skip to main content
tutorial

Extended Reality (XR) Toward Building Immersive Solutions: The Key to Unlocking Industry 4.0

Authors Info & Claims
Published:25 April 2024Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

When developing XR applications for Industry 4.0, it is important to consider the integration of visual displays, hardware components, and multimodal interaction techniques that are compatible with the entire system. The potential use of multimodal interactions in industrial applications has been recognized as a significant factor in enhancing humans’ ability to perform tasks and make informed decisions. To offer a comprehensive analysis of the current advancements in industrial XR, this review presents a structured tutorial that provides answers to the following research questions: (R.Q.1) What are the similarities and differences between XR technologies, including augmented reality (AR), mixed reality (MR), Augmented Virtuality (AV), and virtual reality (VR) under Industry 4.0 consideration? (R.Q.2) What types of visual displays and hardware devices are needed to present XR for Industry 4.0? (R.Q.3) How did the multimodal interaction in XR perceive and relate to Industry 4.0? (R.Q.4) How have modern adaptations of XR technologies dealt with the theme of Industry 4.0? (R.Q.5) How can XR technologies in Industry 4.0 develop their services and usages to be more solution-inclusive? This review showcases various instances that demonstrate XR’s potential to transform how humans interact with the physical world in Industry 4.0. These advancements can increase productivity, reduce costs, and enhance safety.

REFERENCES

  1. [1] Abushakra Ahmad and Faezipour Miad. 2014. Augmenting breath regulation using a mobile driven virtual reality therapy framework. IEEE Journal of Biomedical and Health Informatics 18, 3 (2014), 746752. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  2. [2] Aigner Roland, Wigdor Daniel, Benko Hrvoje, Haller Michael, Lindbauer David, Ion Alexandra, Zhao Shengdong, and Koh JTKV. 2012. Understanding mid-air hand gestures: A study of human preferences in usage of gesture types for HCI. Microsoft Research TechReport MSR-TR-2012-111 2 (2012), 30.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. [3] Aisala Heikki, Rantala Jussi, Vanhatalo Saara, Nikinmaa Markus, Pennanen Kyösti, Raisamo Roope, and Sözer Nesli. 2020. Augmentation of perceived sweetness in sugar reduced cakes by local odor display. In Companion Publication of the 2020 International Conference on Multimodal Interaction (Virtual Event, Netherlands) (ICMI’20 Companion). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 322327. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. [4] Alam M., Samad M. D., Vidyaratne L., Glandon A., and Iftekharuddin K. M.. 2020. Survey on deep neural networks in speech and vision systems. Neurocomputing 417 (2020), 302321. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. [5] Alhakamy A’Aeshah and Tuceryan Mihran. 2020. Real-time illumination and visual coherence for photorealistic augmented/mixed reality. ACM Comput. Surv. 53, 3, Article 49 (May 2020), 34 pages. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. [6] Alizadehsalehi Sepehr, Hadavi Ahmad, and Huang Joseph Chuenhuei. 2019. BIM/MR-lean construction project delivery management system. In 2019 IEEE Technology Engineering Management Conference (TEMSCON). 16. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  7. [7] Alizadehsalehi Sepehr, Hadavi Ahmad, and Huang Joseph Chuenhuei. 2019. Virtual reality for design and construction education environment. AEI 2019: Integrated Building Solutions–The National Agenda (2019), 193203. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. [8] Alizadehsalehi Sepehr, Hadavi Ahmad, and Huang Joseph Chuenhuei. 2020. From BIM to extended reality in AEC industry. Automation in Construction 116 (2020), 103254. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  9. [9] Angrisani Leopoldo, Arpaia Pasquale, Moccaldi Nicola, and Esposito Antonio. 2018. Wearable augmented reality and brain computer interface to improve human-robot interactions in smart industry: A feasibility study for SSVEP signals. In 2018 IEEE 4th International Forum on Research and Technology for Society and Industry (RTSI). 15. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  10. [10] Arksey Hilary and O’Malley Lisa. 2005. Scoping studies: Towards a methodological framework. International Journal of Social Research Methodology 8, 1 (2005), 1932. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. [11] Arpaia Pasquale, Benedetto Egidio De, and Duraccio Luigi. 2021. Design, implementation, and metrological characterization of a wearable, integrated AR-BCI hands-free system for health 4.0 monitoring. Measurement 177 (2021), 109280. