|
|
|
|
| LEADER |
01000naa a22002652 4500 |
| 001 |
NLM275387224 |
| 003 |
DE-627 |
| 005 |
20231225005548.0 |
| 007 |
cr uuu---uuuuu |
| 008 |
231225s2018 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c |
| 024 |
7 |
|
|a 10.1109/TVCG.2017.2745941
|2 doi
|
| 028 |
5 |
2 |
|a pubmed24n0917.xml
|
| 035 |
|
|
|a (DE-627)NLM275387224
|
| 035 |
|
|
|a (NLM)28866590
|
| 040 |
|
|
|a DE-627
|b ger
|c DE-627
|e rakwb
|
| 041 |
|
|
|a eng
|
| 100 |
1 |
|
|a Bach, Benjamin
|e verfasserin
|4 aut
|
| 245 |
1 |
4 |
|a The Hologram in My Hand
|b How Effective is Interactive Exploration of 3D Visualizations in Immersive Tangible Augmented Reality?
|
| 264 |
|
1 |
|c 2018
|
| 336 |
|
|
|a Text
|b txt
|2 rdacontent
|
| 337 |
|
|
|a ƒaComputermedien
|b c
|2 rdamedia
|
| 338 |
|
|
|a ƒa Online-Ressource
|b cr
|2 rdacarrier
|
| 500 |
|
|
|a Date Completed 15.04.2019
|
| 500 |
|
|
|a Date Revised 15.04.2019
|
| 500 |
|
|
|a published: Print-Electronic
|
| 500 |
|
|
|a Citation Status MEDLINE
|
| 520 |
|
|
|a We report on a controlled user study comparing three visualization environments for common 3D exploration. Our environments differ in how they exploit natural human perception and interaction capabilities. We compare an augmented-reality head-mounted display (Microsoft HoloLens), a handheld tablet, and a desktop setup. The novel head-mounted HoloLens display projects stereoscopic images of virtual content into a user's real world and allows for interaction in-situ at the spatial position of the 3D hologram. The tablet is able to interact with 3D content through touch, spatial positioning, and tangible markers, however, 3D content is still presented on a 2D surface. Our hypothesis is that visualization environments that match human perceptual and interaction capabilities better to the task at hand improve understanding of 3D visualizations. To better understand the space of display and interaction modalities in visualization environments, we first propose a classification based on three dimensions: perception, interaction, and the spatial and cognitive proximity of the two. Each technique in our study is located at a different position along these three dimensions. We asked 15 participants to perform four tasks, each task having different levels of difficulty for both spatial perception and degrees of freedom for interaction. Our results show that each of the tested environments is more effective for certain tasks, but that generally the desktop environment is still fastest and most precise in almost all cases
|
| 650 |
|
4 |
|a Journal Article
|
| 650 |
|
4 |
|a Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural
|
| 650 |
|
4 |
|a Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
|
| 700 |
1 |
|
|a Sicat, Ronell
|e verfasserin
|4 aut
|
| 700 |
1 |
|
|a Beyer, Johanna
|e verfasserin
|4 aut
|
| 700 |
1 |
|
|a Cordeil, Maxime
|e verfasserin
|4 aut
|
| 700 |
1 |
|
|a Pfister, Hanspeter
|e verfasserin
|4 aut
|
| 773 |
0 |
8 |
|i Enthalten in
|t IEEE transactions on visualization and computer graphics
|d 1996
|g 24(2018), 1 vom: 30. Jan., Seite 457-467
|w (DE-627)NLM098269445
|x 1941-0506
|7 nnns
|
| 773 |
1 |
8 |
|g volume:24
|g year:2018
|g number:1
|g day:30
|g month:01
|g pages:457-467
|
| 856 |
4 |
0 |
|u http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TVCG.2017.2745941
|3 Volltext
|
| 912 |
|
|
|a GBV_USEFLAG_A
|
| 912 |
|
|
|a SYSFLAG_A
|
| 912 |
|
|
|a GBV_NLM
|
| 912 |
|
|
|a GBV_ILN_350
|
| 951 |
|
|
|a AR
|
| 952 |
|
|
|d 24
|j 2018
|e 1
|b 30
|c 01
|h 457-467
|