![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() Dr. George McConkie, Dr. Arthur Kramer, Dr. Chris Wickens, Dr. David Zola (UIUC), Dr. Celestine Ntuen (NCAT), Dr. William Marshak (Sytronics), Dr. Grayson Cuqlock-Knopp, Dr. Laurel Allender, Dr. Paul Rose, Dr. Michael Benedict, Ms. Carolyn Dunmire, and Ms. Brenda Thein (ARL) April 1 - June 30, 1996 (FY96Q3) Goals: Obtain and set up equipment. Progress: Data collection is continuing from subjects on navigation tasks; data from previous subjects are being analyzed. Equipment is on order. July 1 - September 30, 1996 (FY96Q4) Goals: Complete design of virtual spaces to be used in the research. Progress: The design of a number of virtual spaces has been completed and data is being collected to examine the issue of spatial navigation in virtual reality environments. Computers having 3-D display capability were set up for use in research on cognitive representation of virtual spaces. We also obtained and set up binocular eyetracking equipment for examining the depth plane at which the observer is attending. Sytronics has acquired the SOAR software from the University of Michigan to support exploratory efforts in cognitive modeling under a contract with the Air Forces' Electronics Systems Division. This software runs in conjunction with Loral's MODSAF distributive interactive simulation (DIS) system software, so modeling efforts will be compatible with the DIS application later. October 1 - December 31, 1996 (FY97Q1) Goals: Acquire SOAR system for Silicon Graphics computer and experiment with its architecture. Progress: The SOAR software was acquired and installed, although we are still in the process of getting Air Force funding in place. Sytronics has begun preliminary software design to implement the F-16 ground attack task specified by the Air Force. Dr. John Laird of the University of Michigan, a designer of SOAR and a Department of Defense funded researcher, has agreed to consult on the methods of introducing human cognitive performance characteristics (including environment driven degrades) into SOAR functionality. The same adaptations will be crucial to modeling soldier interaction with user interfaces in battlefield environments. Due to funding cuts, FY97 activities will be limited to that which is funded by the Air Force, with soldier modeling deferred to FY98. January 1 - March 31, 1997 (FY97Q2) Goals: Acquire SOAR system for Silicon Graphics computer and experiment with its architecture. Progress: The SOAR architecture is currently up and running on a Silicon Graphics computer. Existing SOAR code is being analyzed and some theoretic work about how to represent more detailed cognitive function of the soldier is starting. In addition, we are working on getting a personal computer version of SOAR operating that we received from the University of Michigan. We intend to use the personal computer version for all future SOAR modeling efforts. The Air Force has expressed interest in this project and has provided additional funding to augment the ARL resources applied to the project to accelerate the basic cognitive representation work planned. April 1 - June 30, 1997 (FY97Q3) Goals: Complete initial study of the effect of field of view on development of cognitive representations of virtual space. Progress: Data collection for the study of the effects of field of view on cognitive representations of virtual space is underway. Subjects view 6' by 4' projected images through goggles that restrict their view. The subjects are tested on a variety of measures to assess the quality of their cognitive representation gained from viewing the virtual space depicted in the images. The four field of view restrictions range from a view approximately the size of a computer monitor to the size provided by most head-mounted displays, to an unrestricted view. Analysis of the data collected thus far indicates that virtual spaces viewed under less restricted conditions produce better object recall, smaller errors in estimating object locations, less time to make object location estimations, higher confidence ratings in estimated object locations, and large decreases in search time. Once more data has been gathered, data analyses will be conducted to estimate the average direction of estimated location errors and average recall performance by object category or type. Data collection for the study on effects of field of view will conclude soon, with studies examining distance estimation, rotation, and orientation abilities to follow. July 1 - September 30, 1997 (FY97Q4) Goals: Complete initial study of the effect of field of view on development of cognitive representations in virtual space (Incomplete in FY97Q3). Report on existing SOAR applications and how the SOAR architecture could be used for cognitive modeling of virtual reality interfaces. Complete integration of eyetracking system with virtual space situation. Progress: We have nearly completed the initial study on the effect of field of view for the development of cognitive representations in virtual space. In the experiment, subjects are given 30 seconds to examine a set of objects, lying at different positions in a terrain in a large (4' by 6') display. Performance on several tests (memory for objects, memory for locations of objects, and search time) are being compared when the display is examined through head-mounted viewports of different sizes. This manipulation simulates examining a large space using computer displays of different sizes. Size of the viewport makes a large difference in performance on these tasks: smaller viewports lead to longer search times and poorer object locating performance. Further studies will investigate the degree to which less complete mental representations are formed with smaller viewports or limited peripheral vision. We have set up the headmounted EyeLink eyetracker that was acquired for this project, and are using it in our research. With this instrument, we can now present color images and other displays, and collect eye movement data. Data transformation and reduction processes are also being improved. The SOAR applications results have far exceeded the milestone, with funding provided by the Air Force to build a SOAR-based cognitive model. A model of an F-16 pilot performing an air-to-ground strike mission, using two different cockpit configurations, was completed this quarter. The task analysis for the baseline cockpit is shown in Figure 1. Cockpit enhancements included overhead imagery of the target area from the Real-Time Information in the Cockpit (RTIC) system and an improved forward looking infrared system. Configurations were previously studied using human-in-the-loop simulation, Extended Air Defense Simulation Model (EADSIM), and the Micro Saint modeling tool. The ARL-funded effort was kept "in the blind" about the previous efforts, other than which dependent measures were employed. The SOAR model was programmed and an enhanced visual processing model was introduced. Images of target KC-10 and cluttering B-52 aircraft were shown to subjects, who made signal detection judgments as to whether the aircraft was a KC-10 target. The visual model was derived from having observers look at pixel images of the targets at various simulated ranges, as shown in Figure 2. A total of 160 simulated strikes were "flown" using the SOAR mission model. SOAR predicted significant performance improvements using the cockpit enhancements, as compared to the baseline system (Figure 3). Target acquisition distances were somewhat overestimated because the visual model was based on