skip to main content
10.1145/3173574.3173724acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageschiConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article
Honorable Mention

Visuo-Haptic Illusions for Improving the Perceived Performance of Shape Displays

Published:19 April 2018Publication History

ABSTRACT

In this work, we utilize visuo-haptic illusions to improve the perceived performance of encountered-type haptic devices, specifically shape displays, in virtual reality. Shape displays are matrices of actuated pins that travel vertically to render physical shapes; however, they have limitations such as low resolution, small display size, and low pin speed. To address these limitations, we employ illusions such as redirection, scaling, and retargeting that take advantage of the visual dominance effect, the idea that vision often dominates when senses conflict. Our evaluation of these techniques suggests that redirecting sloped lines with angles less than 40 degrees onto a horizontal line is an effective technique for increasing the perceived resolution of the display. Scaling up the virtual object onto the shape display by a factor less than 1.8x can also increase the perceived resolution. Finally, using vertical redirection a perceived 3x speed increase can be achieved.

Skip Supplemental Material Section

Supplemental Material

pn1994.m4v

m4v

73.2 MB

pn1994-file5.mp4

mp4

8.3 MB

References

  1. Bruno Araujo, Ricardo Jota, Varun Perumal, Jia Xian Yao, Karan Singh, and Daniel Wigdor. 2016. Snake Charmer: Physically Enabling Virtual Objects. In Proceedings of the TEI'16: Tenth International Conference on Tangible, Embedded, and Embodied Interaction. ACM, 218--226. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Naoya Asamura, Tomoyuki Shinohara, Yoshiharu Tojo, and Hiroyuki Shinoda. 2001. Necessary spatial resolution for realistic tactile feeling display. In ICRA. Citeseer, 1851--1856.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  3. Mahdi Azmandian, Mark Hancock, Hrvoje Benko, Eyal Ofek, and Andrew D. Wilson. 2016. Haptic Retargeting: Dynamic Repurposing of Passive Haptics for Enhanced Virtual Reality Experiences. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '16). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 1968--1979. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Yuki Ban, Takashi Kajinami, Takuji Narumi, Tomohiro Tanikawa, and Michitaka Hirose. 2012a. Modifying an Identified Angle of Edged Shapes Using Pseudo-haptic Effects. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, 25--36. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Y. Ban, T. Kajinami, T. Narumi, T. Tanikawa, and M. Hirose. 2012b. Modifying an identified curved surface shape using pseudo-haptic effect. In 2012 IEEE Haptics Symposium (HAPTICS). 211--216. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Yuki Ban, Takuji Narumi, Tomohiro Tanikawa, and Michitaka Hirose. 2014. Displaying Shapes with Various Types of Surfaces Using Visuo-haptic Interaction. In Proceedings of the 20th ACM Symposium on Virtual Reality Software and Technology (VRST '14). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 191--196. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Hrvoje Benko, Christian Holz, Mike Sinclair, and Eyal Ofek. 2016. NormalTouch and TextureTouch: High-fidelity 3D Haptic Shape Rendering on Handheld Virtual Reality Controllers. In Proceedings of the 29th Annual Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology. ACM, 717--728. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Lung-Pan Cheng, Eyal Ofek, Christian Holz, Hrvoje Benko, and Andrew D. Wilson. 2017. Sparse Haptic Proxy: Touch Feedback in Virtual Environments Using a General Passive Prop. In Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '17). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 3718--3728. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Inrak Choi and Sean Follmer. 2016. Wolverine: A Wearable Haptic Interface for Grasping in VR. In Proceedings of the 29th Annual Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology. ACM, 117--119. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. William Peine Dimitrios A. Kontarinis, Jae S. Son, Shigeaki Robert D. Howe, Jun Rekimoto, and Yasufumi Yamaji. 1995. A Tactile Shape Sensing and Display System for Teleoperated Manipulation. In IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. Lionel Dominjon, Anatole Lécuyer, J-M Burkhardt, Paul Richard, and Simon Richir. 2005. Influence of control/display ratio on the perception of mass of manipulated objects in virtual environments. In Virtual Reality, 2005. Proceedings. VR 2005. IEEE. IEEE, 19--25. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Sean Follmer, Daniel Leithinger, Alex Olwal, Akimitsu Hogge, and Hiroshi Ishii. 2013. inFORM: Dynamic Physical Affordances and Constraints Through Shape and Object Actuation. In Proceedings of the 26th Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology (UIST '13). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 417--426. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. James J. Gibson. 1933. Adaptation, after-effect and contrast in the perception of curved lines. In Journal of Experimental Psychology (16). 1--31.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. James J. Gibson. 1962. Observations on Active Touch. Psychological Review 6 (1962), 477--491.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. Mar Gonzalez-Franco and Jaron Lanier. 2017. Model of Illusions and Virtual Reality. 8 (06 2017).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Mark Goulthorpe, Mark Burry, and Grant Dunlop. 2001. Aegis Hyposurface©: The Bordering of University and Practice. (2001).