Evaluating 3D Vision for Command and Control Applications

  • Britton Wolfe
  • Beomjin Kim
  • Benjamin Aeschliman
  • Robert Sedlmeyer
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 8034)


3D stereoscopic vision is used in many applications, but the level of benefit to the user differs depending on the particular application. We studied its benefits for command and control applications such as battlefield visualization or disaster response. We conducted experiments where the subjects completed some simple military planning exercises both with and without 3D vision. 3D users had lower error when judging line of sight between two points. Furthermore, survey results show that subjects preferred 3D. We also compared two ways of rendering symbols in the environment. Billboard symbols were more efficient than draping the symbol on the terrain.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Grechkin, T.Y., Nguyen, T.D., Plumert, J.M., Cremer, J.F., Kearney, J.K.: How does presentation method and measurement protocol affect distance estimation in real and virtual environments? ACM Transactions on Applied Perception 7, Article No. 26 (2010)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Yang, M., McMullen, D.P., Schwartz-Bloom, R.D., Brady, R.: Dive into alcohol: A biochemical immersive experience. In: IEEE Virtual Reality Conference, pp. 281–282 (2009)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Chittaro, L., Ranon, R., Ieronutti, L.: Vu-flow: A visualization tool for analyzing navigation in virtual environments. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 12, 1475–1485 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Schwartz, R.J., Fleming, G.A.: Real-time aerodynamic flow and data visualization in an interactive virtual environment. In: IEEE Instrumentation and Measurement Technology Conference, vol. 3, pp. 2210–2215 (2005)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Zelle, Z.M., Figura, C.: Simple, low-cost stereographics: VR for everyone. In: The 35th SIGCSE Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education, pp. 348–352 (2004)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Elmquist, N., Philippas, T.: A taxonomy of 3D occlusion management for visualization. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 14, 1095–1109 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Cipiloglu, Z., Bulbul, A., Capin, T.: A framework for enhancing depth perception in computer graphics. In: 7th Symposium on Applied Perception in Graphics and Visualization, pp. 141–148 (2010)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Jones, J.A., Swan II, J.E., Singh, G., Kolstad, E., Ellis, S.R.: The effects of virtual reality, augmented reality, and motion parallax on egocentric depth perception. In: 7th Symposium on Applied Perception in Graphics and Visualization, pp. 9–14 (2008)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Wartell, Z., Hodges, L.F., Ribarsky, W.: A geometric comparison of algorithms for fusion control in stereoscopic HTDs. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 8, 129–143 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Livingston, M.A., Zhuming, A., Swan, J.E., Smallman, H.S.: Indoor vs. outdoor depth perception of mobile augmented reality. In: IEEE Virtual Reality Conference, pp. 55–62 (2009)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Livatino, S., Privitera, F.: 3D visualization technologies for teleguided robots. In: ACM Symposium on Virtual Reality Software and Technology, pp. 240–243 (2006)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hartzell, T., Thompson, M., Kim, B.: The influence of graphics effects on perceiving depth in minimized virtual environments. In: Kim, T.-h., Ko, D.-s., Vasilakos, T., Stoica, A., Abawajy, J. (eds.) FGCN/DCA 2012. CCIS, vol. 350, pp. 235–242. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Sun, Y., Ding, N., Hao, G., Shi, X.: The research and application of 2D and 3D interactive system. In: Second International Conference on Information and Computing Science, pp. 252–254 (2009)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Cockburn, A., McKenzie, B.J.: 3D or not 3D? Evaluating the effect of the third dimension in a document management system. In: SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 434–441 (2001)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    St. John, M., Cowen, M., Smallman, H., Oonk, H.: The use of 2D and 3D displays for shape understanding versus relative position tasks. Human Factors 43, 79–98 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Wolfe, B., Podgorniy, D., Kim, B., Sedlmeyer, R.: C2VE: A software platform for evaluating the use of 3D vision technology for C2 operations. In: Proceedings of the 17th International Command and Control Research and Technology Symposium. CD–ROM (2012)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    U.S. Geological Survey: Seamless database (2012) (accessed March 2012)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Guth, P.: Microdem home page (2010) (accessed March 2012)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Blender Foundation: Blender (2013) (accessed March 2013)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Dept. of Defense: MIL-STD-2525C (2008) (accessed March 2012)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Octave community: GNU/Octave (2012)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    R Core Team: R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria (2013)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Britton Wolfe
    • 1
  • Beomjin Kim
    • 1
  • Benjamin Aeschliman
    • 1
  • Robert Sedlmeyer
    • 1
  1. 1.Dept. of Computer ScienceIndiana University-Purdue University Fort Wayne (IPFW)Fort WayneUSA

Personalised recommendations