EDP Sciences logo
Web of Conferences logo
Search
Menu
All issues Volume 145 (2022) SHS Web Conf., 145 (2022) 01022 References
Open Access
Issue
SHS Web Conf.
Volume 145, 2022
2022 3rd International Conference on Advanced Education and Management Engineering (AEME2022)
Article Number 01022
Number of page(s) 11
DOI https://doi.org/10.1051/shsconf/202214501022
Published online 29 August 2022
  1. Huang jin, Han Dongqi, Chen Yineng, Tian Feng, Wang Hongan, Dai Guozhong. A Review of Human-Computer Interaction in Mixed Reality[J]. Journal of ComputerAided Design and Graphics, 2016, 28(06): 869-880. [Google Scholar]
  2. Milgram P, F Kishino. A Taxonomy of Mixed Reality Visual Displays[J]. IEICE Transactions on Information and Systems, 1994, vol. E77-D, no. 12(12):1321-1329. [Google Scholar]
  3. Sutherland, L. E.. “A Head-Mounted, Three Dimensional Display. ” Afips IEEE Computer Society, 1968. [Google Scholar]
  4. Feiner S, Macintyre B, Seligman D. Knowledge-based augmented reality” Communications of the ACM. 1993. [Google Scholar]
  5. Piekarski W, Thomas B H. ARQuake: The Outdoor Augmented Reality Gaming System[J]. Communications of the ACM, 2002, 45(1):36-38. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  6. Miller, C C. Google searches for style[J]. New York Times, 2013. [Google Scholar]
  7. Rubenstone J. HOLOLENS FIRST IMPRESSIONS [J]. Engineering news-record, 2016, 277(16):24-24. [Google Scholar]
  8. Fenwick S. Microsoft’s mixed reality headset, the HoloLens 2[J]. Land Mobile Wireless Communications for Businesses, 2019, 26(3):32-33. [Google Scholar]
  9. Arrighi P A, Mougenot, Céline. Towards user empowerment in product design: a mixed reality tool for interactive virtual prototyping[J]. Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, 2016. [Google Scholar]
  10. Maurya S, Céline Mougenot, Takeda Y. Impact of mixed reality implementation on early-stage interactive product design process[J]. Journal of Engineering Design. [Google Scholar]
  11. Freitas, G., et al. “A Systematic Review of Rapid Prototyping Tools for Augmented Reality. ” 2020 22nd Symposium on Virtual and Augmented Reality (SVR) 2020. [Google Scholar]
  12. Casques, D., et al. “What You Sketch Is What You Get: Quick and Easy Augmented Reality Prototyping with PintAR. ” Extended Abstracts of the 2019 CHI Conference 2019. [Google Scholar]
  13. Kent L, Snider C, Gopsill J, et al. Mixed reality in design prototyping: A systematic review. [Google Scholar]
  14. Billinghurst, M., and M. Nebeling. “Rapid Prototyping of XR Experiences. ” CHI ’21: CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems 2021. [Google Scholar]
  15. Razek, Ara, et al. “A Comparative Study on Conventional versus Immersive Service Prototyping (VR, AR, MR). ” the Virtual Reality International Conference Laval Virtual 2018. [Google Scholar]
  16. Gomes F F, Tiago C, Isabella D S S, et al. Mixed prototypes for the evaluation of usability and user experience: simulating an interactive electronic device[J]. Virtual Reality, 2018, 23:197-211. [Google Scholar]
  17. Morozova, A., V. Rheinstdter, and D. P. Wallach. “MixedUX: A Mixed Prototyping Framework for Usability Testing in Augmented Reality. ” Companion Publication of the 2019 2019. [Google Scholar]
  18. Zhou X, Rau P. Determining fidelity of mixed prototypes: Effect of media and physical interaction[J]. Applied Ergonomics, 2019, 80:111-118. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  19. Apostolakis, K. C., G. Margetis, and C. Stephanidis. “Pleistocene Crete: A narrative, interactive mixed reality exhibition that brings prehistoric wildlife back to life. ” 2020 IEEE International Symposium on Mixed and Augmented Reality Adjunct (ISMAR-Adjunct) IEEE, 2020. [Google Scholar]
  20. Plecher, D. A., M. Wandinger, and G. Klinker. “Mixed Reality for Cultural Heritage. ” 2019 IEEE Conference on Virtual Reality and 3D User Interfaces (VR) IEEE, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  21. Pietroszek, K.. “Mixed-Reality Exhibition for Museum of Peace Corps Experiences using AHMED toolset. ” Symposium on Spatial User Interaction 2019. [Google Scholar]