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. David Hecht and Miriam Reiner. 2009. Sensory dominance in combinations of audio, visual and haptic stimuli. Experimental Brain Research 193, 2 (2009), 307--314.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  18. Koichi Hirota and Michitaka Hirose. 1995. Simulation and presentation of curved surface in virtual reality environment through surface display. In Virtual Reality Annual International Symposium, 1995. Proceedings. IEEE, 211--216. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Hiroo Iwata, Hiroaki Yano, Fumitaka Nakaizumi, and Ryo Kawamura. 2001. Project FEELEX: Adding Haptic Surface to Graphics. In Proceedings of the 28th Annual Conference on Computer Graphics and Interactive Techniques (SIGGRAPH '01). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 469--476. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. I. Jang and D. Lee. 2014. On utilizing pseudo-haptics for cutaneous fingertip haptic device. In 2014 IEEE Haptics Symposium (HAPTICS). 635--639.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Robert S. Kennedy, Norman E. Lane, Kevin S. Berbaum, and Michael G Lilienthal. 1993. Simulator Sickness Questionnaire: An Enhanced Method for Quantifying Simulator Sickness. The International Journal of Aviation Psychology 3, 3 (1993), 203--220.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  22. Roberta L Klatzky, Susan J Lederman, and Dana E Matula. 1993. Haptic exploration in the presence of vision. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 19, 4 (1993), 726.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  23. Roberta L. Klatzky, Susan J. Lederman, and Catherine Reed. 1987. There's More to Touch Than Meets the Eye: The Salience of Object Attributes for Haptics with and Without Vision. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 116, 4 (1987), 356--369.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  24. Luv Kohli. 2010. Redirected touching: Warping space to remap passive haptics. In 2010 IEEE Symposium on 3D User Interfaces (3DUI). 129--130. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. Luv Kohli, Mary C. Whitton, and Frederick P. Brooks. 2012. Redirected Touching: The Effect of Warping Space on Task Performance. In IEEE Symposium on 3D User Interfaces ((3DUIâ´ Z12). 105--112.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. Anatole Lécuyer. 2009. Simulating Haptic Feedback Using Vision: A Survey of Research and Applications of Pseudo-haptic Feedback. Presence: Teleoper. Virtual Environ. 18, 1 (Jan. 2009), 39--53. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. S. J. Lederman and L. A. Jones. 2011. Tactile and Haptic Illusions. IEEE Transactions on Haptics 4, 4 (October 2011), 273--294. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. Y. Lee, I. Jang, and D. Lee. 2015. Enlarging just noticeable differences of visual-proprioceptive conflict in VR using haptic feedback. In 2015 IEEE World Haptics Conference (WHC). 19--24.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. Daniel Leithinger. 2015. Grasping information and collaborating through shape displays. Ph.D. Dissertation. Massachusetts Institute of Technology.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. Daniel Leithinger, Sean Follmer, Alex Olwal, and Hiroshi Ishii. 2014. Physical Telepresence: Shape Capture and Display for Embodied, Computer-mediated Remote Collaboration. In Proceedings of the 27th Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology (UIST '14). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 461--470. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  31. Daniel Leithinger, Sean Follmer, Alex Olwal, and Hiroshi Ishii. 2015. Shape Displays: Spatial Interaction with Dynamic Physical Form. IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications 35, 5 (Sept 2015), 5--11.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  32. Daniel Leithinger, Sean Follmer, Alex Olwal, Samuel Luescher, Akimitsu Hogge, Jinha Lee, and Hiroshi Ishii. 2013. Sublimate: State-changing Virtual and Physical Rendering to Augment Interaction with Shape Displays. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '13). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 1441--1450. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  33. Daniel Leithinger and Hiroshi Ishii. 2010. Relief: A Scalable Actuated Shape Display. In Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Tangible, Embedded, and Embodied Interaction (TEI '10). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 221--222. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  34. Thomas H Massie, J Kenneth Salisbury, and others. 1994. The phantom haptic interface: A device for probing virtual objects. In Proceedings of the ASME winter annual meeting, symposium on haptic interfaces for virtual environment and teleoperator systems, Vol. 55. Citeseer, 295--300.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  35. Yoky Matsuoka, Sonya J. Allin, and Roberta L. Klatzky. 2002. The tolerance for visual feedback distortions in a virtual environment. Physiology Behavior 77, 4 (2002), 651 -- 655.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  36. William A McNeely. 1993. Robotic graphics: A new approach to force feedback for virtual reality. In Virtual Reality Annual International Symposium, 1993., 1993 IEEE. IEEE, 336--341. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  37. Yoichi Ochiai, Kota Kumagai, Takayuki Hoshi, Satoshi Hasegawa, and Yoshio Hayasaki. 2016. Cross-field aerial haptics: Rendering haptic feedback in air with light and acoustic fields. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, 3238--3247. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  38. GonÃgalo Padrao, Mar Gonzalez-Franco, Maria V. Sanchez-Vives, Mel Slater, and Antoni Rodriguez-Fornells. 2016. Violating body movement semantics: Neural signatures of self-generated and external-generated errors. NeuroImage 124, Part A (2016), 147 -- 156.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  39. Ivan Poupyrev, Tatsushi Nashida, Shigeaki Maruyama, Jun Rekimoto, and Yasufumi Yamaji. 2004. Lumen: Interactive Visual and Shape Display for Calm Computing. In ACM SIGGRAPH 2004 Emerging Technologies (SIGGRAPH '04). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 17--. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  40. MW Riley, DJ Cochran, and CA Schanbacher. 1985. Force capability differences due to gloves. Ergonomics 28, 2 (1985), 441--447.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  41. Irvin Rock and Jack Victor. 1964. Vision and Touch: An Experimentally Created Conflict between the Two Senses. Science 143, 3606 (1964), 594--596.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  42. M. Shimojo, M. Shinohara, and Y. Fukui. 1999. Human shape recognition performance for 3D tactile display. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics Part A: Systems and Humans 29, 6 (Nov 1999), 637--644. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  43. Alexa F. Siu, Eric J. Gonzalez, Shenli Yuan, Jason Ginsberg, Allen Zhao, and Sean Follmer. 2017. shapeShift: A Mobile Tabletop Shape Display for Tangible and Haptic Interaction. In Adjunct Publication of the 30th Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology (UIST '17). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 77--79. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  44. Rajinder Sodhi, Matthew Glisson, and Ivan Poupyrev. 2013. AIREAL: tactile gaming experiences in free air. In ACM SIGGRAPH 2013 Emerging Technologies. ACM, 2. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  45. Andrew A Stanley, James C Gwilliam, and Allison M Okamura. 2013. Haptic jamming: A deformable geometry, variable stiffness tactile display using pneumatics and particle jamming. In World Haptics Conference (WHC), 2013. IEEE, 25--30.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  46. F. Steinicke, G. Bruder, J. Jerald, H. Frenz, and M. Lappe. 2010. Estimation of Detection Thresholds for Redirected Walking Techniques. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 16, 1 (Jan 2010), 17--27. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  47. Ian R Summers and Craig M Chanter. 2002. A broadband tactile array on the fingertip. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 112, 5 (2002), 2118--2126.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  48. Susuma Tachi, Taro Maeda, Ryokichi Hirata, and Hiroshi Hoshino. 1994. A construction method of virtual haptic space. In proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Artificial Reality and Tele-Existence (ICAT'94). 131--138.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  49. Faisal Taher, John Hardy, Abhijit Karnik, Christian Weichel, Yvonne Jansen, Kasper Hornbæk, and Jason Alexander. 2015. Exploring Interactions with Physically Dynamic Bar Charts. In Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '15). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 3237--3246. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  50. Dimitar Valkov, Alexander Giesler, and Klaus H. Hinrichs. 2014. Imperceptible Depth Shifts for Touch Interaction with Stereoscopic Objects. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '14). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 227--236. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  51. Christopher R Wagner, Susan J Lederman, and Robert D Howe. 2002. A tactile shape display using RC servomotors. In Haptic Interfaces for Virtual Environment and Teleoperator Systems, 2002. HAPTICS 2002. Proceedings. 10th Symposium on. IEEE, 354--355. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  52. Parris S Wellman, William J Peine, Gregg Favalora, and Robert D Howe. 1998. Mechanical design and control of a high-bandwidth shape memory alloy tactile display. In Experimental robotics V. Springer, 56--66. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  53. Haihong Zhu and Wayne John Book. 2003. Control concepts for digital clay. Georgia Institute of Technology.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Visuo-Haptic Illusions for Improving the Perceived Performance of Shape Displays

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Login options

      Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

      Sign in
      • Published in

        cover image ACM Conferences
        CHI '18: Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
        April 2018
        8489 pages
        ISBN:9781450356206
        DOI:10.1145/3173574

        Copyright © 2018 ACM

        Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

        Publisher

        Association for Computing Machinery

        New York, NY, United States

        Publication History

        • Published: 19 April 2018

        Permissions

        Request permissions about this article.

        Request Permissions

        Check for updates

        Qualifiers

        • research-article

        Acceptance Rates

        CHI '18 Paper Acceptance Rate666of2,590submissions,26%Overall Acceptance Rate6,199of26,314submissions,24%

        Upcoming Conference

        CHI '24
        CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
        May 11 - 16, 2024
        Honolulu , HI , USA

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader