Comparison of the Observation Errors of Augmented and Spatial Reality Systems
Using 3D technologies such as virtual reality (VR) and augmented reality (AR), has intensified nowadays. The mainstream AR devices in use today are head-mounted displays (HMDs), which, due to specification limitations, may not perform to their full potential within a distance of 1.0 m. The spatial r...
| Main Authors: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
MDPI AG
2021-12-01
|
| Series: | Applied Sciences |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.mdpi.com/2076-3417/11/24/12076 |
| _version_ | 1797506715623620608 |
|---|---|
| author | Masataka Ariwa Tomoki Itamiya So Koizumi Tetsutaro Yamaguchi |
| author_facet | Masataka Ariwa Tomoki Itamiya So Koizumi Tetsutaro Yamaguchi |
| author_sort | Masataka Ariwa |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Using 3D technologies such as virtual reality (VR) and augmented reality (AR), has intensified nowadays. The mainstream AR devices in use today are head-mounted displays (HMDs), which, due to specification limitations, may not perform to their full potential within a distance of 1.0 m. The spatial reality display (SRD) is another system that facilitates stereoscopic vision by the naked eye. The recommended working distance is 30.0~75.0 cm. It is crucial to evaluate the observation accuracy within 1.0 m for each device in the medical context. Here, 3D-CG models were created from dental models, and the observation errors of 3D-CG models displayed within 1.0 m by HMD and SRD were verified. The measurement error results showed that the HMD model yielded more significant results than the control model (Model) under some conditions, while the SRD model had the same measurement accuracy as the Model. The measured errors were 0.29~1.92 mm for HMD and 0.02~0.59 mm for SRD. The visual analog scale scores for distinctness were significantly higher for SRD than for HMD. Three-dimensionality did not show any relationship with measurement error. In conclusion, there is a specification limitation for using HMDs within 1.0 m, as shown by the measured values. In the future, it will be essential to consider the characteristics of each device in selecting the use of AR devices. Here, we evaluated the accuracies of 3D-CG models displayed in space using two different systems of AR devices. |
| first_indexed | 2024-03-10T04:36:33Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-5264bfea4cfc47a78c974a99de14e063 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2076-3417 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-03-10T04:36:33Z |
| publishDate | 2021-12-01 |
| publisher | MDPI AG |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Applied Sciences |
| spelling | doaj.art-5264bfea4cfc47a78c974a99de14e0632023-11-23T03:42:51ZengMDPI AGApplied Sciences2076-34172021-12-0111241207610.3390/app112412076Comparison of the Observation Errors of Augmented and Spatial Reality SystemsMasataka Ariwa0Tomoki Itamiya1So Koizumi2Tetsutaro Yamaguchi3Department of Orthodontics, School of Dentistry, Kanagawa Dental University, Yokosuka 238-8580, JapanDepartment of Liberal Arts Education, School of Dentistry, Kanagawa Dental University, Yokosuka 238-8580, JapanDepartment of Orthodontics, School of Dentistry, Kanagawa Dental University, Yokosuka 238-8580, JapanDepartment of Orthodontics, School of Dentistry, Kanagawa Dental University, Yokosuka 238-8580, JapanUsing 3D technologies such as virtual reality (VR) and augmented reality (AR), has intensified nowadays. The mainstream AR devices in use today are head-mounted displays (HMDs), which, due to specification limitations, may not perform to their full potential within a distance of 1.0 m. The spatial reality display (SRD) is another system that facilitates stereoscopic vision by the naked eye. The recommended working distance is 30.0~75.0 cm. It is crucial to evaluate the observation accuracy within 1.0 m for each device in the medical context. Here, 3D-CG models were created from dental models, and the observation errors of 3D-CG models displayed within 1.0 m by HMD and SRD were verified. The measurement error results showed that the HMD model yielded more significant results than the control model (Model) under some conditions, while the SRD model had the same measurement accuracy as the Model. The measured errors were 0.29~1.92 mm for HMD and 0.02~0.59 mm for SRD. The visual analog scale scores for distinctness were significantly higher for SRD than for HMD. Three-dimensionality did not show any relationship with measurement error. In conclusion, there is a specification limitation for using HMDs within 1.0 m, as shown by the measured values. In the future, it will be essential to consider the characteristics of each device in selecting the use of AR devices. Here, we evaluated the accuracies of 3D-CG models displayed in space using two different systems of AR devices.https://www.mdpi.com/2076-3417/11/24/12076virtual realityaugmented realityspatial realitydental arch3D displayhead-mounted display |
| spellingShingle | Masataka Ariwa Tomoki Itamiya So Koizumi Tetsutaro Yamaguchi Comparison of the Observation Errors of Augmented and Spatial Reality Systems Applied Sciences virtual reality augmented reality spatial reality dental arch 3D display head-mounted display |
| title | Comparison of the Observation Errors of Augmented and Spatial Reality Systems |
| title_full | Comparison of the Observation Errors of Augmented and Spatial Reality Systems |
| title_fullStr | Comparison of the Observation Errors of Augmented and Spatial Reality Systems |
| title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of the Observation Errors of Augmented and Spatial Reality Systems |
| title_short | Comparison of the Observation Errors of Augmented and Spatial Reality Systems |
| title_sort | comparison of the observation errors of augmented and spatial reality systems |
| topic | virtual reality augmented reality spatial reality dental arch 3D display head-mounted display |
| url | https://www.mdpi.com/2076-3417/11/24/12076 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT masatakaariwa comparisonoftheobservationerrorsofaugmentedandspatialrealitysystems AT tomokiitamiya comparisonoftheobservationerrorsofaugmentedandspatialrealitysystems AT sokoizumi comparisonoftheobservationerrorsofaugmentedandspatialrealitysystems AT tetsutaroyamaguchi comparisonoftheobservationerrorsofaugmentedandspatialrealitysystems |