Although augmented reality (AR) has gained much research attention in recent years, the term AR was given different meanings by varying researchers. In this article, we first provide an overview of definitions, taxonomies, and technologies of AR. We argue that viewing AR as a concept rather than a type of technology would be more productive for educators, researchers, and designers. Then we identify certain features and affordances of AR systems and applications. Yet, these compelling features may not be unique to AR applications and can be found in other technological systems or learning environments (e.g., ubiquitous and mobile learning environments). The instructional approach adopted by an AR system and the alignment among technology design, instructional approach, and learning experiences may be more important. Thus, we classify three categories of instructional approaches that emphasize the ''roles,'' ''tasks,'' and ''locations,'' and discuss what and how different categories of AR approaches may help students learn. While AR offers new learning opportunities, it also creates new challenges for educators. We outline technological, pedagogical, learning issues related to the implementation of AR in education. For example, students in AR environments may be cognitively overloaded by the large amount of information they encounter, the multiple technological devices they are required to use, and the complex tasks they have to complete. This article provides possible solutions for some of the challenges and suggests topics and issues for future research.

Current status, opportunities and challenges of augmented reality in education

We present steps toward a conceptual framework for tangible user interfaces. We introduce the MCRpd interaction model for tangible interfaces, which relates the role of physical and digital representations, physical control, and underlying digital models. This model serves as a foundation for identifying and discussing several key characteristics of tangible user interfaces. We identify a number of systems exhibiting these characteristics, and situate these within 12 application domains. Finally, we discuss tangible interfaces in the context of related research themes, both within and outside of the human-computer interaction domain.

/pdf/emerging-frameworks-for-tangible-user-interfaces-254dznxose.pdf

Emerging frameworks for tangible user interfaces

Mathematica--A System for Doing Mathematics by Computer.

We are living in a world which faces a rapidly increasing amount of data to be dealt with on a daily basis. In the last decade, the steady improvement of data storage devices and means to create and collect data along the way influenced our way of dealing with information: Most of the time, data is stored without filtering and refinement for later use. Virtually every branch of industry or business, and any political or personal activity nowadays generate vast amounts of data. Making matters worse, the possibilities to collect and store data increase at a faster rate than our ability to use it for making decisions. However, in most applications, raw data has no value in itself; instead we want to extract the information contained in it.

/pdf/visual-analytics-definition-process-and-challenges-3mll5saq86.pdf

Visual Analytics: Definition, Process, and Challenges

Even though interaction is an important part of information visualization (Infovis), it has garnered a relatively low level of attention from the Infovis community. A few frameworks and taxonomies of Infovis interaction techniques exist, but they typically focus on low-level operations and do not address the variety of benefits interaction provides. After conducting an extensive review of Infovis systems and their interactive capabilities, we propose seven general categories of interaction techniques widely used in Infovis: 1) Select, 2) Explore, 3) Reconfigure, 4) Encode, 5) Abstract/Elaborate, 6) Filter, and 7) Connect. These categories are organized around a user's intent while interacting with a system rather than the low-level interaction techniques provided by a system. The categories can act as a framework to help discuss and evaluate interaction techniques and hopefully lay an initial foundation toward a deeper understanding and a science of interaction.

https://www.cc.gatech.edu/~john.stasko/papers/infovis07-interaction.pdf

Toward a Deeper Understanding of the Role of Interaction in Information Visualization

The objective behind Tangible User Interfaces (TUIs) is to allow users to interact with computers through familiar tangible objects, thereby taking advantage of the richness of the tactile world combined with the power of computer-based simulations. TUIs “give physical form to digital information, employing physical artifacts both as representations and controls for computational media”. They lend themselves well to collaboration around intelligent tables, or what we call
tabletop interaction.

On the Tabletop: Tangibles for Creative Problem Solving and Learning

Virtual Reality (VR) headsets can open opportunities for users to accomplish complex tasks on large virtual displays, using compact setups. However, interacting with large virtual displays using existing interaction techniques might cause fatigue, especially for precise manipulations, due to the lack of physical surfaces. We designed VXSlate, an interaction technique that uses a large virtual display, as an expansion of a tablet. VXSlate combines a user’s head movements, as tracked by the VR headset, and touch interaction on the tablet. The user’s head movements position both a virtual representation of the tablet and of the user’s hand on the large virtual display. The user’s multi-touch interactions perform finely-tuned content manipulations.

/pdf/vxslate-combining-head-movement-and-mobile-touch-for-large-2o0sdgrdi7.pdf

VXSlate: Combining Head Movement and Mobile Touch for Large Virtual Display Interaction

Industrial process tomography (IPT) is a specialized imaging technique widely used in industrial scenarios for process supervision and control. Today, augmented/mixed reality (AR/MR) is increasingly being adopted in many industrial occasions, even though there is still an obvious gap when it comes to IPT. To bridge this gap, we propose the first systematic AR approach using optical see-through (OST) head mounted displays (HMDs) with comparative evaluation for domain users towards IPT visualization analysis. The proof-of-concept was demonstrated by a within-subject user study (n=20) with counterbalancing design. Both qualitative and quantitative measurements were investigated. The results showed that our AR approach outperformed conventional settings for IPT data visualization analysis in bringing higher understandability, reduced task completion time, lower error rates for domain tasks, increased usability with enhanced user experience, and a better recommendation level. We summarize the findings and suggest future research directions for benefiting IPT users with AR/MR.

Playing with Data: An Augmented Reality Approach to Interact with Visualizations of Industrial Process Tomography

Virtual reality is used under the assumption that humans behave similarly in virtual reality and in physical environments. This assumption lacks extensive testing, thus risking unexpected human behavior when working with virtual reality. In the current study, we tested this assumption by comparing the performance on visual search tasks in physical environments and in virtual reality. The participants (n = 29) performed search tasks while standing still and search tasks that required walking in both physical environments and in virtual reality. We compared search speed, accuracy, workload, and cognitive absorption with Bayesian t-tests and factorial ANOVAs. Our results provide weak to moderate evidence that all are similar in virtual reality as in physical environments, even when controlling for virtual reality experience and personal innovativeness. Our findings provide some evidence for the assumption that virtual reality can simulate and replace visual search tasks in physical environments. This knowledge can be used to justify the use of virtual reality to, for example, study the human visual system, train surgeons, and remotely operate ships. We suggest further scrutiny of the underlying assumptions of virtual reality use, for example, by studying more naturalistic scenarios, the role of memory, and interaction with objects.

Morten Fjeld

Papers

On the Tabletop: Tangibles for Creative Problem Solving and Learning

VXSlate: Combining Head Movement and Mobile Touch for Large Virtual Display Interaction

Playing with Data: An Augmented Reality Approach to Interact with Visualizations of Industrial Process Tomography

Comparing Visual Search between Physical Environments and VR

Foreword to the Special Section on the 23rd ACM Symposium on Virtual Reality Software and Technology 2017