Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]

skip to main content
research-article
Public Access

The Contribution of Stereoscopic and Motion Depth Cues to the Perception of Structures in 3D Point Clouds

Published: 21 February 2018 Publication History

Abstract

Particle-based simulations are used across many science domains, and it is well known that stereoscopic viewing and kinetic depth enhance our ability to perceive the 3D structure of such data. But the relative advantages of stereo and kinetic depth have not been studied for point cloud data, although they have been studied for 3D networks. This article reports two experiments assessing human ability to perceive 3D structures in point clouds as a function of different viewing parameters. In the first study, the number of discrete views was varied to determine the extent to which smooth motion is needed. Also, half the trials had stereoscopic viewing and half had no stereo. The results showed kinetic depth to be more beneficial than stereo viewing in terms of accuracy and so long as the motion was smooth. The second experiment varied the amplitude of oscillatory motion from 0 to 16 degrees. The results showed an increase in detection rate with amplitude, with the best amplitudes being 4 degrees and greater. Overall, motion was shown to yield greater accuracy, but at the expense of longer response times in comparison with stereoscopic viewing.

References

[1]
Sean Ahern, Arie Shoshani, Kwan-Liu Ma, Alok Choudhary, Terence Critchlow, Scott Klasky, Valerio Pascucci, et al. 2011. Scientific discovery at the exascale: Report from the DOE ASCR workshop on exascale data management, analysis, and visualization. Dept. of Energy Office of Advanced Scientific Computing Research.
[2]
James Ahrens, Sebastien Jourdain, Patrick O'Leary, John Patchett, David H. Rogers, and Mark Petersen. 2014. An image-based approach to extreme scale in situ visualization and analysis. In Proceedings of the International Conference for High Performance Computing, Networking, Storage and Analysis. IEEE, 424--434.
[3]
Roland Arsenault and Colin Ware. 2004. The importance of stereo and eye-coupled perspective for eye-hand coordination in fish tank VR. Presence: Teleoperat. Virtual Environ. 13, 5, 549--559.
[4]
Woodrow Barfield, Claudia Hendrix, and Karl Bystrom. 1997. Visualizing the structure of virtual objects using head tracked stereoscopic displays. In Proceedings of the Virtual Reality Annual International Symposium. IEEE, 114--120. March.
[5]
Georges-Pierre Bonneau, Thomas Ertl, and Gregory M. Nielson. 2006. Scientific Visualization: The Visual Extraction of Knowledge from Data. Springer.
[6]
Mark F. Bradshaw, Andrew D. Parton, and Andrew Glennerster. 2000. The task-dependent use of binocular disparity and motion parallax information. Vision Res. 40, 27, 3725--3734.
[7]
Isaac Cho, Wenwen Dou, Zachary Wartell, William Ribarsky, and Xiaoyu Wang. 2012. Evaluating depth perception of volumetric data in semi-immersive VR. In Proceedings of the International Working Conference on Advanced Visual Interfaces. 266--269. ACM.
[8]
Salman Habib, Adrian Pope, Zarija Lukić, David Daniel, Patricia Fasel, Nehal Desai, Katrin Heitmann, et al. 2009. Hybrid petacomputing meets cosmology: The roadrunner universe project. J. Phys. Conf. Ser., IOP Publishing. 180, 1, 1--10.
[9]
Djamel Hassaine, Nicholas S. Holliman, and Simon P. Liversedge. 2010. Investigating the performance of path-searching tasks in depth on multiview displays. ACM Trans. Appl. Percept. 8, 1, 18.
[10]
Nicholas S. Holliman, Neil A. Dodgson, Gregg E. Favalora, and Lachlan Pockett. 2011. Three-dimensional displays: A review and applications analysis. IEEE Trans. Broadcast. 57, 2, 362--371.
[11]
Ian P. Howard and Brian J. Rogers. 1995. Binocular Vision and Stereopsis. Oxford University Press, USA.
[12]