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. [12] Auda Jonas, Pascher Max, and Schneegass Stefan. 2019. Around the (virtual) world: Infinite walking in virtual reality using electrical muscle stimulation. In Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Glasgow, Scotland UK) (CHI’19). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 18. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. [13] Augstein Mirjam and Neumayr Thomas. 2019. A human-centered taxonomy of interaction modalities and devices. Interacting with Computers 31, 1 (02 2019), 2758. https://academic.oup.com/iwc/article-pdf/31/1/27/28666029/iwz003.pdfGoogle ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  14. [14] Auvray Malika and Spence Charles. 2008. The multisensory perception of flavor. Consciousness and Cognition 17, 3 (2008), 10161031.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. [15] Ayoub Ashraf and Pulijala Yeshwanth. 2019. The application of virtual reality and augmented reality in oral & maxillofacial surgery. BMC Oral Health 19, 1 (2019), 18. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  16. [16] Rozmi Mohd Daniel Azraff Bin, Thirunavukkarasu Gokul Sidarth, Jamei Elmira, Seyedmahmoudian Mehdi, Mekhilef Saad, Stojcevski Alex, and Horan Ben. 2019. Role of immersive visualization tools in renewable energy system development. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 115 (2019), 109363. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  17. [17] Baek Tae Hyun, Yoo Chan Yun, and Yoon Sukki. 2018. Augment yourself through virtual mirror: The impact of self-viewing and narcissism on consumer responses. International Journal of Advertising 37, 3 (2018), 421439. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  18. [18] Bai Chunguang, Dallasega Patrick, Orzes Guido, and Sarkis Joseph. 2020. Industry 4.0 technologies assessment: A sustainability perspective. International Journal of Production Economics 229 (2020), 107776. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  19. [19] Bai Huidong, Sasikumar Prasanth, Yang Jing, and Billinghurst Mark. 2020. A User Study on Mixed Reality Remote Collaboration with Eye Gaze and Hand Gesture Sharing. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 113. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. [20] Wided Batat. 2021. How augmented reality (AR) is transforming the restaurant sector: Investigating the impact of “Le petit chef” on customers’ dining experiences. Technological Forecasting and Social Change 172 (2021), 121013. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  21. [21] Baus Oliver, Bouchard Stéphane, and Nolet Kevin. 2019. Exposure to a pleasant odour may increase the sense of reality, but not the sense of presence or realism. Behaviour & Information Technology 38, 12 (2019), 13691378. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  22. [22] Benda Brett and Ragan Eric D.. 2021. The effects of virtual avatar visibility on pointing interpretation by observers in 3D environments. In 2021 IEEE International Symposium on Mixed and Augmented Reality (ISMAR). 5059. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  23. [23] Bergström Joanna, Mottelson Aske, and Knibbe Jarrod. 2019. Resized grasping in VR: Estimating thresholds for object discrimination. In Proceedings of the 32nd Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology (New Orleans, LA, USA) (UIST’19). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 11751183. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. [24] Bichlmeier Christoph, Heining Sandro Michael, Feuerstein Marco, and Navab Nassir. 2009. The virtual mirror: A new interaction paradigm for augmented reality environments. IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging 28, 9 (2009), 14981510. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  25. [25] Bille Ross, Smith Shamus P., Maund Kim, and Brewer Graham. 2014. Extending building information models into game engines. In Proceedings of the 2014 Conference on Interactive Entertainment (Newcastle, NSW, Australia) (IE2014). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 18. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. [26] Bimber Oliver, Fröhlich Bernd, Schmalstieg Dieter, and Encarnação L. Miguel. 2006. The virtual showcase. In ACM SIGGRAPH 2006 Courses (Boston, Massachusetts) (SIGGRAPH’06). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 9–es. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. [27] Birk Udo and Roebrock Philipp. 2019. User-position aware adaptive display of 3D data without additional stereoscopic hardware. In Eleventh International Conference on Machine Vision (ICMV 2018), Verikas Antanas, Nikolaev Dmitry P., Radeva Petia, and Zhou Jianhong (Eds.), Vol. 11041. International Society for Optics and Photonics, SPIE, 142148. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  28. [28] Biswas Shantonu and Visell Yon. 2019. Emerging material technologies for haptics. Advanced Materials Technologies 4, 4 (2019), 1900042. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  29. [29] Bolt Richard A.. 1980. “Put-that-there”: Voice and gesture at the graphics interface. SIGGRAPH Comput. Graph. 14, 3 (Jul. 1980), 262270. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  30. [30] Carulli Marina, Bordegoni Monica, and Cugini Umberto. 2016. Integrating scents simulation in virtual reality multisensory environment for industrial products evaluation. Computer-Aided Design and Applications 13, 3 (2016), 320328. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  31. [31] Caserman Polona, Schmidt Philip, Gobel Thorsten, Zinnacker Jonas, Kecke Andre, and Gobel Stefan. 2022. Impact of full-body avatars in immersive multiplayer virtual reality training for police forces. IEEE Transactions on Games (2022), 11. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  32. [32] Chalhoub Jad and Ayer Steven K.. 2018. Using mixed reality for electrical construction design communication. Automation in Construction 86 (2018), 110. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  33. [33] Chen Yeqing, Bian Yulong, Yang Chenglei, Bao Xiyu, Wang Yafang, Melo Gerard De, Liu Juan, Gai Wei, Wang Lu, and Meng Xiangxu. 2019. Leveraging blowing as a directly controlled interface. In 2019 IEEE SmartWorld, Ubiquitous Intelligence & Computing, Advanced & Trusted Computing, Scalable Computing & Communications, Cloud & Big Data Computing, Internet of People and Smart City Innovation (SmartWorld/SCALCOM/UIC/ATC/CBDCom/IOP/SCI). 419424. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  34. [34] Cheng Jack C. P., Chen Keyu, and Chen Weiwei. 2020. State-of-the-art review on mixed reality applications in the AECO industry. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management 146, 2 (2020), 03119009. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  35. [35] Cheok Adrian David and Karunanayaka Kasun. 2018. Virtual Taste and Smell Technologies for Multisensory Internet and Virtual Reality. Springer.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  36. [36] Cidota Marina, Lukosch Stephan, Datcu Dragos, and Lukosch Heide. 2016. Comparing the effect of audio and visual notifications on workspace awareness using head-mounted displays for remote collaboration in augmented reality. Augmented Human Research 1, 1 (2016), 115. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  37. [37] Firu Adrian Ciprian, Tapîrdea Alin Ion, Feier Anamaria Ioana, and Drăghici George. 2021. Virtual reality in the automotive field in Industry 4.0. Materials Today: Proceedings 45 (2021), 41774182. 8th International Conference on Advanced Materials and Structures - AMS 2020.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  38. [38] Coleman Beth. 2009. Using sensor inputs to affect virtual and real environments. IEEE Pervasive Computing 8, 3 (2009), 1623. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  39. [39] Colombo Armando W., Karnouskos Stamatis, and Bangemann Thomas. 2014. Towards the Next Generation of Industrial Cyber-Physical Systems. Springer International Publishing, Cham, 122. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  40. [40] Cruz-Neira Carolina, Sandin Daniel J., and DeFanti Thomas A.. 1993. Surround-screen projection-based virtual reality: The design and implementation of the CAVE. In Proceedings of the 20th Annual Conference on Computer Graphics and Interactive Techniques (Anaheim, CA) (SIGGRAPH’93). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 135142. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  41. [41] Cutolo Fabrizio, Fontana Umberto, Carbone Marina, D’Amato Renzo, and Ferrari Vincenzo. 2017. [POSTER] hybrid video/optical see-through HMD. In 2017 IEEE International Symposium on Mixed and Augmented Reality (ISMAR-Adjunct). 5257. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  42. [42] Koster René de, Le-Duc Tho, and Roodbergen Kees Jan. 2007. Design and control of warehouse order picking: A literature review. European Journal of Operational Research 182, 2 (2007), 481501. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  43. [43] Guimarães Marcelo de Paiva, Martins James Miranda, Dias Diego Roberto Colombo, Guimarães Rita de Fátima Rodrigues, and Gnecco Bruno Barberi. 2022. An olfactory display for virtual reality glasses. Multimedia Systems (2022), 111. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  44. [44] Desai Amit P., Peña-Castillo Lourdes, and Meruvia-Pastor Oscar. 2017. A window to your smartphone: Exploring interaction and communication in immersive VR with augmented virtuality. In 2017 14th Conference on Computer and Robot Vision (CRV). 217224. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  45. [45] Dong Jiaqi, Xia Zeyang, and Zhao Qunfei. 2021. Augmented reality assisted assembly training oriented dynamic gesture recognition and prediction. Applied Sciences 11, 21 (2021). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  46. [46] Dong Meiya, Zhao Jumin, Wang Dianqi, Ding Xin, Liu Zhaobin, Zhu Biaokai, and Yuze Jin. 2020. Central-eye: Gaze tracking research on visual rendering method in industrial virtual reality scene. In Proceedings of the ACM Turing Celebration Conference - China (Hefei, China) (ACM TURC’20). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 5157. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  47. [47] Dumoulin William, Thiry Nicolas, and Slama Rim. 2021. Real time hand gesture recognition in industry. In 2021 3rd International Conference on Video, Signal and Image Processing (Wuhan, China) (VSIP 2021). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 17. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  48. [48] Engelbart D.. 1988. The Augmented Knowledge Workshop. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 185248. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  49. [49] Erkoyuncu John and Khan Samir. 2020. Olfactory-based augmented reality support for industrial maintenance. IEEE Access 8 (2020), 3030630321. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  50. [50] Farooq Ahmed, Evreinov Grigori, Raisamo Roope, and Hippula Arto. 2019. Developing intelligent multimodal IVI systems to reduce driver distraction. In Intelligent Human Systems Integration 2019, Karwowski Waldemar and Ahram Tareq (Eds.). Springer International Publishing, Cham, 9197.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  51. [51] Farooq Ahmed, Weitz Philipp, Evreinov Grigori, Raisamo Roope, and Takahata Daisuke. 2016. Touchscreen overlay augmented with the stick-slip phenomenon to generate kinetic energy. In Proceedings of the 29th Annual Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology (Tokyo, Japan) (UIST’16 Adjunct). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 179180. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  52. [52] Feiner Steven, MacIntyre Blair, Höllerer Tobias, and Webster Anthony. 1997. A touring machine: Prototyping 3D mobile augmented reality systems for exploring the urban environment. Personal Technologies 1, 4 (1997), 208217.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  53. [53] Fraga-Lamas Paula, Fernández-Caramés Tiago M., Blanco-Novoa Óscar, and Vilar-Montesinos Miguel A.. 2018. A review on industrial augmented reality systems for the Industry 4.0 shipyard. IEEE Access 6 (2018), 1335813375. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  54. [54] Freeman Euan, Wilson Graham, Vo Dong-Bach, Ng Alex, Politis Ioannis, and Brewster Stephen. 2017. Multimodal Feedback in HCI: Haptics, Non-Speech Audio, and Their Applications. Association for Computing Machinery and Morgan & Claypool, 277317. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  55. [55] Fu Meiqing and Liu Rui. 2018. The application of virtual reality and augmented reality in dealing with project schedule risks. In Proceedings of the Construction Research Congress. 429438. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  56. [56] Gard Niklas, Hilsmann Anna, and Eisert Peter. 2019. Projection distortion-based object tracking in shader lamp scenarios. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 25, 11 (2019), 31053113. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  57. [57] Gong Liang, Fast-Berglund Åsa, and Johansson Björn. 2021. A framework for extended reality system development in manufacturing. IEEE Access 9 (2021), 2479624813. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  58. [58] Lopez Juan Miguel Gonzalez, Betancourt Ramon Octavio Jimenez, Arredondo Juan M Ramirez, Laureano Efrain Villalvazo, and Haro Fernando Rodriguez. 2019. Incorporating virtual reality into the teaching and training of grid-tie photovoltaic power plants design. Applied Sciences 9, 21 (2019). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  59. [59] Goose S., Sudarsky S., Zhang Xiang, and Navab N.. 2003. Speech-enabled augmented reality supporting mobile industrial maintenance. IEEE Pervasive Computing 2, 1 (2003), 6570. