光场和传统AR眼镜的用户性能和体验比较。

IF 6.5
Wei-An Teng, Su-Ling Yeh, Homer H Chen
{"title":"光场和传统AR眼镜的用户性能和体验比较。","authors":"Wei-An Teng, Su-Ling Yeh, Homer H Chen","doi":"10.1109/TVCG.2025.3617940","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Light field AR glasses can provide better visual comfort than conventional AR glasses; however, studies on user performance comparison between them are notably scarce. In this paper, we present a systematic method employing a serial visual search task without confounding factors to quantify and compare the user performance and experience between these two types of AR glasses at two different viewing distances, 30 cm and 60 cm, and in two modes, purely virtual VR mode and virtualreal integration AR mode. The results show that the light field AR glasses led to a significantly faster reaction speed and higher accuracy than the conventional AR glasses at 30 cm in the AR mode. The participant feedback also shows that the former led to better virtual-real integration. User performance and experience of the light field AR glasses remained consistent across different viewing distances. Although the conventional AR glasses had a better search efficiency than the light field AR glasses at 60 cm in both AR and VR modes, it had more negative feedback from the participants. Overall, the design of this experiment successfully allows us to quantify the effect of VAC and underscores the strength of the evaluation method.</p>","PeriodicalId":94035,"journal":{"name":"IEEE transactions on visualization and computer graphics","volume":"PP ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of User Performance and Experience between Light Field and Conventional AR Glasses.\",\"authors\":\"Wei-An Teng, Su-Ling Yeh, Homer H Chen\",\"doi\":\"10.1109/TVCG.2025.3617940\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Light field AR glasses can provide better visual comfort than conventional AR glasses; however, studies on user performance comparison between them are notably scarce. In this paper, we present a systematic method employing a serial visual search task without confounding factors to quantify and compare the user performance and experience between these two types of AR glasses at two different viewing distances, 30 cm and 60 cm, and in two modes, purely virtual VR mode and virtualreal integration AR mode. The results show that the light field AR glasses led to a significantly faster reaction speed and higher accuracy than the conventional AR glasses at 30 cm in the AR mode. The participant feedback also shows that the former led to better virtual-real integration. User performance and experience of the light field AR glasses remained consistent across different viewing distances. Although the conventional AR glasses had a better search efficiency than the light field AR glasses at 60 cm in both AR and VR modes, it had more negative feedback from the participants. Overall, the design of this experiment successfully allows us to quantify the effect of VAC and underscores the strength of the evaluation method.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":94035,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"IEEE transactions on visualization and computer graphics\",\"volume\":\"PP \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-10-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"IEEE transactions on visualization and computer graphics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1109/TVCG.2025.3617940\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"IEEE transactions on visualization and computer graphics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/TVCG.2025.3617940","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

光场AR眼镜可以提供比传统AR眼镜更好的视觉舒适度;然而,对两者之间的用户性能比较的研究却非常少。在本文中,我们提出了一种系统的方法,采用无混杂因素的连续视觉搜索任务来量化和比较这两种类型的AR眼镜在30 cm和60 cm两种不同观看距离下,纯虚拟VR模式和虚拟现实集成AR模式下的用户性能和体验。结果表明,在AR模式下,光场AR眼镜在30 cm处的反应速度和精度明显高于传统AR眼镜。参与者的反馈也表明,前者可以更好地实现虚拟与现实的融合。光场增强现实眼镜的用户性能和体验在不同的观看距离下保持一致。尽管在AR和VR两种模式下,传统AR眼镜在60 cm处的搜索效率都优于光场AR眼镜,但参与者的负面反馈更多。总体而言,本实验的设计成功地使我们能够量化VAC的效果,并强调了评估方法的强度。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparison of User Performance and Experience between Light Field and Conventional AR Glasses.

Light field AR glasses can provide better visual comfort than conventional AR glasses; however, studies on user performance comparison between them are notably scarce. In this paper, we present a systematic method employing a serial visual search task without confounding factors to quantify and compare the user performance and experience between these two types of AR glasses at two different viewing distances, 30 cm and 60 cm, and in two modes, purely virtual VR mode and virtualreal integration AR mode. The results show that the light field AR glasses led to a significantly faster reaction speed and higher accuracy than the conventional AR glasses at 30 cm in the AR mode. The participant feedback also shows that the former led to better virtual-real integration. User performance and experience of the light field AR glasses remained consistent across different viewing distances. Although the conventional AR glasses had a better search efficiency than the light field AR glasses at 60 cm in both AR and VR modes, it had more negative feedback from the participants. Overall, the design of this experiment successfully allows us to quantify the effect of VAC and underscores the strength of the evaluation method.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信