observers who were not burdened by other mission aspects. The results of the SOAR model predicted the superior performance of the enhanced cockpit, and compared favorably with the human-in-the-loop simulation findings. The lessons learned during the Air Force effort will serve as the basis for next year's effort to start cognitive modeling soldier interaction with digitization systems. October 1 - December 31, 1997 (FY98Q1) Goals: Complete a study to separate the effect of field of view size on formation of a cognitive representation from its effect on the ability to search for objects within that space (Incomplete in FY97Q3). Progress: Further guidance from ARL has changed the focus of the Army modeling effort from the individual soldier to a command and control emphasis. The effort is being shifted to modeling command post staff, who have decidedly more cognitive-oriented activities. The chosen focus is on the maneuver officer (S3), who operates in a highly dynamic and cognitively challenging environment. The planned model will not try to comprehensively model the S3 function, but will choose specific subtasks to be done and try to implement anthropomorphic changes to the SOAR code to better represent human performance. SOAR now operates in a human fashion, but does not impose human limits, such as the limited capability of short-term memory, and it does not degrade under stress or fatigue. Creating a SOAR-ArmySAF software seems feasible. There are still questions as to how much programming would be needed to get SOAR to direct the Army MODSAF entities, much like AIRSAF directs aircraft. The new merging of software (SOAR and ArmySAF) would not only give Fed Lab a new product, but the resulting S3 model would automatically be Distributed Interactive Simulation (DIS) compatible. In this quarter, further data analyses have been completed on our study in which subjects examined a large terrain display with fields of view of different sizes (a 13" monitor, a 21" monitor, and a head-mounted display, and a full view of the terrain, as seen in Figure 4). The size of the field of view had no effect on the number of objects that the observer could recall after examining the display, but it had a sizable effect on the time required to find a specified object, and on the accuracy with which the observer could specify exactly where the object was in the display. Thus, field of view size appears to primarily affect the observer's sense of the locations of objects in the display, rather than memory for the objects themselves. Part of this difference is probably due to the amount of information available from peripheral vision during the test itself. Additionally, this difference may also be attributed to the formation of a less accurate mental representation of the space, caused by a restricted field of view in which less information is available about the positions of objects relative to one another. Thus, the study currently being run attempts to separate the effects that occur during learning vs. testing. Data are currently being collected for this study, which is not yet complete. January 1 - March 31, 1998 (FY98Q2) Goals: Complete a study to separate the effect of field of view size on formation of a cognitive representation from its effect on the ability to search for objects within that space (Q397). Complete initial report on effect of field of view size on observer's ability to form a cognitive representation of a virtual space. Explore design representation issues associated with modeling human cognitive activities in a virtual space. Progress: In the new, digitized Army, personnel often need to view a large terrain through a small computer monitor. Only part of the area can be seen at any one time. We are conducting a series of studies to investigate the effect that the size of the viewport (the computer monitor) through which a person examines the terrain has on his/her ability to construct a mental representation of the information in the region. Last quarter, we reported a study showing people's performance on several tasks carried out with viewports of different sizes. In that study, however, the viewport size was the same during the examination and test. Therefore, we conducted a follow-up study that overcomes this limitation. Similar to the prior study, subjects examined a large terrain display with fields of view of different sizes, simulating the view one would have with a 13" monitor, and a head-mounted display, in comparison to a full view of the terrain. This time, however, subjects were asked to alternatively wear or remove the view-restricting goggles before or after their initial exposure to the terrain. This allowed us to tease apart the effects of a restricted field of view on learning a display versus later performing evaluation tasks with the display. Initial results indicated that the most restrictive view during test, simulating the 13" monitor, greatly impairs performance in indicating the prior locations of objects and in searching for the objects. This impairment appears to be equally strong whether the terrain was learned using the highly restrictive view or not. A larger display, simulating the field of view of a head-mounted display, produced mean times, accuracies, and confidence ratings that were only slightly worse than the full-view, control condition. In terms of learning a terrain and interacting with it, the head-mounted display possibly will present itself as a reasonable compromise between the benefit of computerized displays and the visually constraining problem they present. Additional analyses are under way to evaluate this possibility. In general, having the field of view restricted at the time one is trying to carry out a task using previously-gained knowledge appears to be more detrimental than having the field of view restricted during the learning period. This indicates, first, peripheral vision plays an important role in these tasks; and second, people are either adept at developing a coherent mental representation of a large space when only part is visible any one time, or under unconstrained viewing conditions, do not rely much on their mental representations of the terrain. In the final task, we developed levels of design abstraction to map human cognitive states with decision-making performance based on information displayed in a virtual space. The levels of abstraction provide a theory for design of information display that captures the attention of the decision-maker. The draft report on this task is in progress. April 1 - June 30, 1998 (FY98Q3) Goals: Complete development of software and procedures for tracking eye movements with Head-mounted display. Progress: We are still awaiting delivery of the ISCAN eyetracker mounted in a head-mounted display (HMD) which we have provided from NSF Infrastructure grant funds. We have prepared for its arrival by installing the magnetic head tracking equipment that will be used with the eyetracker. This is only the second time that ISCAN has mounted their equipment in an HMD (the first is currently be used by University of Rochester) and they are employing a modified design in ours. The company says that it should be finished shortly, and we can then install and develop the necessary software for planned research. Our previous work has documented the effects of restricting the field of view (similar to using computer monitors of different sizes) when examining a large, virtual terrain space. We have now completed a study designed to determine the extent to which performance decrements that occur with restricted field of view are the result of limitations in forming a mental representation of the space, or of limitations in carrying out tasks such as visual search and specifying the location of objects. The results are very clear in indicating that the limitation is primarily in the latter processes. That is, when users have no access to information from peripheral vision, it appears that they are severely restricted in their ability to use information from their mental representation alone to compensate in carrying out visual tasks. Results of our first two studies were reported at the Midwestern Psychological Association Meetings. We are now conducting a third study in this series that is examining the role of the mental representation in quickly finding objects and indicating the locations where objects previously resided in the display (an indication of the quality of their mental representation of a previously viewed domain). July 1 - September 30, 1998 (FY98Q4)
