Advertisement

Abstract

We present a new metaphor for learning anatomy – the 3D puzzle. With this metaphor students learn anatomic relations by assembling a geometric model themselves. For this purpose, a 3D model is enriched with docking positions which allow objects to be connected together. As complex 3D interactions are required to compose 3D objects, sophisticated 3D visualization- and interaction techniques are included. Among these techniques are shadow generation, 3D input devices, snapping mechanisms and collision detection.

The puzzle, similar to a computer game, can be operated at different levels. To simplify the task, a subset of the geometry, e.g. the skeleton, can be correctly assembled initially. Moreover, textual information concerning the region of objects is provided, along with snapping mechanisms to support the user. With this approach we expect to motivate students to explore the spatial relations between parts of the human body.

Keywords

Anatomic atlas metaphors for anatomy education depthcues 3D interaction two-handed interaction 

References

  1. 1.
    Hinckley, K.: Haptic Issues for Virtual Manipulation, PhD-thesis, University of Virginia (1997)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Höhne, K.-H., Pflesser, B., Pommert, A., et al.: A Virtual Body Model for Surgical Education and Rehearsal. Computer - Innovative Technology for Professionals, January 25-31 (1996)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Hudson, T.C., Lin, M.C., Cohen, J., Gottschalk, S., Manocha, D.: VCOLLIDE: Accelerated Collision Detection with VRML. In: Proc. of VRML (1997)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kiyokawa, K., Takemura, H., Katayama, Y., Iwasa, H., Yokoya, N.: VLEGO: A Simple Two-handed Modeling Environment Based On Toy Block. In: Proc. of VRST 1997, pp. 27–34. ACM, New York (1997)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    LeBlanc, A., Kalra, P., Magenat-Thalmann, N., Thalmann, D.: Sculpting with the ’ball and mouse’ metaphor. In: Proc. of Graphics Interface, pp. 152–159 (1991)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Pitt, I., Preim, B., Schlechtweg, S.: Evaluation of Interaction Techniques for the Exploration of Complex Spatial Phenomena. In: Proc. of Softwareergonomie 1999, pp. 275–286 (1999)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Preim, B.: Interaktive Illustrationen und Animationen zur Erklärung komplexer räumlicher Zusammenhänge, PhD-thesis, Otto-von-Guericke-University of Magdeburg (1998)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Preim, B., Ritter, A., Strothotte, T.: Illustrating Anatomic Models - A Semi-Interactive Approach. In: Höhne, K.H., Kikinis, R. (eds.) VBC 1996. LNCS, vol. 1131, pp. 23–32. Springer, Heidelberg (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Wanger, L., Ferwerda, J., Greenberg, D.: Perceiving Spatial Relationships in Computer-Generated Images. IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications 12(3), 44–58 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Zhai, S., Buxton, W., Milgram, P.: The partial occlusion effect: utilizing semi-transparency in 3D human computer interaction. ACM Transactions on HCI 3(3), 254–284 (1996)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1999

Authors and Affiliations

  • Bernhard Preim
    • 1
  • Felix Ritter
    • 2
  • Oliver Deussen
    • 2
  1. 1.MeVis gGmbHBremenGermany
  2. 2.Dept. of Computer ScienceInst. for Simulation and Graphics, Otto-von-Guericke-University of MagdeburgMagdeburgGermany

Personalised recommendations