"Using Augmented
Virtuality for Remote
Collaboration"
Presented by Julian Yu-Chung Chen
CS528 Fall 2005
2005-10-27
•
Computer-Supported Collaborative Work
(CSCW) environment
•
Application sharing
•
Data distribution and sharing
•
Video-conferencing
•
Integrating AV, AR, data distribution/sharing
and network to one CSCW environment
Previous Works
So, what's wrong?!
•
Cumbersome hardware
•
HMD - Limits face-to-face communication
•
Tracking system
•
Cake platter
•
Inherent need to have the meeting at one
physical location
cAR/PE!
•
Augmented Virtuality (AV) - based videoconferencing
system
•
Requirements
•
Implementation
•
Empirical Work
A Real World Meeting
Scenario - User case
•
A planned meeting
•
Two or more participants
•
Optimize for 2~3 users (56%, Aaby, 2003)
•
A moderator + 2 other users
•
3D CAD models
•
Slides or spreadsheets
Requirements
•
Local, regional and worldwide collaboration
•
3D Video-conferencing on the desk
•
Enable natural communication
•
One system for communication, 3D data,
and presentation
•
Integrated into existing IT infrastructure
•
Cost should be minimal
•
Less than €5000
•
Interface should be natural
•
Network bandwidth consumption
•
Aiming for wireless LAN
Requirements
User's workspace
Meeting Room(Virtual)
Interactions
Visible viewpoint control
Others
•
Use video-planes instead of avatars
•
Ray-cast pointing
•
Mapping audio and video information
•
Horizontal space orientation in virtual
world is easier to implement
•
Later version uses icons buttons in 3D space
to do interactions
Usability test
•
27 R&D adult volunteers
•
Task: decide on the most aesthetic out of
five car models in 20 minutes
•
Observation
•
Will 'communication' happen?
•
Enable the experience of presence?
Results
•
88.9% - Easy to use
•
Audio delay and jitter is crucial
•
Users' prior VR or AR experience do not
have much impact
•
Eye contacts is important to do face to face
communication - camera position
•
But in general, there was little sense of
presence.
cAR/PE! vs. "RealWorld"
•
60 users from DaimlerChrysler production
plants
•
Tasks, 10 minutes each
•
Cost optimization task
•
Design task
Results
•
Overall rated good
•
92% would use a system like cAR/PE! for
their actual work
•
Audio quality takes a higher priority of
improvements (30 persons mentioned)
•
Alter table configurations to give user more
freedom of movements
In Summary
•
Real life 2-3 users meeting scenario is
analyzed and requirements are listed
•
A Augmented Virtuality prototype for 3D
video-conferencing cAR/PE! is developed
and tested
•
Even with some compromises due to the
requirements, the system is still rated good
and useful overall.
Questions?
References
•
"Using augmented Virtuality for Remote
Collaboration", Presence: Teleoperators and
virtual environments, June 2004.
•
"An Immersive 3D Video-Conferencing
System Using Shared Virtual Team User
Environments"
•
http://igroup.org/projects/carpe/
•
http://www.shared-reality.de/index.php?
main=products&sub=meeting
Backup slides
MagicMeeting
"MagicMeeting", 2001
Virtual meeting room
views
A typical meeting
environment
pdf