Goals: Explore design representation issues associated with modeling human cognitive activities in a virtual space.(Q298). Complete development of software and procedures for tracking eye movements with Head-mounted display.(Q398). Demonstrate a simple, SOAR-based, individual soldier model. Conduct statistical analysis on experimental data obtained in FY98Q2 experiment. Multidimensional discriminate analysis models are used to quantify the design representation issues. Progress: We are still awaiting delivery of the ISCAN eyetracker mounted in a head-mounted display (HMD) which we have provided from NSF Infrastructure grant funds. We will be unable to complete software development and procedures until it arrives. Despite not having received the HMD ISCAN eyetracker, we have made progress with the non-HMD ISCAN eyetracker, and have developed standardized procedures for its use and are currently testing the reliability and precision that ISCAN eyetrackers are capable of. The results of the reliability testing will be included in a paper titled "Use of Eye Movements in Human-Computer Interaction," an abstract of which has been submitted for inclusion in the FedLab 1999 Symposium Proceedings. This paper, which is being written, will incorporate a historical perspective on the use of eye movements in human-computer interaction, the capabilities of the ISCAN system, and a discussion of how the ISCAN eyetracker can be used to improve on prior attempts to incorporate eye movements in the dialog between humans and computers. The activity on demonstrating a simple, SOAR-based, individual soldier model was severely curtailed by the funding profile problems. Some planning work for the proposed model, now focusing on the S-3 or Maneuver Officer rather than the individual soldier was done, but no code was developed during the quarter. This will be shifted into the first quarter of next FY. Because of the complexity of the statistical analysis, final multidimensional discriminate analysis models have not been fully constructed. However the initial finding reported last quarter - that a restricted view primarily interferes with the task of finding objects rather than remembering their precise location - has remained unchanged. As shown in Figure 7, the time required to search for an object was greatly effected by a smaller view, despite an unrestricted learning exposure. The third study of the series examining the effect of restricted field of view on forming a mental representation of a large-scale space is on-going. Data is being collected now. October 1 - December 31, 1998 (FY99Q1)
Goals:Complete development of software and procedures for tracking eye movements with head-mounted display. (Reported as incomplete FY98Q3). Demonstrate a simple, SOAR-based, individual soldier model. (Reported as incomplete FY98Q4). Conduct statistical analysis on experimental data obtained in FY98Q2 experiment. Multidimensional discriminant analysis models are used to quantify the design representation issues. (Reported as incomplete FY98Q4). Further develop the S3 model and integrate it with MODSAF simulation software. Complete study using high-resolution Purkinje Eyetracker that examines the accuracy with which binocular eye movement date indicates the depth at which a person is attending in a 3D display. Progress: The milestone "Explore design representation issues associated with modeling human cognitive activities in a virtual space", which was incomplete in the FY98Q2 report, has been removed since it was to be done by NCA&T, who no longer has funding under this module. Tracking eye movements with an HMD has not yet been completed because we have not yet received the head-mounted display from ISCAN; rapid progress will be made as soon as the equipment arrives. Sytronics has not yet been able to complete the demonstration of a simple, SOAR-based, individual soldier model. They have chosen to concentrate on the Symposium papers and demonstrations to insure their success. The results of statistical analysis on experimental data obtained in experiments are currently being pulled together in a paper summarizing the modeling research. The further development of the S-3 model and integration of it with MODSAF simulation software has also not been completed. As noted, Sytronics has chosen to concentrate on the Symposium. After completion of the Symposium, Sytronics will review the state of the research effort, funding situation, and consult with ARL to determine a "get well" schedule or to give up this line of research. The computer programs to collect binocular data from the two Purkinje eye trackers are under development at UIUC. Some progress has been made, but no data has been collected yet.
January 1 - March 31, 1999 (FY99Q2)
Goals: Complete study using high-resolution Purkinje Eyetracker that examines the accuracy with which binocular eye movement date indicates the depth at which a person is attending in a 3D display (Reported as incomplete in FY99Q1). Develop operational scenario based on Staff Group Training (SGT) examples in MODSAF to evaluate the S-3 model. Complete a study comparing the ability to develop a cognitive model of a virtual space as examined with a limited field-of-view, head-mounted display with display change in response to head movements vs. change in response to joystick control. Progress: The apparatus for the study using the Purkinje Eyetracker is currently being built. The milestone is not yet complete. SYTRONICS has found it impossible to execute the cognitive model of S-3 as originally planned. The principal reason for this has been the higher than expected cost of doing the Usability and Validation work, especially the hardware necessary to collect that data. Supplemental funding from an Air Force source originally assisted this work. It continued as a very low level of activity over the next year with some small progress. When the cognitive modeling was not selected for supplemental funding under the cognitive augment, no additional funds were forthcoming. In addition, a much greater effort in cognitive modeling was discovered elsewhere in the Army. This significantly funded project obviously overlapped and made our Fed Lab effort relatively insignificant. For these reasons SYTRONICS has decided to end the effort and will write a termination report during this quarter. Funding allocated for Cognitive modeling will be applied to the Usability and Validation effort which is of much greater importance to the overall Fed Lab effort. The equipment required to perform the study in milestone three has not arrived yet. This milestone is incomplete.
