Ce diaporama a bien été signalé.
Le téléchargement de votre SlideShare est en cours. ×

COMP 4010 - Lecture 2: Presence in Virtual Reality

COMP 4010 - Lecture 2: Presence in Virtual Reality

Télécharger pour lire hors ligne

The second lecture for the course COMP 4010. This lecture was about the concept of Presence in Virtual Reality and was taught by Bruce Thomas on August 2nd 2016.

The second lecture for the course COMP 4010. This lecture was about the concept of Presence in Virtual Reality and was taught by Bruce Thomas on August 2nd 2016.

Plus De Contenu Connexe

COMP 4010 - Lecture 2: Presence in Virtual Reality

  1. 1. LECTURE 2: PRESENCE IN VIRTUAL REALITY COMP 4010 - Virtual Reality Semester 5 - 2016 Mark Billinghurst, Bruce Thomas University of South Australia August 2nd 2016
  2. 2. Are We Living In a Simulation? •  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hprf4Mgi9lE
  3. 3. Are We In the Matrix?
  4. 4. •  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aVLexf_dyCM
  5. 5. What is Reality?
  6. 6. How do We Perceive Reality? • We understand the world through our senses: •  Sight, Hearing, Touch, Taste, Smell (and others..) • Two basic processes: •  Sensation – Gathering information •  Perception – Interpreting information
  7. 7. Simple Sensing/Perception Model
  8. 8. What is Virtual Reality? •  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gBuW6mFEnpo
  9. 9. Goal of Virtual Reality “.. to make it feel like you’re actually in a place that you are not.” Palmer Luckey Co-founder, Oculus
  10. 10. Creating the Illusion of Reality • Fooling human perception by using technology to generate artificial sensations • Computer generated sights, sounds, smell, etc
  11. 11. Reality vs. Virtual Reality •  In a VR system there are input and output devices between human perception and action
  12. 12. Example: Virtual Cocoon •  Virtual Cocoon concept •  Univ. Warwick, Univ. York (2009) •  Multi-sensory VR display •  All 5 senses stimulated •  Visual, 3D audio, smells, etc •  Cross modal effects improve VR experience •  E.g. taste + sound > taste alone http://www.wired.com/2009/03/realvirtuality/ Chalmers, A., Howard, D., & Moir, C. (2009). Real virtuality: a step change from virtual reality. In Proceedings of the 25th Spring Conference on Computer Graphics (pp. 9-16). ACM.
  13. 13. FeelReal – FeelReal.com •  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mIin6K_iNSA
  14. 14. Birdly - http://www.somniacs.co/ •  Create illusion of flying like a bird •  Multisensory VR experience •  Visual, audio, wind, haptic
  15. 15. Birdly Demo •  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gHE6H62GHoM
  16. 16. ‘Virtual Reality is a synthetic sensory experience which may one day be indistinguishable from the real physical world.” -Roy Kalawsky (1993) Today Tomorrow
  17. 17. Types of Human Experience Lee, K. M. (2004). Presence, explicated. Communication theory, 14(1), 27-50.
  18. 18. Presence Definition “Presence is a psychological state .. in which even though part or all of an individual’s current experience is generated by .. technology, part or all of the individual’s perception fails to .. acknowledge the role of the technology in the experience.” International Society for Presence Research, 2016 https://ispr.info/
  19. 19. In Simple Terms, Presence is .. “The subjective experience of being in one place or environment even when physically situated in another” Witmer, B. G., & Singer, M. J. (1998). Measuring presence in virtual environments: A presence questionnaire. Presence: Teleoperators and virtual environments, 7(3), 225-240.
  20. 20. Immersion vs. Presence •  Immersion: describes the extent to which technology is capable of delivering a vivid illusion of reality to the senses of a human participant. •  Presence: a state of consciousness, the (psychological) sense of being in the virtual environment. •  So Immersion, defined in technical terms, is capable of producing a sensation of Presence Slater, M., & Wilbur, S. (1997). A framework for immersive virtual environments (FIVE): Speculations on the role of presence in virtual environments. Presence: Teleoperators and virtual environments, 6(6), 603-616.
  21. 21. Three Dimensions of Presence • Personal Presence, the extent to which the person feels like he or she is part of the virtual environment; • Social Presence, the extent to which other beings (living or synthetic) also exist in the VE; • Environmental Presence, the extent to which the environment itself acknowledges and reacts to the person in the VE. Heeter, C. (1992). Being there: The subjective experience of presence. Presence: Teleoperators & Virtual Environments, 1(2), 262-271.
