skip to main content
10.1145/3582700.3582706acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesahsConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

ShadowClones: an Interface to Maintain a Multiple Sense of Body-space Coordination in Multiple Visual Perspectives

Authors Info & Claims
Published:14 March 2023Publication History

ABSTRACT

In this paper, we propose ShadowClones, an interface that supports interactions in which a single user can interact with multiple bodies in multiple spaces. Recent teleoperation technologies have allowed a user controlling multiple objects simultaneously, but at the same time, it also exhibited a significant challenge, which can be attributed to the high cognitive load caused by switching and recogning various spaces/perspectives repeatedly and instantly. To tackle this challenge, by taking advantage of pre-attentive visual cues for users’ simultaneous information processing, we designed and evaluated a new user interface, called Shadow Clones, that projects self-body information in unattended areas for increasing the awareness of body-space relationships and allowing users to seamlessly switch across different visual perspectives from avatars or remote robots. We then explored the proposed approach through a simple visual reaching task with a performance evaluation in terms of task completion time and success rate. The results showed superior performance when compared with a condition that presents no projections of users’ body movements in unattended areas. We conclude by discussing possible mechanisms of this enhancement as well as two potential scenarios using the shadow clones approach, including new entertainment content for virtual reality e-sports and multiple robot teleoperation such as in a construction site or a disaster site, without compromising operational performance.