April 1 - June 30, 1999 (FY99Q3)
Goals: Complete study using high-resolution Purkinje Eyetracker that examines the accuracy with which binocular eye movement date indicates the depth at which a person is attending in a 3D display (reported as incomplete in FY99Q1). Develop operational scenario based on Staff Group Training (SGT) examples in MODSAF to evaluate the S-3 model (reported as incomplete in FY99Q2). Complete a study comparing the ability to develop a cognitive model of a virtual space as examined with a limited field-of-view, head-mounted display with display change in response to head movements vs. change in response to joystick control. Run the evolving S-3 model inside the MODSAF simulation to test model performance. Continue FY99Q2 #3 task with addition of display objects to arouse anxiety and emotion. Progress: The apparatus for the study using the Purkinje Eyetracker is currently being built. The milestone is not yet complete. Sytronics does not have the funding to complete an operational scenario and will not be doing it. The equipment required to perform the study in milestone three has not arrived yet. This milestone is incomplete. Sytronics does not have the funding to complete a study comparing display methods and will not be doing it. The equipment required to perform the study in milestone five has not arrived yet. This milestone is incomplete.It may be possible to run this series of studies in the Integrated Support Lab once an eye-tracker has been integrated with the ImmersaDesk. Work on integrating an eye tracker into the ImmersaDesk should be completed this summer.
July 1 - September 30, 1999 (FY99Q4)
Goals: Complete study using high-resolution Purkinje Eyetracker that examines the accuracy with which binocular eye movement date indicates the depth at which a person is attending in a 3D display. (Reported as incomplete in FY99Q1.) Develop operational scenario based on Staff Group Training (SGT) examples in MODSAF to evaluate the S-3 model. (Reported as incomplete in FY99Q2.) Complete a study comparing the ability to develop a cognitive model of a virtual space as examined with a limited field-of-view, head-mounted display with display change in response to head movements vs. change in response to joystick control. (Reported as incomplete in FY99Q2.) Run the evolving S-3 model inside the MODSAF simulation to test model performance. (Reported as incomplete in FY99Q3.) Continue FY99Q2 #3 task with addition of display objects to arouse anxiety and emotion. (Reported as incomplete in FY99Q3.) Conduct human vs. S-3 interactive MODSAF simulation and perform a simple Turing test of S-3 model effectiveness. Progress: Eyetracking is very useful in a virtual environment in indicating the observer's direction of gaze, and thus the objects in the environment to which he is attending at any given moment. However, in a virtual 3D environment it is quite possible to have different objects that lie roughly in the same direction from the observer, but at different depths. Data from normal monocular eyetracking can only indicate that visual attention is being directed to some member of this cluster of objects, but cannot indicate whether the selected object is one that is near or far. One method for providing information concerning the depth plane being attended is to monitor the position of both eyes. Since the visual system adjusts eye position to place the region of interest at corresponding positions on the two retina, the angle of gaze of the two eyes changes systematically with changes in the depth plane being attended. When attending a far distant object, the line of gaze of the two eyes is nearly parallel; when attending a very close object, the eyes rotate toward each other. Thus, a signal based on the difference between the horizontal component of the eye position signal of the two eyes can indicate the relative positions of the two eyes, which is related to the depth plane being attended. Since the eyetracker's signal is linearly related to the angular position of the eyes, it is possible to obtain a difference signal that indicates the relative direction of gaze of the two eyes, without having to calculate the angular position itself. A mathematical model has been developed with three free parameters that represent this relationship. Once a few samples of eye position have been taken as the observer attends to objects at known distances, these parameters can be estimated with nonlinear regression methods, thus fitting the model both to the person and to the current characteristics of the eyetracking signal. Data have been collected using our high-resolution binocular Purkinje Eyetracking system, and the model fits it well. The next step is to develop a method of estimating the reliability of a given eyetracker's binocular difference signal, and with that to be able to indicate the degree of resolution in depth that can be expected from the eyetracking system. We have just recently received (after a wait of over a year) our head-mounted display having eyetracking capability, so that this study can now be conducted. As noted above, the HMD with eyetracking capability just arrived, therefore the original study must be completed before display objects can be added.
October 1 - December 31, 1999 (FY00Q1)
Goals: Complete a study comparing the ability to develop a cognitive model of a virtual space as examined with a limited field-of-view, head-mounted display with display change in response to head movements vs. change in response to joystick control. (Reported as incomplete in FY99Q2.) Implement monocular eyetracking within the BattleView environment and explore the potential benefits of using binocular eyetracking. Progress: The development of an operational scenario based on Staff Group Training will not be completed by Sytronics, as the research has been cancelled. The study comparing the ability to develop a cognitive model of virtual space in a limited view HMD using head movements for display change vs. using a joystick for display change has been delayed. This delay was because our head-mounted display was at the factory having eyetracking capability added. The equipment has now been returned to us and we can conduct the study. Currently we anticipate completion in FY00Q3. The S-3 model will not be run in the MODSAF simulation since Sytronics has cancelled this research with permission of ARL. NCAT was not funded in FY99 to finish the research outlined in FY99Q2, task 3, therefore the milestone should be removed. Human versus S-3 interactive MODSAF simulation will not be done because Sytronics and ARL have cancelled this research. Monocular eyetracking has been implemented within the ImmersaDesk environment, though not specifically with BattleView. It is unclear at this time if effort should be put into integration with BattleView. A study has been completed of the ability of a high-accuracy binocular eyetracker (Dual-Purkinje eyetracker) to determine the depth plane of attention (the distance an attended object lies from the subject) from the angular position of the two eyes. There is a strong relationship between the difference in angular position of the two eyes and the depth plan of attention, as seen Figure 8. A mathematical function has been fit to the relationship, and the standard deviation of the residuals of our observations are being calculated. This information is making it possible to provide the information necessary to estimate the accuracy with which it is possible to distinguish different depth planes, as a basis for determining, for a given application, whether binocular data is likely to be of value. A paper has been written to be presented at the ARL Federated Laboratories' Symposium. Figure 8: Relationship between the difference in angular position In other research, a demonstration for the ARL FedLab 2000 Symposium has been planned and development is underway. The plan is for the demo to include the use of eyetracking in connection with language and gesture. This demonstration is being developed in such a way that it can be used as a research environment to study the effectiveness of different modes of human-computer interaction, including eye movement recording. At this time it is unclear if we will be able to present this demonstration, due to limited funds.