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  60. [60] Granquist Christina, Sun Susan Y., Montezuma Sandra R., Tran Tu M., Gage Rachel, and Legge Gordon E.. 2021. Evaluation and comparison of artificial intelligence vision aids: Orcam MyEye 1 and seeing AI. Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness 115, 4 (2021), 277285. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  61. [61] Hartmann Jeremy, Yeh Yen-Ting, and Vogel Daniel. 2020. AAR: Augmenting a Wearable Augmented Reality Display with an Actuated Head-Mounted Projector. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 445458. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  62. [62] Takuma Hashimoto, Suzanne Low, Koji Fujita, Risa Usumi, Hiroshi Yanagihara, Chihiro Takahashi, Maki Sugimoto, and Yuta Sugiura. 2018. TongueInput: Input method by tongue gestures using optical sensors embedded in mouthpiece. In the 57th Annual Conference of the Society of Instrument and Control Engineers of Japan (SICE), Nara, Japan. 1219–1224. DOI:Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  63. [63] Heuts Pien. 2017. DHL experiments with augmented reality. HesaMag: The European Trade Union Institute’s Health and Safety at Work Magazine 16 (2017), 2226.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  64. [64] Holloway Richard, Fuchs Henry, and Robinett Warren. 1992. Virtual-worlds research at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill as of February 1992. In Visual Computing, Kunii Tosiyasu L. (Ed.). Springer Japan, Tokyo, 109128.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  65. [65] Huang Weidong, Alem Leila, Tecchia Franco, and Duh Henry Been-Lirn. 2018. Augmented 3D hands: A gesture-based mixed reality system for distributed collaboration. Journal on Multimodal User Interfaces 12, 2 (2018), 7789. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  66. [66] Iwai Daisuke, Mihara Shoichiro, and Sato Kosuke. 2015. Extended depth-of-field projector by fast focal sweep projection. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 21, 4 (2015), 462470. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  67. [67] Iwamoto Takayuki, Tatezono Mari, and Shinoda Hiroyuki. 2008. Non-contact method for producing tactile sensation using airborne ultrasound. In Haptics: Perception, Devices and Scenarios, Ferre Manuel (Ed.). Springer Berlin, Berlin, 504513.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  68. [68] Kaminskas Marius and Ricci Francesco. 2012. Contextual music information retrieval and recommendation: State of the art and challenges. Computer Science Review 6, 2 (2012), 89119. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  69. [69] Kandel Eric R., Schwartz James H., Jessell Thomas M., Siegelbaum Steven, Hudspeth A. James, and Mack Sarah. 2000. Principles of Neural Science. Vol. 4. McGraw-Hill New York.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  70. [70] Kerruish Erika. 2019. Arranging sensations: Smell and taste in augmented and virtual reality. The Senses and Society 14, 1 (2019), 3145. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  71. [71] Keshari Tanya and Palaniswamy Suja. 2019. Emotion recognition using feature-level fusion of facial expressions and body gestures. In 2019 International Conference on Communication and Electronics Systems (ICCES). 11841189. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  72. [72] Kijima R. and Ojika T.. 1997. Transition between virtual environment and workstation environment with projective head mounted display. In Proceedings of IEEE 1997 Annual International Symposium on Virtual Reality. 130137. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  73. [73] Knierim Pascal, Kosch Thomas, Schwind Valentin, Funk Markus, Kiss Francisco, Schneegass Stefan, and Henze Niels. 2017. Tactile drones - providing immersive tactile feedback in virtual reality through quadcopters. In Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Denver, Colorado, USA) (CHI EA’17). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 433436. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  74. [74] Kortum Philip. 2008. HCI Beyond the GUI: Design for Haptic, Speech, Olfactory, and other Nontraditional Interfaces. Elsevier.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  75. [75] Krueger Myron W., Gionfriddo Thomas, and Hinrichsen Katrin. 1985. VIDEOPLACEan artificial reality. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (San Francisco, California, USA) (CHI’85). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 3540. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  76. [76] Singh Kuldeep. 2020. The growing list of XR devices. XRPractices 0 (2020). https://medium.com/xrpractices/the-growing-list-of-xr-devices-f102262e4a58Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  77. [77] Kunert Andre, Weissker Tim, Froehlich Bernd, and Kulik Alexander. 