skip to main content
10.1145/2578153.2578168acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesetraConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Comparing estimated gaze depth in virtual and physical environments

Published:26 March 2014Publication History

ABSTRACT

We show that the error in 3D gaze depth (vergence) estimated from binocularly-tracked gaze disparity is related to the viewing distance of the screen calibration plane at which 2D gaze is recorded. In a stereoscopic (virtual) environment, this relationship is evident in gaze to target depth error: vergence error behind the screen is greater than in front of the screen and is lowest at the screen depth. In a physical environment, with no accommodation-vergence conflict, the magnitude of vergence error in front of the 2D calibration plane appears reversed, increasing with distance from the viewer.

References

  1. Bair, A., House, D., and Ware, C. 2006. Texturing of Layered Surfaces for Optimal Viewing. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics (Proceedings of IEEE Visualization) 12, 5, 1125--1132. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Brown, R. G. 1983. Introduction to Random Signal Analysis and Kalman Filtering. John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Campbell, F., and Green, D. 1965. Monocular versus binocular visual acuity. Nature 209, 191--192.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  4. Cutting, J. E., and Vishton, P. M. 1995. Perceiving layout and knowing distances: The integration, relative potency, and contextual use of different information about depth. In Perception of Space and Motion, W. Epstein and S. Rogers, Eds. Academic Press, San Diego, CA, 69--117. (Handbook of Perception and Cognition, Vol. 5).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Daugherty, B. C., Duchowski, A. T., House, D. H., and Ramasamy, C. 2010. Measuring Vergence Over Stereoscopic Video with a Remote Eye Tracker. In ETRA '10: Proceedings of the 2010 Symposium on Eye Tracking Research & Applications (Late Breaking Results), ACM, Austin, TX. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Dodgson, N. A. 2004. Variation and extrema of human inter-pupillary distance. In Stereoscopic Displays and Virtual Reality Systems XI, A. J. Woods, J. O. Merritt, S. A. Benton, and M. T. Bolas, Eds., vol. 5291, SPIE, 36--46.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Duchowski, A., Medlin, E., Cournia, N., Gramopadhye, A., Melloy, B., and Nair, S. 2002. 3D Eye Movement Analysis for VR Visual Inspection Training. In ETRA '02: Proceedings of the 2002 Symposium on Eye Tracking Research & Applications, ACM, New Orleans, LA, 103--110,155. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Duchowski, A. T., Pelfrey, B., House, D. H., and Wang, R. 2011. Measuring Gaze Depth with an Eye Tracker During Stereoscopic Display. In Applied Perception in Graphics & Visualization (APGV), ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Duchowski, A. T., Pelfrey, B., House, D. H., and Wang, R. 2012. Eye-Tracked Vergence Response During Active-Stereo Display. In The 5th Hamlyn Symposium on Medical Robotics.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Essig, K., Pomplun, M., and Ritter, H. 2004. Application of a Novel Neural Approach to 3D Gaze Tracking: Vergence Eye-Movements in Autostereograms. In Proceedings of the Twenty-Sixth Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, K. Forbus, D. Gentner, and T. Regier, Eds., Cognitive Science Society, 357--362.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Essig, K., Prinzhorn, D., Maycock, J., Dornbusch, D., Ritter, H., and Schack, T. 2012. Automatic analysis of 3d gaze coordinates on scene objects using data from eye tracking and motion-capture systems. In ETRA '12: Proceedings of the 2012 Symposium on Eye Tracking Research & Applications, ACM, New York, NY. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Howard, I. P., and Rogers, B. J. 2002. Seeing in Depth, vol. II: Depth Perception. I Porteous, University of Toronto Press, Thornhill, ON, Canada.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Iwasaki, T., Kubota, T., and Tawara, A. 2009. The tolerance range of binocular disparity on a 3D display based on the physiological characteristics of ocular accommodation. Displays 30, 44--48.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  14. Kellner, F., Bolte, B., Bruder, G., Rautenberg, U., Steinicke, F., Lappe, M., and Koch, R. 2012. Geometric Calibration of Head-Mounted Displays and its Effects on Distance Estimation. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 18, 4, 589--596. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. Love, G. D., Hoffman, D. M., Hands, P. J. W., Gao, J., Kirby, A. K., and Banks, M. S. 2009. High-speed switchable lens enables the development of a volumetric stereoscopic display. Optics Express 17, 18, 15716--15725.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  16. Mantiuk, R., Bazyluk, B., and Tomaszewska, A. 2011. Gaze-Dependent Depth-of-Field Effect Rendering in Virtual Environments. In SGDA '11: Serious Games Development and Applications, Springer-Verlag, 1--12. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. Medlin, E. 2003. Ocular Vergence Measurement in Bi{n}ocular Virtual Reality. Master's thesis, Clemson University, Clemson, SC.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Napieralski, P. E., Altenhoff, B. M., Bertrand, J. W., Long, L. O., Babu, S. V., Pagano, C. C., Kern, J., and Davis, T. A. 2011. Near-field distance perception in real and virtual environments using both verbal and action responses. ACM Transactions on Applied Perception 8, 3, 18:1--18:19. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Pfeiffer, T. 2010. Understanding Multimodal Deixis with Gaze and Gesture in Conversational Interfaces. PhD thesis, Bielefeld University, Bielefeld, Germany.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Pfeiffer, T. 2012. Measuring and visualizing attention in space with 3d attention volumes. In ETRA '12: Proceedings of the 2012 Symposium on Eye Tracking Research & Applications, ACM, New York, NY. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. Rushton, S. K., and Riddell, P. M. 1999. Developing visual systems and exposure to virtual reality and stereo displays: some concerns and speculations about the demands on accommodation and vergence. Applied Ergonomics 30, 69--78.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  22. Smith, G., and Atchison, D. A. 1997. The Eye and Visual Optical Instruments. Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, UK.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. Valkov, D., Steinicke, F., Bruder, G., and Hinrichs, K. 2011. 2D Touching of 3D Stereoscopic Objects. In CHI '11: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, ACM Press, New York, NY, 1353--1362. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. Wang, R., Pelfrey, B., Duchowski, A. T., and House, D. H. 2012. Online Gaze Disparity via Binocular Eye Tracking on Stereoscopic Displays. In Second Joint 3DIM/3DPVT Conference: 3D Imaging, Modeling, Processing, Visualization & Transmission (3DimPVT 2012), IEEE. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. Wang, R. I., Pelfrey, B., Duchowski, A. T., and House, D. H. 2013. Online 3D Gaze Localization on Stereoscopic Displays. Transactions on Applied Perception. (In press.).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. Wann, J. P., Rushton, S., and Mon-Williams. 1995. Natural Problems for Stereoscopic Depth Perception in Virtual Environments. Vision Research 35, 19, 2731--2746.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  27. Wibirama, S., and Hamamoto, K. 2013. 3D Gaze Tracking System for NVidia 3D Vision. In Proceedings of the 35th Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine & Biology Society (EMBS).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. Wilson, J. R. 1996. Effects of Participating in Virtual Environments: A Review of Current Knowledge. Safety Science 23, 1, 39--51.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  29. Zhang, Z. 2000. A flexible new technique for camera calibration. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence 22, 11 (Nov.), 1330--1334. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Comparing estimated gaze depth in virtual and physical environments

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Login options

      Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

      Sign in
      • Published in

        cover image ACM Conferences
        ETRA '14: Proceedings of the Symposium on Eye Tracking Research and Applications
        March 2014
        394 pages
        ISBN:9781450327510
        DOI:10.1145/2578153

        Copyright © 2014 ACM

        Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

        Publisher

        Association for Computing Machinery

        New York, NY, United States

        Publication History

        • Published: 26 March 2014

        Permissions

        Request permissions about this article.

        Request Permissions

        Check for updates

        Qualifiers

        • research-article

        Acceptance Rates

        Overall Acceptance Rate69of137submissions,50%

        Upcoming Conference

        ETRA '24
        The 2024 Symposium on Eye Tracking Research and Applications
        June 4 - 7, 2024
        Glasgow , United Kingdom

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader