Effects of VR System Fidelity on Analyzing Isosurface Visualization of Volume Datasets

Volume visualization is an important technique for analyzing datasets from a variety of different scientific domains. Volume data analysis is inherently difficult because volumes are three-dimensional, dense, and unfamiliar, requiring scientists to precisely control the viewpoint and to make precise spatial judgments. Researchers have proposed that more immersive (higher fidelity) VR systems might improve task performance with volume datasets, and significant results tied to different components of display fidelity have been reported. However, more information is needed to generalize these results to different task types, domains, and rendering styles. We visualized isosurfaces extracted from synchrotron microscopic computed tomography (SR-μCT) scans of beetles, in a CAVE-like display. We ran a controlled experiment evaluating the effects of three components of system fidelity (field of regard, stereoscopy, and head tracking) on a variety of abstract task categories that are applicable to various scientific domains, and also compared our results with those from our prior experiment using 3D texture-based rendering. We report many significant findings. For example, for search and spatial judgment tasks with isosurface visualization, a stereoscopic display provides better performance, but for tasks with 3D texture-based rendering, displays with higher field of regard were more effective, independent of the levels of the other display components. We also found that systems with high field of regard and head tracking improve performance in spatial judgment tasks. Our results extend existing knowledge and produce new guidelines for designing VR systems to improve the effectiveness of volume data analysis.

[1]  B. Laha,et al.  Identifying the Benefits of Immersion in Virtual Reality for Volume Data Visualization , 2013 .

[2]  Kamel Fezzaa,et al.  Tracheal Respiration in Insects Visualized with Synchrotron X-ray Imaging , 2003, Science.

[3]  Oliver Kreylos,et al.  Environment-Independent VR Development , 2008, ISVC.

[4]  Eric D. Ragan,et al.  Studying the Effects of Stereo, Head Tracking, and Field of Regard on a Small-Scale Spatial Judgment Task , 2013, IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics.

[5]  John J. Socha,et al.  Issues of convection in insect respiration: Insights from synchrotron X-ray imaging and beyond , 2010, Respiratory Physiology & Neurobiology.

[6]  Doug A. Bowman,et al.  Validation of the MR Simulation Approach for Evaluating the Effects of Immersion on Visual Analysis of Volume Data , 2012, IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics.

[7]  John T. Kelso,et al.  DIVERSE: A Framework for Building Extensible and Reconfigurable Device-Independent Virtual Environments and Distributed Asynchronous Simulations , 2003, Presence: Teleoperators & Virtual Environments.

[8]  Colin Ware,et al.  Evaluating stereo and motion cues for visualizing information nets in three dimensions , 1996, TOGS.

[9]  Doug A. Bowman,et al.  The benefits of immersion for spatial understanding of complex underground cave systems , 2007, VRST '07.

[10]  Cullen D. Jackson,et al.  CAVE and fishtank virtual-reality displays: a qualitative and quantitative comparison , 2006, IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics.

[11]  A. Peterson The Insects. , 1964, Science.

[12]  W. Barfield,et al.  Visualizing the structure of virtual objects using head tracked stereoscopic displays , 1997, Proceedings of IEEE 1997 Annual International Symposium on Virtual Reality.

[13]  Ruth B. Ekstrom Cognitive factors: Their identification and replication. , 1979 .

[14]  Kamel Fezzaa,et al.  Correlated patterns of tracheal compression and convective gas exchange in a carabid beetle , 2008, Journal of Experimental Biology.

[15]  Doug A. Bowman,et al.  A Method for Quantifying the Benefits of Immersion Using the CAVE , 2004 .

[16]  Arie E. Kaufman Volume visualization , 1996, CSUR.

[17]  Nicolas Pugeault,et al.  Advances in Visual Computing , 2007, Lecture Notes in Computer Science.

[18]  R. Chapman The Insects: Structure and Function , 1969 .

[19]  Mel Slater,et al.  A note on presence terminology , 2003 .

[20]  Benjamin D. Greenberg,et al.  An immersive virtual environment for DT-MRI volume visualization applications: a case study , 2001, Proceedings Visualization, 2001. VIS '01..

[21]  Philipp Slusallek,et al.  Interactive Volume Rendering with Ray Tracing , 2006, Eurographics.

[22]  Prabhat,et al.  A Comparative Study of Desktop, Fishtank, and Cave Systems for the Exploration of Volume Rendered Confocal Data Sets , 2008, IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics.

[23]  Tobias Höllerer,et al.  Evaluating effectiveness in virtual environments with MR simulation , 2012 .

[24]  Doug A. Bowman,et al.  Evaluating Display Fidelity and Interaction Fidelity in a Virtual Reality Game , 2012, IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics.

[25]  Francesco De Carlo,et al.  Use of synchrotron tomography to image naturalistic anatomy in insects , 2008, Optical Engineering + Applications.

[26]  Doug A. Bowman,et al.  Virtual Reality: How Much Immersion Is Enough? , 2007, Computer.

[27]  Doug A. Bowman,et al.  Effects of Immersion on Visual Analysis of Volume Data , 2013, IEEE Trans. Vis. Comput. Graph..

[28]  David H. Laidlaw,et al.  Effects of Stereo and Screen Size on the Legibility of Three-Dimensional Streamtube Visualization , 2012, IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics.

[29]  Carolina Cruz-Neira,et al.  Surround-Screen Projection-Based Virtual Reality: The Design and Implementation of the CAVE , 2023 .

[30]  David H. Laidlaw,et al.  Visualizing Diffusion Tensor MR Images Using Streamtubes and Streamsurfaces , 2003, IEEE Trans. Vis. Comput. Graph..

[31]  Wah-Keat Lee,et al.  Advances in biological structure, function, and physiology using synchrotron X-ray imaging*. , 2008, Annual review of physiology.

[32]  Steve Bryson Virtual reality in scientific visualization , 1993, Comput. Graph..

[33]  Stuart R. Stock,et al.  MicroComputed Tomography: Methodology and Applications , 2008 .

[34]  David H. Laidlaw,et al.  Online Submission ID: vis-1157 Comparing 3D Vector Field Visualization Methods: A User Study , 2022 .