  22. 22. Benefits of High Presence •  Leads to greater engagement, excitement and satisfaction •  Increased reaction to actions in VR •  People more likely to behave like in the real world •  E.g. people scared of heights in real world will be scared in VR •  More natural communication (Social Presence) •  Use same cues as face to face conversation •  Note: The relationship between Presence and Performance is unclear – still an active area of research
  23. 23. Measuring Presence •  Presence is very subjective so there is a lot of debate among researchers about how to measure it •  Subjective Measures •  Self report questionnaire •  University College London Questionnaire (Slater 1999) •  Witmer and Singer Presence Questionnaire (Witmer 1998) •  ITC Sense Of Presence Inventory (Lessiter 2000) •  Continuous measure •  Person moves slider bar in VE depending on Presence felt •  Objective Measures •  Behavioural •  reflex/flinch measure, startle response •  Physiological measures •  change in heart rate, skin conductance, skin temperature Presence Slider
  24. 24. Example: Witmer and Singer (1998) •  32 questions in 4 categories/factors •  Control (CF), Sensory (SF), Realism (RF), Distraction factors (DF) •  Answered on Likert scale from 1 to 7 ( 1 = low, 7 = high)
  25. 25. Example: UNC Pit Room •  Key Features •  Training room and pit room •  Physical walking •  Fast, accurate, room scale tracking •  Haptic feedback – feel edge of pit, walls •  Strong visual and 3D audio cues •  Task •  Carry object across pit •  Walk across or walk around •  Dropping virtual balls at targets in pit •  http://wwwx.cs.unc.edu/Research/eve/walk_exp/
  26. 26. Typical Subject Behaviour •  Note – from another pit experiment •  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VVAO0DkoD-8
  27. 27. Results •  Physiological measures can be used as a reliable measure of Presence - especially change in heart rate (HR) •  Change in HR agreed with UCL subjective questionnaire •  HR increased with passive haptics, and increase in fps Meehan, M., Insko, B., Whitton, M., & Brooks, F. P. (2001). Physiological measures of presence in virtual environments. In Proceedings of 4th International Workshop on Presence (pp. 21-23).
  28. 28. How to Create Strong Presence? • Use 3 Dimensions of Presence •  Create rich multi-sensory VR experiences •  Include social actors/agents that interact with user •  Have environment respond to user • What Influences Presence •  Vividness – ability to provide rich experience (Steuer 1992) •  Using Virtual Body – user can see themselves (Slater 1993) •  Internal factors – individual user differences (Sadowski 2002) •  Interactivity – how much users can interact (Steuer 1992) •  Sensory, Realism factors (Witmer 1998)
  29. 29. Presence Guidelines (Sadowski 2002)
  30. 30. Oculus 5 Key Technical Ingredients •  Persistence •  > 90 Hz refresh, < 3 ms persistence, avoid retinal blur •  Optics •  Wide FOV > 90 degrees, comfortable eyebox, good calibration •  Tracking •  6 DOF, 360 tracking, sub-mm accuracy, no jitter, good tracking volume •  Resolution •  Correct stereo, > 1K x 1K resolution, no visible pixels •  Latency •  < 20 ms latency, fuse optical tracking and IMU, minimize tracking loop http://www.roadtovr.com/oculus-shares-5-key-ingredients-for-presence-in-virtual-reality/
  31. 31. Relevant Papers •  Slater, M., & Usoh, M. (1993). Representation systems, perceptual positions, and presence in immersive virtual environments. Presence, 2:221–233. •  Slater, M. (1999). Measuring presence: A response to the Witmer and Singer Presence Questionnaire. Presence, 8:560–565. •  Steuer, J. (1992). Defining virtual reality: Dimensions determining telepresence. Journal of Communication, 42(4):72–93. •  Sadowski, W. J. and Stanney, K. M. (2002) Measuring and Managing Presence in Virtual Environments. In: Handbook of Virtual Environments: Design, implementation, and applications.http://vehand.engr.ucf.edu/handbook/ •  Schuemie, M. J., Van Der Straaten, P., Krijn, M., & Van Der Mast, C. A. (2001). Research on presence in virtual reality: A survey CyberPsychology & Behavior, 4(2), 183-201. •  Lee, K. M. (2004). Presence, explicated. Communication theory, 14(1), 27-50. •  Witmer, B. G., & Singer, M. J. (1998). Measuring presence in virtual environments: A presence questionnaire. Presence: Teleoperators and virtual environments, 7(3), 225-240. •  Lessiter, J., Freeman, J., Keogh, E., & Davidoff, J. (2000). Development of a new cross- media presence questionnaire: The ITC-Sense of presence. Paper at the Presence 2000 Workshop, March 27–28, Delft.
  32. 32. www.empathiccomputing.org @marknb00 mark.billinghurst@unisa.edu.au

×