January 1 - March 31, 2000 (FY00Q2)
Goals: Complete a study comparing the ability to develop a cognitive model of a virtual space as examined with a limited field-of-view, head-mounted display with display change in response to head movements vs. change in response to joystick control. (Reported as incomplete in FY99Q2.) Implement monocular eyetracking within the BattleView environment and explore the potential benefits of using binocular eyetracking. Conduct experiment that examines the development over time of a mental representation for information in a large, virtual environment requiring observer movement to explore.
Progress: The study comparing the ability to develop a cognitive model of a virtual space is still in progress. A 3-D Head-mounted display system has been set up, and a basic program written that allows exploration of a large space. Software is being written to allow definition of the displays to be used in the research, to allow various modes of navigation in that space, and to collect data as the subject is exploring the space.
A study was reported at the ARL Federated Laboratory Symposium, March, 2000, that examined the ability of an accurate binocular eyetracking system to discriminate the distance at which a viewer is attending. Discrimination is quite good at close distances and becomes less accurate at greater distances. For objects with virtual distances of about 6 feet or less, as is often found with large-format displays such as the Immersa-desk, use of binocular eyetracking appears to have considerable potential. For objects at greater distances, discrimination power is less, so that binocular eyetracking will be useful only when distinguishing between widely-separated depth planes. Monocular eyetracking has been implemented within a large-format (immersa-desk) environment, though not specifically with BattleView.
The experiment to examine the development over time of a mental representation has been delayed. In other research, a review of literature related to the development of memory representations of large spaces over time is being conducted.
April 1 - June 30, 2000 (FY00Q3)
Goals: Complete a study comparing the ability to develop a cognitive model of a virtual space as examined with a limited field-of-view, head-mounted display with display change in response to head movements vs. change in response to joystick control. (Reported as incomplete in FY99Q2-FY00Q2.) Conduct experiment that examines the development over time of a mental representation for information in a large, virtual environment requiring observer movement to explore. (UIUC) (Reported as incomplete FY00Q2.) Complete analysis of study of user's exploration of virtual space in head-mounted displays by various control mechanisms (joystick, head-tracking, eye-tracking, and combinations of the above). (UIUC) Write report regarding accuracy of identifying the depth plane attended from binocular eye position data. (UIUC) Progress: Research in this module has been slowed due to multiple factors: the RA assigned to this project switched to another project, the head of our lab was on sabbatical in China, and it was necessary to find a programmer with virtual environment experience. In general, thus far we have accomplished the following: With regard to the study comparing the ability to develop a cognitive model of a virtual space, we have made headway with the development of a unique HMD system. We are using a VR4 head mounted display (HMD) with an ISCAN eyetracker mounted inside. This is connected with three PCs running on the Linux system. There is one main controlling PC, and two client PCs that are used to convey different images to each eye of the HMD in order to form stereoscopic images. The system is described in more detail below. In order to carry out experiments exploring the development of spatial representations of virtual environments, we needed a dedicated machine capable of running a stereo HMD with high graphics performance. Since this requires two views of the scene to be rendered, one for the left eye and one for the right eye, we could not rely on a combination of commodity hardware and software and still meet our budgetary constraints. While it is possible to put two graphics cards in a single PC, each card would need to be fed by its own processor to maintain performance. Since we also need to collect data, a third processor would be required. Hence, a single PC configuration would require a quad CPU motherboard, an expensive proposition coming in at a minimum $6000. Furthermore, there would have been nontrivial software to write to make this work. Another off-the-shelf option would have been to use an SGI Onyx2. In this case we could have used existing software infrastructure, like the CAVE libraries, and gotten good performance, but the cost, at $200,000, was completely out of the question. In fact, $6000 for a quad CPU PC was already too much. Hence, cost constraints forced us to build a unique system. As opposed to using a single computer, we use a small cluster, networked via ethernet. There are 3 computers, one for data collection and coordination, one for displaying the left eye image, and one for displaying the right eye image. We have used off-the-shelf hardware and produced a system for a total cost of $3000. The challenge was then producing software to make this system work. A pleasant side-effect of building this type of system is scalability. By adding more display computers, we could reuse the software infrastructure to, for instance, view graphics on a display wall at extremely high resolutions. The software is composed of several distinct components. There is a piece that takes care of processing and describing 3D scenes, in effect providing a kind of graphics language suitable for broadcasting over network connections. There is a server program that acts as a transmitter for graphics information, and there is a client program that acts as a receiver for that information, displaying the results. Synchronization components, operating over the network, ensure that the graphics computers coordinate their displayed images. In order to display images for the current VR experiments, the experimental program sends drawing commands, in the graphics language, to the geometry server, which relays them to the connected display clients. Everything is robust. Individual components can fail and be restarted, in any order, without crashing the whole system. Everything is also dynamically reconfigurable, allowing displays to be added or removed even while a scene is being displayed. We are currently carrying out a pilot study, and so far have collected data from 3 subjects. In this study, subjects wear a HMD and are asked to look around four virtual rooms. At any given time, the view is 40º horizontally, and 35º vertically. Thus, to see the complete room, it is necessary to combine information across views. This requires a mental representation of the room to be held in memory. There are 4 conditions derived from a 2x2 design in the experiment: head movement vs. no head movement, and joystick relative mode vs. absolute mode. We assume that the joystick absolute mode will facilitate the development of an egocentric spatial representation whereas the relative mode may inhibit it, at least until the viewer becomes accustomed to it. Similarly, we expect that the head movement condition should facilitate developing an egocentric spatial representation, whereas the no-head movement condition should slightly inhibit it. In the experiment, there are two dependent measures. The primary measure is the time taken to find various objects in the rooms (search reaction time). There are more than 10 objects in each room and the room layouts have been carefully arranged. We predict that the conditions that facilitate the development of an egocentric spatial