Virtual objects can be visualized inside real objects using augmented reality (AR). This visualization is called AR X-ray because it gives the impression of seeing through the real object. In standard AR, virtual information is overlaid on top of the real world. To position a virtual object inside an object, AR X-ray requires partially occluding the virtual object with visually important regions of the real object. In effect, the virtual object becomes less legible compared to when it is completely unoccluded. Legibility is an important consideration for various applications of AR X-ray. In this research, we explored legibility in two implementations of AR X-ray, namely, edge-based and saliency-based. In our first experiment, we explored on the tolerable amounts of occlusion to comfortably distinguish small virtual objects. In our second experiment, we compared edge-based and saliency-based AR X-ray methods when visualizing virtual objects inside various real objects. Moreover, we benchmarked the legibility of these two methods against alpha blending. From our experiments, we observed that users have varied preferences for proper amounts of occlusion cues for both methods. The partial occlusions generated by the edge-based and saliency-based methods need to be adjusted depending on the lighting condition and the texture complexity of the occluding object. In most cases, users identify objects faster with saliency-based AR X-ray than with edge-based AR X-ray. Insights from this research can be directly applied to the development of AR X-ray applications.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.
Buy single article
Instant access to the full article PDF.
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
Subscribe to journal
Immediate online access to all issues from 2019. Subscription will auto renew annually.
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
Avery B, Sandor C, Thomas B (2009) Improving spatial perception for augmented reality X-ray vision. In: Procceedings of IEEE virtual reality conference, pp 79–82
Bajura M, Fuchs H, Ohbuchi R (1992) Merging virtual objects with the real world: seeing ultrasound imagery within the patient. In: Proceedings of ACM SIGGRAPH computer graphics, vol 26. ACM, pp 203–210
Carmigniani J, Furht B, Anisetti M, Ceravolo P, Damiani E, Ivkovic M (2011) Augmented reality technologies, systems and applications. Multimed Tools Appl 51(1):341–377
Dey A, Jarvis G, Sandor C, Reitmayr G (2012) Tablet versus phone: depth perception in handheld augmented reality. In: Proceedings of IEEE international symposium on mixed and augmented reality, pp 187–196
Dey A, Sandor C (2014) Lessons learned: evaluating visualizations for occluded objects in handheld augmented reality. Int J Human-Comput Stud 72:704–716
Furness TA (1986) The super cockpit and its human factors challenges. In: Proceedings of the human factors and ergonomics society annual meeting, vol 30. SAGE Publications, pp 48–52
Gabbard J, Swan J (2008) Usability engineering for augmented reality: employing user-based studies to inform design. IEEE Trans Visual Comput Graph 14(3):513–525
Gabbard J, Swan J, Hix D, Kim S J, Fitch G (2007) Active text drawing styles for outdoor augmented reality: a user-based study and design implications. In: IEEE virtual reality conference, pp 35–42
Itti L, Koch C, Niebur E (1998) A model of saliency-based visual attention for rapid scene analysis. IEEE Trans Pattern Anal Mach Intell 20(11):1254–1259
Kalkofen D, Mendez E, Schmalstieg D (2007) Interactive focus and context visualization for augmented reality. In: IEEE international symposium on mixed and augmented reality, pp 191–201
Kalkofen D, Mendez E, Schmalstieg D (2009) Comprehensible visualization for augmented reality. IEEE Trans Vis Comput Graph 15(2):193–204
Kalkofen D, Veas E, Zollmann S, Steinberger M, Schmalstieg D (2013) Adaptive ghosted views for augmented reality. In: IEEE international symposium on mixed and augmented reality, pp 1–9
Kameda Y, Takemasa T, Ohta Y (2004) Outdoor see-through vision utilizing surveillance cameras. In: IEEE international symposium on mixed and augmented reality, pp 151–160
Kourouthanassis P, Boletsis C, Lekakos G (2013) Demystifying the design of mobile augmented reality applications. Multimed Tools Appl:1–22
Livingston M (2005) Evaluating human factors in augmented reality systems. IEEE Comput Graph Appl 25(6):6–9
Livingston M, Moser K (2013) Effectiveness of occluded object representations at displaying ordinal depth information in augmented reality. In: IEEE virtual reality conference, pp 107–108
Livingston MA, Dey A, Sandor C, Thomas B H (2013) Pursuit of X-ray vision for augmented reality. In: Human factors in augmented reality environments. Springer, pp 67–107
Nielsen J (1994) Usability engineering. Elsevier
Peterson S, Axholt M, Cooper M, Ellis S (2009) Visual clutter management in augmented reality: effects of three label separation methods on spatial judgments. In: IEEE symposium on 3D user interfaces, pp 111–118
Sandor C, Cunningham A, Dey A, Mattila V V (2010) An augmented reality X-ray system based on visual saliency. In: IEEE international symposium on mixed and augmented reality, pp 27–36
Santos M, Chen A, Terawaki M, Yamamoto G, Taketomi T, Miyazaki J, Kato H (2013) Augmented reality X-ray interaction in k-12 education: theory, student perception and teacher evaluation. In: IEEE international conference on advanced learning technologies, pp 141–145
Santos MEC, Chen A, Taketomi T, Yamamoto G, Miyazaki J, Kato H (2014) Augmented reality learning experiences: Survey of prototype design and evaluation. IEEE Trans Learn Technol 7(1):38–56
Santos MEC, Polvi J, Taketomi T, Yamamoto G, Sandor C, Kato H (2014) A usability scale for handheld augmented reality. In: ACM symposium on virtual reality software and technology
Santos MEC, Terawaki M, Taketomi T, Yamamoto G, Kato H (2015) Development of handheld augmented reality X-ray for k-12 settings. In: Chang M, Li Y (eds) Smart learning environments, lecture notes in educational technology. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg
Walther D (2006) Interactions of visual attention and object recognition: computational modeling, algorithms, and psychophysics. Ph.D. thesis. California Institute of Technology
Zollmann S, Kalkofen D, Mendez E, Reitmayr G (2010) Image-based ghostings for single layer occlusions in augmented reality. In: IEEE international symposium on mixed and augmented reality, pp 19–26
This work was supported by the Grant-in-Aid for JSPS Fellows, Grant Number 15J10186.
About this article
Cite this article
Santos, M.E.C., de Souza Almeida, I., Yamamoto, G. et al. Exploring legibility of augmented reality X-ray. Multimed Tools Appl 75, 9563–9585 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11042-015-2954-1
- Augmented reality
- Augmented reality X-ray
- Empirical study