References

  1. Reem Alzahabi and Matthew S Cain. 2021. Ensemble perception during multiple-object tracking. Atten. Percept. Psychophys. 83, 3 (April 2021), 1263–1274.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  2. A T Bahill, A Brockenbrough, and B T Troost. 1981. Variability and development of a normative data base for saccadic eye movements. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 21, 1 Pt 1 (July 1981), 116–125.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Renaud Blanch and Michaël Ortega. 2009. Rake cursor: improving pointing performance with concurrent input channels. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Boston, MA, USA) (CHI ’09). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1415–1418.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Yuanzhi Cao, Tianyi Wang, Xun Qian, Pawan S Rao, Manav Wadhawan, Ke Huo, and Karthik Ramani. 2019. GhostAR: A Time-space Editor for Embodied Authoring of Human-Robot Collaborative Task with Augmented Reality. In Proceedings of the 32nd Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology (New Orleans, LA, USA) (UIST ’19). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 521–534.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Li-Hung Chang, Kazuhisa Shibata, George J Andersen, Yuka Sasaki, and Takeo Watanabe. 2014. Age-related declines of stability in visual perceptual learning. Curr. Biol. 24, 24 (Dec. 2014), 2926–2929.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. Linfeng Chen, Kazuki Takashima, Kazuyuki Fujita, and Yoshifumi Kitamura. 2021. PinpointFly: An Egocentric Position-control Drone Interface using Mobile AR. In Proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Yokohama, Japan) (CHI ’21, Article 150). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1–13.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. H Collewijn, C J Erkelens, and R M Steinman. 1988. Binocular co-ordination of human horizontal saccadic eye movements. J. Physiol. 404 (Oct. 1988), 157–182.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Barbara Anne Dosher, Songmei Han, and Zhong-Lin Lu. 2010. Information-limited parallel processing in difficult heterogeneous covert visual search. J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. 36, 5 (Oct. 2010), 1128–1144.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  9. John Duncan. 2010. The multiple-demand (MD) system of the primate brain: mental programs for intelligent behaviour. Trends Cogn. Sci. 14, 4 (April 2010), 172–179.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  10. Paul E Dux, Jason Ivanoff, Christopher L Asplund, and René Marois. 2006. Isolation of a central bottleneck of information processing with time-resolved FMRI. Neuron 52, 6 (Dec. 2006), 1109–1120.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. Paul E Dux, Michael N Tombu, Stephenie Harrison, Baxter P Rogers, Frank Tong, and René Marois. 2009. Training improves multitasking performance by increasing the speed of information processing in human prefrontal cortex. Neuron 63, 1 (July 2009), 127–138.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. Dylan F Glas, Takayuki Kanda, Hiroshi Ishiguro, and Norihiro Hagita. 2012. Teleoperation of Multiple Social Robots. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics - Part A: Systems and Humans 42, 3 (May 2012), 530–544.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Arvid Guterstam, Dennis E O Larsson, Joanna Szczotka, and H Henrik Ehrsson. 2020. Duplication of the bodily self: a perceptual illusion of dual full-body ownership and dual self-location. R Soc Open Sci 7, 12 (Dec. 2020), 201911.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  14. Suk Won Han and René Marois. 2013. The source of dual-task limitations: serial or parallel processing of multiple response selections?Atten. Percept. Psychophys. 75, 7 (Oct. 2013), 1395–1405.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. James B Heald, Máté Lengyel, and Daniel M Wolpert. 2021. Contextual inference underlies the learning of sensorimotor repertoires. Nature 600, 7889 (Dec. 2021), 489–493.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  16. Christopher G Healey, Kellogg S Booth, and James T Enns. 1996. High-speed visual estimation using preattentive processing. ACM Trans. Comput. Hum. Interact. 3, 2 (June 1996), 107–135.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. Christopher G Healey and James T Enns. 2012. Attention and visual memory in visualization and computer graphics. IEEE Trans. Vis. Comput. Graph. 18, 7 (July 2012), 1170–1188.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Yoko Higuchi, Yoshiyuki Ueda, Kazuhisa Shibata, and Jun Saiki. 2019. Spatial variability induces generalization in contextual cueing. J. Exp. Psychol. Learn. Mem. Cogn. (Nov. 2019).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. Matthias Hoppe, Andrea Baumann, Patrick Chofor Tamunjoh, Tonja-Katrin Machulla, Paweł W Woźniak, Albrecht Schmidt, and Robin Welsch. 2022. There Is No First- or Third-Person View in Virtual Reality: Understanding the Perspective Continuum. In Proceedings of the 2022 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (New Orleans, LA, USA) (CHI ’22, Article 360). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1–13.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Hiroshi Imamizu and Mitsuo Kawato. 2009. Brain mechanisms for predictive control by switching internal models: implications for higher-order cognitive functions. Psychol. Res. 73, 4 (July 2009), 527–544.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  21. Shunichi Kasahara, Ryuma Niiyama, Valentin Heun, and Hiroshi Ishii. 2013. exTouch: spatially-aware embodied manipulation of actuated objects mediated by augmented reality. In Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Tangible, Embedded and Embodied Interaction (Barcelona, Spain) (TEI ’13). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 223–228.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. A M Clare Kelly and Hugh Garavan. 2005. Human functional neuroimaging of brain changes associated with practice. Cereb. Cortex 15, 8 (Aug. 2005), 1089–1102.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  23. Masatomo Kobayashi and Takeo Igarashi. 2008. Ninja cursors: using multiple cursors to assist target acquisition on large screens. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Florence, Italy) (CHI ’08). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 949–958.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. Andrey Krekhov and Jens Krueger. 2021. Deadeye: A Novel Preattentive Visualization Technique Based on Dichoptic Presentation. (Jan. 2021). arxiv:2101.07048 [cs.HC]Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. Manu Kumar, Andreas Paepcke, and Terry Winograd. 2007. EyeExpos’e: Switching applications with your eyes.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. Seungyeol Lee and Jeon-Il Moon. 2017. Management of a Single-User Multi-Robot Teleoperated System for Maintenance in Offshore Plants. In Multi-agent Systems. InTech.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. Bingxin Li, Xiangqian Li, Gijsbert Stoet, and Martin Lages. 2019. Exploring individual differences in task switching. Acta Psychol. 193 (Feb. 2019), 80–95.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. René Marois and Jason Ivanoff. 2005. Capacity limits of information processing in the brain. Trends Cogn. Sci. 9, 6 (June 2005), 296–305.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  29. Antonella Maselli and Mel Slater. 2014. Sliding perspectives: dissociating ownership from self-location during full body illusions in virtual reality. Front. Hum. Neurosci. 8 (Sept. 2014), 693.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. B McElree and M Carrasco. 1999. The temporal dynamics of visual search: evidence for parallel processing in feature and conjunction searches. J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. 25, 6 (Dec. 1999), 1517–1539.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  31. Reiji Miura, Shunichi Kasahara, Michiteru Kitazaki, Adrien Verhulst, Masahiko Inami, and Maki Sugimoto. 2022. MultiSoma: Motor and Gaze Analysis on Distributed Embodiment With Synchronized Behavior and Perception. Frontiers in Computer Science 4 (2022).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. Yukiya Nakanishi, Masaaki Fukuoka, Shunichi Kasahara, and Maki Sugimoto. 2022. Synchronous and Asynchronous Manipulation Switching of Multiple Robotic Embodiment Using EMG and Eye Gaze. In Augmented Humans 2022 (Kashiwa, Chiba, Japan) (AHs 2022). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 94–103.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  33. Ulric Neisser and Robert Becklen. 1975. Selective looking: Attending to visually specified events. Cogn. Psychol. 7, 4 (Oct. 1975), 480–494.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  34. Mikhail Ostanin, Stanislav Mikhel, Alexey Evlampiev, Valeria Skvortsova, and Alexandr Klimchik. 2020. Human-robot interaction for robotic manipulator programming in Mixed Reality. In 2020 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA). 2805–2811.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  35. H Pashler. 1994. Dual-task interference in simple tasks: data and theory. Psychol. Bull. 116, 2 (Sept. 1994), 220–244.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  36. H Pashler. 1994. Graded capacity-sharing in dual-task interference?J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. 20, 2 (April 1994), 330–342.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  37. Z W Pylyshyn and R W Storm. 1988. Tracking multiple independent targets: evidence for a parallel tracking mechanism. Spat. Vis. 3, 3 (1988), 179–197.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  38. Kari-Jouko Räihä and Oleg Špakov. 2009. Disambiguating ninja cursors with eye gaze. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Boston, MA, USA) (CHI ’09). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1411–1414.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  39. Jonas Schjerlund, Kasper Hornbæk, and Joanna Bergström. 2021. Ninja Hands: Using Many Hands to Improve Target Selection in VR. In Proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1–14.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  40. E H Schumacher, T L Seymour, J M Glass, D E Fencsik, E J Lauber, D E Kieras, and D E Meyer. 2001. Virtually perfect time sharing in dual-task performance: uncorking the central cognitive bottleneck. Psychol. Sci. 12, 2 (March 2001), 101–108.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  41. Mariano Sigman and Stanislas Dehaene. 2008. Brain mechanisms of serial and parallel processing during dual-task performance. J. Neurosci. 28, 30 (July 2008), 7585–7598.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  42. Kazuma Takada, Midori Kawaguchi, Yukiya Nakanishi, Akira Uehara, Mark Armstrong, Adrien Verhulst, Kouta Minamizawa, and Shunichi Kasahara. 2021. Parallel Ping-Pong: Demonstrating Parallel Interaction through Multiple Bodies by a Single User. In SIGGRAPH Asia 2021 Emerging Technologies(Tokyo, Japan) (SA ’21 Emerging Technologies, Article 12). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1–2.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  43. Kazuma Takada, Midori Kawaguchi, Akira Uehara, Yukiya Nakanishi, Mark Armstrong, Adrien Verhulst, Kouta Minamizawa, and Shunichi Kasahara. 2022. Parallel Ping-Pong: Exploring Parallel Embodiment through Multiple Bodies by a Single User. In Augmented Humans 2022 (Kashiwa, Chiba, Japan) (AHs 2022). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 121–130.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  44. James T Townsend. 1990. Serial vs. Parallel Processing: Sometimes They Look like Tweedledum and Tweedledee but they can (and Should) be Distinguished. Psychol. Sci. 1, 1 (Jan. 1990), 46–54.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  45. A M Treisman and G Gelade. 1980. A feature-integration theory of attention. Cogn. Psychol. 12, 1 (Jan. 1980), 97–136.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  46. Adrien Verhulst, Yasuko Namikawa, and Shunlchl Kasahara. 2022. Parallel Adaptation: Switching between Two Virtual Bodies with Different Perspectives Enables Dual Motor Adaptation. In 2022 IEEE International Symposium on Mixed and Augmented Reality (ISMAR). 169–177.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  47. C Ware. 2004. Information Visualization: Perception for Design: Second Edition. unknown.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  48. Kei Watanabe and Shintaro Funahashi. 2014. Neural mechanisms of dual-task interference and cognitive capacity limitation in the prefrontal cortex. Nat. Neurosci. 17, 4 (April 2014), 601–611.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  49. Jeremy M Wolfe. 2014. Approaches to Visual Search. In The Oxford Handbook of Attention, Anna C. (Kia) Nobre and Sabine Kastner (Eds.). Oxford University Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. ShadowClones: an Interface to Maintain a Multiple Sense of Body-space Coordination in Multiple Visual Perspectives

    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 Other conferences
      AHs '23: Proceedings of the Augmented Humans International Conference 2023
      March 2023
      395 pages
      ISBN:9781450399845
      DOI:10.1145/3582700

      Copyright © 2023 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 the author(s) 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: 14 March 2023

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article
      • Research
      • Refereed limited

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader

    HTML Format

    View this article in HTML Format .

    View HTML Format