representation (head movement and joystick absolute mode) should lead to shorter search times than those conditions that inhibit development of such a spatial representation. The second dependent measure is the subjects' navigation route through each room, which is recorded at a rate of 50 Hz. It is believed that the routes taken may differ between conditions of the experiment, though our analysis of this variable is of a more exploratory nature, and we do not have any a priori predictions as to these differences. At present the study is still in an exploratory phase in which we are testing how robust the VR software is and determining how the how the layout of the virtual rooms affects subject performance on the search task and the routes taken in exploring the rooms. In order to analyze the route-taking data, we have developed an algorithm for replaying the route taken by a subject through a room. Once we have refined the design of the rooms, we will collect more data and begin the formal study in which we can test our hypotheses. Work toward the experiment examining mental representation in a large, virtual environment is also progressing. We have been building a HMD software package including several programs necessary to run our experiments. One program is a "RoomEditor" that allows you to construct experimental environments according to ones specifications, including building different virtual rooms with different numbers of walls, placing 3D objects in various locations, manipulating wall height and width, etc. A Viewer program is then able to display the environment. A second program runs the experiments, allowing one to load an environment, run through it and collect data. While the subject is engaged in a particular task, the computer logs his position in the virtual environment at a rate of 50 Hz (20 times a second). The data is then available for off-line analysis. Additionally, our new RA has been working on a literature review on navigation in very large virtual environments. It is near completion and should be finished by the end of this month. Based on the literature review, we have developed a design for the first experiment. Our new RA has also been working together with our programmer to develop a VR environment in which to carry out our experiments as detailed above. The study of user's exploration of virtual space using various control mechanism cannot be completed until the first study discussed is done. We are at present adding headtracking and wand input devices to our system. Both input devices should be integrated with the system within the next two weeks. Once we have fully integrated the headtracker and wand within the system and can analyze the data from these devices, we will integrate the eyetracker. A report on the accuracy of identifying the depth of plane attended from binocular eye position data was presented at the Advanced and Interactive Displays Federated Laboratory meeting in the form of a poster entitled "How Well Can Binocular Eyetracking Indicate the Depth Plane on which Attention is Focused?". Authors were George McConkie, Lester Loschky, and Gary Wolverton of UIUC.
July 1 - September 30, 2000 (FY00Q4) Goals: Complete a study comparing the ability to develop a cognitive model of a virtual space as examined with a limited field-of-view, head-mounted display with display change in response to head movements vs. change in response to joystick control. (Reported as incomplete in FY99Q2-FY00Q3) Conduct experiment that examines the development over time of a mental representation for information in a large, virtual environment requiring observer movement to explore. (UIUC) (Reported as incomplete FY00Q2 - FY00Q3) Complete analysis of study of user's exploration of virtual space in head-mounted displays by various control mechanisms (joystick, head-tracking, eye-tracking, and combinations of the above) (UIUC) (Reported as incomplete in FY00Q3) Begin writing a chapter for the Federated Laboratory Human Factors Handbook. (UIUC) Conduct study investigating people's use of their mental representation and peripheral vision in seeking information in a complex display (UIUC) Progress: A more complete study on the ability to develop a cognitive model of a virtual space has been conducted on this issue and is described under the head mounted display study discussed below. The study on the development over time of a mental representation for a large, virtual environment has not yet been conducted.
A study has been conducted to investigate the effects of different control methods on people's ability to form a mental representation of a large virtual space when viewed through a restricted field of view. In all conditions, the subject wore a binocular, 3D, head-mounted display (VR-4) which has about 60 deg horizontal field of view and 40 deg vertically (Figure 9). The virtual space consisted of a room with 4, 6 or 8 walls. All the walls in a given room were of equal width, and formed equal angles with adjacent walls. In each room there were 10 pictures of common objects hung on the walls at random locations. The subjects viewed the room from a fixed position at the center of the room. By using their control device, the subjects were able to look around the room, moving the center of the viewport over a 180 deg field horizontally, which actually allowed them to see about 240 deg of the room. Movement in the vertical direction was about 90 deg. It was necessary to move the viewport both horizontally and vertically to see the available area of the room. Figure 9: Sam Xiang runs an experiment on mental models and navigation in virtual environments. Three control devices were used to control this movement: joystick, wand, and head-tracking. The wand is a hand-held pointing device that is tracked magnetically. Each control device was used in two different modes: absolute and relative. In absolute mode, each position of the pointing device was linked to a single viewport direction. Thus, looking in a certain area required that the control device be placed in a certain position. For example, in order to see the left part of the room, subjects using head-tracking had to turn their heads leftward; subjects using a joystick had to tilt the stick to the left. In relative mode, positions of the control device simply caused the room to rotate in the directions indicated. No matter what the current viewpoint direction was, tilting the joystick or moving the head to the left, caused the room to rotate to the right so that more of the leftward area of the room came into view. Thus, with three devices and two control modes for each, there were 6 control conditions. Twenty-four college students participated in the study, twelve using absolute control methods, twelve using relative control methods, and each examining two rooms using each control device. Room complexity (number of walls) was counterbalanced across these conditions. Subjects were given 60 seconds to view each room while attempting to remember the locations of the various pictured objects. Immediately after viewing the room two tests were given. First, subjects were shown four objects, one at a time, and were asked to point to the location of that object, assuming that they were sitting in the middle of the room. Data were scored as deviations, measured in degrees, between the center of the location of the indicated object, and the position to which the wand was pointed. Mean deviation for the subjects was 53 degrees. Second, the subjects were shown the room but with each object replaced by a number on the wall. They were then shown four different objects, one at a time, and for each were asked to indicate the number of the position of that object. These data were simply scored as correct or incurred. Mean accuracy for the subjects was 76% where chance performance would be 10%. On both