  22. “Museum in Your Living Room: Recreating the Peace Corps Experience in Mixed Reality. ” IEEE Games, Entertainment, Media Conference AU Game Lab, American University, Washington DC;AU Game Lab, American University, Washington DC;AU Game Lab, American University, Washington DC;AU Game Lab, American University, Washington DC;AU Game Lab, American University, Washington DC;, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  23. Fistola R, Rastelli A, Pham C, et al. Augmented reality for cultural heritage: a new dimension for the perceptual knowledge[J]. IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering, 2020, 949(1):012053 (9pp). [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  24. Oliva, L. S., et al. “Recovering the history of Bergen Belsen using an interactive 3D reconstruction in a mixed reality space the role of pre-knowledge on memory recollection. ” Digital Heritage IEEE, 2016. [Google Scholar]
  25. Sylaiou, S., et al. “Leveraging Mixed Reality Technologies to Enhance Museum Visitor Experiences. ” 2018 International Conference on Intelligent Systems (IS) IEEE, 2018. [Google Scholar]
  26. Hyun Y J, Sun K H. User Experience Research, Experience Design, and Evaluation Methods for Museum Mixed Reality Experience[J]. Journal on Computing and Cultural Heritage (JOCCH), 2021. [Google Scholar]
  27. Williams, T., et al. “Mixed Reality Deictic Gesture for Multi-Modal Robot Communication. ” ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction ACM, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  28. Williams, T., D. Szafir, and T. Chakraborti. “The Reality-Virtuality Interaction Cube: A Framework for Conceptualizing Mixed-Reality Interaction Design Elements for HRI. ” Late Breaking Reports of the 14th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction ACM, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  29. Ullmer B, Ishii H. Emerging frameworks for tangible user interfaces[J]. Ibm Systems Journal, 2000, 39(3/4):915-931. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  30. Fitzmaurice G. An Empirical Evaluation of Graspable User Interfaces: towards specialized, space-multiplexed input[J]. Proc. CHI’97, 1997. [Google Scholar]
  31. Fitzmaurice, G., H. Ishii, and W. Buxton. “Laying the foundations for graspable user interfaces. ” Proceedings of the Chi (2002). [Google Scholar]
  32. Kang, H. J., J. H. Shin, and K. Ponto. “A Comparative Analysis of 3D User Interaction: How to Move Virtual Objects in Mixed Reality. ” 2020 IEEE Conference on Virtual Reality and 3D User Interfaces (VR) IEEE, 2020. [Google Scholar]
  33. Hassoumi, A., and C. Hurter. “Eye Gesture in a Mixed Reality Environment. ” 3rd International Conference on Human Computer Interaction Theory and Applications 2019. [Google Scholar]
  34. Fitzmaurice G. An Empirical Evaluation of Graspable User Interfaces: towards specialized, space-multiplexed input[J]. Proc. CHI’97, 1997. [Google Scholar]
  35. Bozgeyikli, E., and L. L. Bozgeyikli. “Evaluating Object Manipulation Interaction Techniques in Mixed Reality: Tangible User Interfaces and Gesture. ” 2021 IEEE Virtual Reality and 3D User Interfaces (VR) IEEE, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  36. Farrugia, J. P.. “VirtualHaus: a collaborative mixed reality application with tangible interface. ” the 24th ACM Symposium ACM, 2018. [Google Scholar]
  37. Wang B, Zhang R, Xi C, et al. Virtual and Real-Time Synchronous Interaction for Playing Table Tennis with Holograms in Mixed Reality[J]. Sensors, 2020, 20(17):4857. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  38. Feng, Z., B. L. Duh, and M. Billinghurst. “Trends in Augmented Reality Tracking, Interaction and Display: A Review of Ten Years of ISMAR. ” 2008 7th IEEE/ACM International Symposium on Mixed and Augmented Reality IEEE, 2018. [Google Scholar]
  39. Zhang, Z., et al. “Toward an Efficient Hybrid Interaction Paradigm for Object Manipulation in Optical See-Through Mixed Reality. ” IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS), 2019. [Google Scholar]
  40. Song, Y., et al. “Mixed Reality Storytelling Environments Based on Tangible User Interface: Take Origami as an Example. ” 2019 IEEE Conference on Virtual Reality and 3D User Interfaces (VR) IEEE, 2019. [Google Scholar]

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.