ai Sparkles Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com Generate Now

Continue Learning

We haven't generated follow-up questions for this paper yet.

Ai Sparkles Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com Generate Now

Collections

Sign up for free to add this paper to one or more collections.

User Circle Single Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com Sign Up

Tweets

Sign up for free to view the 1 tweet with 1 like about this paper.

User Circle Single Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com Sign Up for Free