tests, subjects also indicated their confidence in the accuracy of their response, by verbally indicating a number between 1 and 5 (1=low confidence; 5=high confidence). No feedback was given concerning their accuracy in either test. The first test was designed to test for an ego-centric representation; the degree to which the person could remember where objects were located in relation to themselves. The second test could be accomplished using an external representation, in which the room was an externally-viewed object. It was predicted that representations of virtual space would be most accurate when using control devices in absolute mode. This mode gives subjects a way of mapping directly from their own position (head position or hand position) to room locations. The results found this difference with both tests, but neither was statistically significant when tested with ANOVA: the first test showed a mean pointing error of 50% for the absolute condition and 56% for the relative condition (F(1,22 df)=1.50, p=.23), and the second test showed 78% accuracy for the absolute condition and 74% for the relative (F(1,22 df)=.50). It was predicted that with absolute position control methods, performance on the first test would be more accurate with head and wand control than with joystick control, since head and wand require the subject to reference the absolute spatial location of the region to be viewed, either through pointing the wand to it or turning the head to it, while the mapping between joystick position and actual spatial location is much less direct. Thus, we suspected that with the joystick, subjects might compress the space, leading to greater pointing error on the first test, while still being quite accurate on the second. This prediction was not supported; there was no significant difference in pointing accuracy among the three control devices in absolute mode. Finally, it was predicted that accuracy in both tests in absolute mode would be greatest for head-control, simply because it mimics our normal experience, turning our head to look at objects in the world. It was also predicted that accuracy in both tests in relative mode would be greatest for joystick control, since people have more experience using joystick and mouse with relative control than using pointing or head-tracking devices. In fact, people typically have no experience using head movements in this manner. However, these predictions were also not supported by the data. The results seem quite surprising. While we need to conduct further data analyses to examine the power of the tests (to check to see whether we should collect data from more subjects), and to make sure that there are not differences that we have overlooked, it appears that the control device and mode may have much less impact on the user's ability to form a spatial representation of a virtual space than we had expected. The handbook is being written, and we have submitted our input. The study investigating people's use of their mental representation and peripheral vision in seeking information is currently being planned. In other research, we have developed a flexible 3-D, head-mounted display environment that can be used for conducting research on factors that affect how people form mental representations of virtual spaces. Various input devices can be used for navigation, and a record is kept of the user's viewpoint and direction, and actions taken (button-presses). October 1 - December 31, 2000 (FY01Q1) Goals: Conduct experiment that examines the development over time of a mental representation for information in a large, virtual environment requiring observer movement to explore. (UIUC) (Reported as incomplete FY00Q2 - FY00Q4) Conduct study investigating people's use of their mental representation and peripheral vision in seeking information in a complex display (UIUC) (Reported as incomplete in FY00Q4) Begin to prepare papers for the ARL Federated lab symposium. (UIUC) Analyze data from study that examines the development over time of a mental representation for information in a large, virtual environment requiring observer movement to explore. (UIUC) Finish writing a chapter for the Federated Laboratory Human Factors Handbook. (UIUC) Progress: The mental representation study has been delayed because of the need to conduct follow-up research related to the study of the effect of control devices and modes on the development of a mental representation (see discussion below). Until we understand those surprising results better, we will not be in a position to extend the research to this issue.
Do to the delay in conducting the study listed in Milestone 1, it is not likely that we will be able to carry out the mental representation and peripheral vision study before the end of the project. Papers have been completed for the Federated Laboratory Symposium, and presentations are now being prepared. The analysis of data from the mental representation study is delayed because the study has not yet been conducted (see explanation above). The Human Factors chapter has been completed in conjunction with Chris Wickens.
Other Research Progress In other research, we have conducted pilot studies and continued analysis of data related to our study of the effect of navigation control devices and control modes (absolute vs. relative) in building a mental representation of a large virtual environment when only a small part can be seen at once (as in a computer monitor). That study yielded a set of results that we find surprising: while we obtained the predicted result that absolute control methods are more effective than relative control methods, we found no effect for the type of control device used: joystick, wand or head-tracking. We had predicted that these would differ, with head-tracking producing the most accurate mental representation and joystick the least. This is a very important result if it holds up under further investigation. First, it attests to the human's ability to construct mental spatial representations from piece-meal input and raises questions about how this is accomplished. Second, it suggests that head-mounted displays and head tracking may not be needed in some situations where they might be thought to be critical. We are pursuing two directions to better understand the basis for our finding. First, a second study is underway in which the design and testing methods are changed, in order to make sure that the earlier results are not an artifact result from characteristics of the earlier study (subjects serving in different conditions, using the wand for all trials for one of the tests). Second, we are carrying out a theoretical analysis of the types of information that different navigation control methods make available to the user (visual, proprioceptive), and the manner in which a mental spatial representation is developed over time. We also want to understanding the conditions under which different navigation control devices and modes would be expected to affect the quality of the mental spatial representation formed. In addition, we are continuing to develop the HMD environment to facilitate the type of research being conducted. Most recently we have been working on a scheme for representing the data in a way that makes analysis more straightforward. The current data structure is very complex, requiring coordination from multiple files (viewport location, command device activity, location of objects in the environment, etc.). We are trying to create a data structure that will make the analysis of data from psychological studies easier and more straightforward. This is particularly needed in advance of our implementing eyetracking capability within the HMD environment. We are finding the HMD environment to be a very interesting one for studying the development of a mental spatial representation.