Geoffrey S. Hubona, Gregory W. Shirah, and David G. Fout. 1997. The effects of motion and stereopsis on three-dimensional visualization. Int. J. Hum.-Comput. Studies 47, 5, 609--627.
[13]
Wijnand IJsselsteijn, Huib de Ridder, Jonathan Freeman, Steve E. Avons, and Don Bouwhuis. 2001. Effects of stereoscopic presentation, image motion, and screen size on subjective and objective corroborative measures of presence. Presence 10, 3, 298--311.
[14]
Matthias Müller, David Charypar, and Markus Gross. 2003. Particle-based fluid simulation for interactive applications. In Proceedings of the 2003 ACM SIGGRAPH/Eurographics Symposium on Computer Animation. 154--159.
[15]
Norman J. Farley, James T. Todd, and Flip Phillips. 1995. The perception of surface orientation from multiple sources of optical information. Percept. Psychophys. 57, 5, 629--636.
[16]
Marcia C. Linn and Anne C. Petersen. 1985. Emergence and characterization of sex differences in spatial ability: A meta-analysis. Child Dev. 1479--1498.
[17]
Urs Naepflin and Marino Menozzi. 2001. Can movement parallax compensate lacking stereopsis in spatial explorative search tasks? Displays 22, 5, 157--164.
[18]
Stephen E. Palmer. 1999. Vision Science: Photons to Phenomenology. MIT Press.
[19]
Peter Shirley and Allan Tuchman. 1990. A polygonal approximation to direct scalar volume rendering. ACM 24, 5, 63--70.
[20]
Randy L. Sollenberger and Paul Milgram. 1993. The effects of stereoscopic and rotational displays in a three-dimensional path-tracing task. Hum. Fact. 35, 3, 483--500.
[21]
Graeme Sweet and Colin Ware. 2004. View direction, surface orientation and texture orientation for perception of surface shape. In Proceedings of the Graphics Interface Conference. Canadian Human-Computer Communications Society. 97--106.
[22]
Marco Tarini, Paolo Cignoni, and Claudio Montani. 2006. Ambient occlusion and edge cueing for enhancing real time molecular visualization. IEEE Trans. Visual. Comput. Graph. 12, 5, 1237--1244.
[23]
Maurice H. van Beurden, Andre Kuijsters, and Wijnand A. IJsselsteijn. 2010. Performance of a path tracing task using stereoscopic and motion based depth cues. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Workshop on Quality of Multimedia Experience (QoMEX’10). IEEE, 176--181.
[24]
Daniel Voyer, Susan Voyer, and M. Philip Bryden. 1995. Magnitude of sex differences in spatial abilities: A meta-analysis and consideration of critical variables. Psychol. Bull. 117, 2, 250--270.
[25]
Hans Wallach and D. N. O'Connell. 1953. The kinetic depth effect. J. Exp. Psychol. 45, 40, 205--217.
[26]
Michael Wand, Alexander Berner, Martin Bokeloh, Philipp Jenke, Arno Fleck, Mark Hoffmann, Benjamin Maier, Dirk Staneker, Andreas Schilling, and Hans-Peter Seidel. 2008. Processing and interactive editing of huge point clouds from 3D scanners. Comput. Graph. 32, 2 204--220.
[27]
Leonard R. Wanger, James Ferwerda, and Donald P. Greenberg. 1992. Perceiving spatial relationships in computer-generated images. IEEE Comput. Graph. Appl. 12, 3, 44--58.
[28]
Colin Ware. 2012. Information Visualization: Perception for Design. Elsevier.
[29]
Colin Ware, Kevin Arthur, and Kellogg S. Booth. 1993. Fish tank virtual reality. In Proceedings of the INTERACT'93 and CHI'93 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM. 37--42.
[30]
Colin Ware and Glenn Franck. 1996. Evaluating stereo and motion cues for visualizing information nets in three dimensions. 1996. ACM Trans. Graph. 15, 2, 121--140.
[31]
Colin Ware and Peter Mitchell. 2005. Reevaluating stereo and motion cues for visualizing graphs in three dimensions. In Proceedings of the 2nd Symposium on Applied Perception in Graphics and Visualization. ACM, 51--58.
[32]
Colin Ware, Cyril Gobrecht, and Mark A. Paton. 1998. Dynamic adjustment of stereo display parameters. IEEE Trans. Syst., Man, Cybernet.—Part A: Syst. Hum. 28, 1, 56--65.

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)A Systematic Literature Review of User Evaluation in Immersive AnalyticsComputer Graphics Forum10.1111/cgf.1511143:3Online publication date: 10-Jun-2024
  • (2024)An Experimental Evaluation of Viewpoint‐Based 3D Graph DrawingComputer Graphics Forum10.1111/cgf.1507743:3Online publication date: 6-Jun-2024
  • (2022)Effect of binocular disparity on learning anatomy with stereoscopic augmented reality visualization: A double center randomized controlled trialAnatomical Sciences Education10.1002/ase.216416:1(87-98)Online publication date: 18-Mar-2022
  • Show More Cited By

Recommendations

Comments

Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Transactions on Applied Perception
ACM Transactions on Applied Perception  Volume 15, Issue 2
April 2018
104 pages
ISSN:1544-3558
EISSN:1544-3965
DOI:10.1145/3190502
Issue’s Table of Contents
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution International 4.0 License.

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 21 February 2018
Accepted: 01 August 2017
Revised: 01 July 2017
Received: 01 December 2016
Published in TAP Volume 15, Issue 2

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Check for updates

Author Tags

  1. 3D perception
  2. Point cloud data
  3. depth cues

Qualifiers

  • Research-article
  • Research
  • Refereed

Funding Sources

  • U.S. Department of Energy

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • Downloads (Last 12 months)88
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)10
Reflects downloads up to 25 Nov 2024

Other Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)A Systematic Literature Review of User Evaluation in Immersive AnalyticsComputer Graphics Forum10.1111/cgf.1511143:3Online publication date: 10-Jun-2024
  • (2024)An Experimental Evaluation of Viewpoint‐Based 3D Graph DrawingComputer Graphics Forum10.1111/cgf.1507743:3Online publication date: 6-Jun-2024
  • (2022)Effect of binocular disparity on learning anatomy with stereoscopic augmented reality visualization: A double center randomized controlled trialAnatomical Sciences Education10.1002/ase.216416:1(87-98)Online publication date: 18-Mar-2022
  • (2021)ArtScience and the ICECUBE LED Display [ILDm^3]Proceedings of the 29th ACM International Conference on Multimedia10.1145/3474085.3475524(3720-3727)Online publication date: 17-Oct-2021
  • (2021)BibliographyInformation Visualization10.1016/B978-0-12-812875-6.16001-3(479-521)Online publication date: 2021
  • (2020)Virtual Reality Improves Clinical Assessment of the Optic NerveFrontiers in Virtual Reality10.3389/frvir.2020.000041Online publication date: 5-Aug-2020
  • (2020)Contribution of Motion Parallax and Stereopsis to the Sense of Presence in Virtual RealityJournal of Perceptual Imaging10.2352/J.Percept.Imaging.2020.3.2.0205023:2(20502-1-20502-10)Online publication date: 1-Mar-2020
  • (2019)Faster Multibeam Sonar Data Cleaning: Evaluation of Editing 3D Point Clouds using Immersive VROCEANS 2019 MTS/IEEE SEATTLE10.23919/OCEANS40490.2019.8962793(1-10)Online publication date: Oct-2019
  • (2019)Multi-touch 3D positioning with the pantograph techniqueProceedings of the ACM SIGGRAPH Symposium on Interactive 3D Graphics and Games10.1145/3306131.3317014(1-9)Online publication date: 21-May-2019
  • (2018)Contribution of Stereopsis and Motion Parallax to Fear Responses in the Pit Room Environment2018 International Conference on 3D Immersion (IC3D)10.1109/IC3D.2018.8657858(1-6)Online publication date: Dec-2018

View Options

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

Login options

Full Access

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media