Data_Sheet_1_Context matters during pick-and-place in VR: Impact on search and transport phases.pdf

When considering external assistive systems for people with motor impairments, gaze has been shown to be a powerful tool as it is anticipatory to motor actions and is promising for understanding intentions of an individual even before the action. Up until now, the vast majority of studies investigating the coordinated eye and hand movement in a grasping task focused on single objects manipulation without placing them in a meaningful scene. Very little is known about the impact of the scene context on how we manipulate objects in an interactive task. In the present study, it was investigated how the scene context affects human object manipulation in a pick-and-place task in a realistic scenario implemented in VR. During the experiment, participants were instructed to find the target object in a room, pick it up, and transport it to a predefined final location. Thereafter, the impact of the scene context on different stages of the task was examined using head and hand movement, as well as eye tracking. As the main result, the scene context had a significant effect on the search and transport phases, but not on the reach phase of the task. The present work provides insights into the development of potential supporting intention predicting systems, revealing the dynamics of the pick-and-place task behavior once it is realized in a realistic context-rich scenario.</p

Augmentation Impacts Strategy and Gaze Distribution in a Dual-Task Interleaving Scenario

When interleaving multiple tasks, people are confronted with a decision of how to distribute a finite amount of time between several tasks, which defines the task-interleaving strategy. In some challenging task interleaving scenarios where accurate timing is essential, people perform worse than they could have. With the growing advancement of technology, such as augmented reality, it became possible to impact people’s strategy and improve their performance. However, when augmenting visual input with additional visual content, the augmentation not only introduces the possible benefit but can also capture attentional resources. It is, thus, important to investigate how visual augmentation affects people’s performance in cases when otherwise people underscore in their performance. In the current study, using a psychophysics approach, it was investigated how visual augmentation impacts the task-interleaving strategy and, thus, performance in a dual-task setting with unequal task importance. In a simple dynamic 3D environment, four visual augmentations were generated aiming to prompt the user when it is more beneficial score-wise to switch from one task to another. The mean duration on one task before the task switch, as well as the resulting total performance, were evaluated in combination with the gaze direction distribution. In terms of the strategy and the total performance, all augmentations showed an advantage compared to when augmentation was not present. Furthermore, an abrupt augmentation onset based on the individual response time of the participant was more beneficial score-wise for the strategy compared to a constantly present visual augmentation. However, it affected the natural gaze direction distribution indicating the allocation of attentional resources to the augmentation. The results of this study provide an insight into potential visual augmentation designs aiming to improve user’s performance in a challenging dual-task interleaving setting.</p

Task design.

(A) Scheme of the experimental paradigm. (B) Tactile feedback implementation during the grasping phase. Tactile feedback was implemented through the coordinates of the index finger and thumb spherical markers. Once these markers were at a distance of ≤1cm from the screen, the vibration was activated. The graphs on the right show two examples illustrating the position of the markers (index finger and thumb) with respect to the screen position and the vibration threshold. Two conditions are exemplified: static position and moving position (grasping).</p

Supplementary document for In-depth optical characterisation of spectacle lenses for myopia progression management - 6374606.pdf

Optical response of the instrument for testing the focusing properties of spectacle lense

Overview of the workflow.

(A) Planar view of the experimental setup. (B) Schematic diagram of the setup unit. The orthogonal optical data recorded by the motion cameras were sent to the host computer through the Lock unit. The main system used the orthogonal optical data to generate the grasping skeleton template we have created based on the position of the markers on the dorsal surface of the hand: IND (index finger), THU (thumb), WR1 (wrist, left side) and WR2 (wrist, right side). In turn, the position of the index finger and thumb markers was used in real time to activate the vibration motors through the Arduino UNO microcontroller. Arduino UNO was also responsible for triggering the start and stop VICON system capture during the experiment. (C) Characteristics of the devices used in the experiment.</p

MFD lens profile compared with choroidal thickness changes.

(A) Concentric structure of the MFD lens consisting of a 2.3 mm center with distance prescription and a progressive addition zone up to 8.5 mm. (B) Horizontal power profile of the MFD lens as measured and adapted from Wagner et al. [25]. (C) Changes in choroidal thickness from temporal to nasal retina after wearing the MFD lens for 30 min in the present study. The bars represent the temporal perifoveal, temporal parafoveal, central, subfoveal, central, nasal parafoveal and nasal perifoval retinal ETDRS area from left to right.</p

Non-significant differences in the post-hoc analysis when comparing the different scenarios.

The absence of markers indicates that those regions were significantly different under all conditions tested.</p

Saccade amplitude values during pre- and post-grasping manual estimation phases.

(A) Scatter plots representing post-grasping phase saccades against pre-grasping phase saccades under the different horizontal size perturbation conditions: non-perturbation (black squares), shortening (blue circles) and lengthening (orange rhombuses). Reference diagonal is defined by the dashed line. (B) Difference between saccadic amplitude values inthe post- and pre- grasping phases for each size perturbation condition. Saccadic amplitude values are shown in degrees (deg). Error bars from the bar charts indicate pooled standard deviations. Asterisks indicate p-values less than 0.05.</p

Average and SD of the SE contact lens profiles, after subtracting the naked eye conditions (n = 13).

Images from top to bottom and left to right represent the different meridians measured. Y-axis: dioptres scale; X-axis: degrees scale. The points notated with a blue ‘*’ are the points where non-significant statistical differences were found, after applying Mann-Whitney-U-test and the Benjamini-Hochberg FDR correction.</p

Applied contact lenses with parameters.

Applied contact lenses with parameters.</p