January 1 - March 31, 2001 (FY01Q2)
Goals: Conduct experiment that examines the development over time of a mental representation for information in a large, virtual environment requiring observer movement to explore (UIUC) (Reported as incomplete FY00Q2 - FY01Q1). Analyze data from study that examines the development over time of a mental representation for information in a large, virtual environment requiring observer movement to explore (UIUC) (Reported as incomplete FY01Q1). Finish analyzing data from study that examines the development over time of a mental representation for information in a large, virtual environment requiring observer movement to explore (UIUC). Finish writing paper(s) for the Federated Laboratory Symposium (UIUC). Progress: It has been necessary to do preparatory work for the study on mental representations: 1. Software modification Several improvements have been made to our HMD VR software system in preparation for a follow-up study dealing with the effect of navigation device on forming a mental representation of a virtual space. A "shooting" task function was added as a means of giving information about the quality of the observer's mental representation from a non-ego-centric perspective. After observers look around a virtual room, which has images of a number of objects images on the walls, subjects are presented with an identical room but without the objects images. Their task is then to use their current navigational device to move the viewport to the location where an indicated object had been located, placing a cursor at the object's location, and to press a button (or 'shoot' that location). This test does not require an ego-centric representation of the virtual space. It is now added to the search test, in which observers see frames containing numbers at the locations previously occupied by the objects and indicate the frame number at which a specified object had been located, and the pointing task, in which observers imagine themselves sitting in the center of the room and point to locations around them where the indicated object would have been located (a pure ego-centric test). The software has also been modified to keep the image in the viewport vertical with respect to the viewport itself, even if the navigation device (head, wand) is rotated. In the first study the rotation of the image was distracting to the subjects. This also makes all navigation devices more equivalent, since the joystick, by its nature, is not able to rotate the images in a manner that was possible with head or wand control. 2. Test wand calibration and begin second navigation study: As indicated in our last report, the results of our first navigation device study did not show some of the differences we expected from using the devices tested. One possible explanation is that we used the ego-centric pointing test following the viewing of each room, which may be encouraging all subjects, regardless of navigation device used, to for ego-centric representations of the virtual environments used. A second study is now underway in which subjects are tested with the pointing test only on their final two rooms. In addition, adding the shooting test gives a finer-grained non-ego-centric recall measure to supplement the recognition measure of the search test. This study will also have more subjects in order to provide greater stability in the data, and is using a more effective pretest of spatial cognition ability and a questionnaire about individual differences in computer and computer game playing experience. Finally, we have conducted further testing of the calibration of the wand, as used as a pointing device in the pointing test. This is intended to make the pointing data more accurate.
3. Data matrix format Since it is clear that the line of work that we have initiated involving effects of navigation devices, viewport sizes and other variables on perception of head-mounted displays of virtual environments, we have worked out a more convenient data structure for this research. This involves four concepts: the viewer location in the virtual space, the virtual space as projected onto a sphere centered at the viewer's eyes, a labeling of the locations of objects of interest on this sphere, and a viewport as a rectangular region of the sphere that can be seen at any given time. For simplicity in our current studies we are assuming that the viewer's location is constant at the center of the room, and that the projected locations of objects in the room are predefined and stored in a table. The navigation device controls the viewport direction in the virtual space, indicating which part of the projected virtual environment image can be seen within the viewport. Knowing the projected locations of objects and the viewport location makes it possible to readily determine, at any moment, which objects are within the viewport region and can be seen (as well as the proportion of the object and the part that can be seen). Finally, since the head position is simultaneously recorded, this indicates where the viewport is located relative to the viewer, since in a HMD, moving the head changes the ego-centric location of the viewport, and, hence, changes where in the ego-centric space the seen objects are located. The information necessary to produce this data structure is recorded at some sample rate (for example, 20 times a second). This new data structure accomplishes several needed purposes. It allows us to determine what objects are within the viewport at any given time, indicating, over time, what objects have and have not actually appeared visually to the viewer. In addition, it gives us the basis to identify which objects have been within the viewport simultaneously, giving the possibility of visualizing their spatial relation. It allows us to determine where in the viewer's ego-centric space the seen objects appeared. This will allow us to examine whether people make head movements in mapping from non-ego-centric space to ego-centric space. It provides a basis for adding eye movement recording within the HMD environment, with the possibility of indicating toward which object(s) the gaze is being directed. In general, it provides a data structure that makes it much easier to carry out necessary statistical analyses within the 3-D virtual environment. We are not aware of a similar data structure for this type of research. We believe that it will be a significant contribution to research in this area. The data analysis cannot be completed until the previous milestone is complete.
A paper was presented at the Fed Lab Symposium, the citation is listed under Publications.
April 1 - June 30, 2001 (FY01Q3)
Goals: Analyze data from study that examines the development over time of a mental representation for information in a large, virtual environment requiring observer movement to explore. (UIUC) (Reported as incomplete FY01Q1-FY01Q2) Finish analyzing data from study that examines the development over time of a mental representation for information in a large, virtual environment requiring observer movement to explore. (UIUC) ) (Reported as incomplete FY01Q2) Finishing analyzing study investigating people's use of mental representation and peripheral vision in seeking information in a complex display (UIUC) Finish writing articles on studies conducted. (UIUC) Progress: Initial analysis complete: Results confirm the advantage of control devices (joystick, wand or head-position) in absolute mode, as compared to relative mode, in observers' development of accurate mental representations of the locations of objects in a 3D space that must be explored by observer movement. Use of these devices in absolute mode also leads to higher observer confidence in their indications of the locations of objects during testing. Analysis of critical data in the pointing task is still underway. Methods for handling this type of data have been developed and required software modifications completed. Article being written. |