2020. Multi-window 3D interaction for collaborative virtual reality. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26, 11 (2020), 32713284. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  78. [78] Kurth Philipp, Lange Vanessa, Siegl Christian, Stamminger Marc, and Bauer Frank. 2018. Auto-calibration for dynamic multi-projection mapping on arbitrary surfaces. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 24, 11 (2018), 28862894. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  79. [79] Kusabuka Takahiro and Indo Takuya. 2020. IBUKI: Gesture input method based on breathing. In Adjunct Publication of the 33rd Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology (Virtual Event, USA) (UIST’20 Adjunct). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 102104. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  80. [80] Lasi Heiner, Fettke Peter, Kemper Hans-Georg, Feld Thomas, and Hoffmann Michael. 2014. Industry 4.0. Business & Information Systems Engineering 6, 4 (2014), 239242.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  81. [81] Jr. Joseph J. LaViola, Kruijff Ernst, McMahan Ryan P., Bowman Doug, and Poupyrev Ivan P.. 2017. 3D User Interfaces: Theory and Practice. Addison-Wesley Professional.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  82. [82] Lee Cha, DiVerdi Stephen, and Höllerer Tobias. 2007. An immaterial depth-fused 3D display. In Proceedings of the 2007 ACM Symposium on Virtual Reality Software and Technology (Newport Beach, California) (VRST’07). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 191198. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  83. [83] Li Nianlong, Han Teng, Tian Feng, Huang Jin, Sun Minghui, Irani Pourang, and Alexander Jason. 2020. Get a Grip: Evaluating Grip Gestures for VR Input Using a Lightweight Pen. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 113. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  84. [84] Li Xiao, Yi Wen, Chi Hung-Lin, Wang Xiangyu, and Chan Albert P. C.. 2018. A critical review of virtual and augmented reality (VR/AR) applications in construction safety. Automation in Construction 86 (2018), 150162. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  85. [85] Liagkou Vasiliki, Salmas Dimitrios, and Stylios Chrysostomos. 2019. Realizing virtual reality learning environment for Industry 4.0. Procedia CIRP 79 (2019), 712717. 12th CIRP Conference on Intelligent Computation in Manufacturing Engineering, 18-20 July 2018, Gulf of Naples, Italy.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  86. [86] Lucke Dominik, Constantinescu Carmen, and Westkämper Engelbert. 2008. Smart factory - a step towards the next generation of manufacturing. In Manufacturing Systems and Technologies for the New Frontier, Mitsuishi Mamoru, Ueda Kanji, and Kimura Fumihiko (Eds.). Springer London, London, 115118.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  87. [87] Lv Zhihan, Feng Liangbing, Li Haibo, and Feng Shengzhong. 2014. Hand-free motion interaction on Google Glass. In SIGGRAPH Asia 2014 Mobile Graphics and Interactive Applications (Shenzhen, China) (SA’14). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article 21, 1 pages. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  88. [88] Ma Chenguang, Suo Jinli, Dai Qionghai, Raskar Ramesh, and Wetzstein Gordon. 2013. High-rank coded aperture projection for extended depth of field. In IEEE International Conference on Computational Photography (ICCP). 19. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  89. [89] Matlin Margaret W. and Foley Hugh J.. 1992. Sensation and Perception. Allyn & Bacon.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  90. [90] Matveiuk Kristina. 2019. Role of XR wearables in intralogistics field: Insight into AR applications. (2019).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  91. [91] Mayer Sven, Reinhardt Jens, Schweigert Robin, Jelke Brighten, Schwind Valentin, Wolf Katrin, and Henze Niels. 2020. Improving humans’ ability to interpret deictic gestures in virtual reality. In Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Honolulu, HI, USA) (CHI’20). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 114. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  92. [92] Melzer James E. and Porter James W.. 2008. Helmet-mounted display (HMD) upgrade for the US Army’s AVCATT simulation program. In Head-and Helmet-Mounted Displays XIII: Design and Applications, Vol. 6955. International Society for Optics and Photonics, 695504.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  93. [93] Micaroni Lorenzo, Carulli Marina, Ferrise Francesco, Gallace Alberto, and Bordegoni Monica. 2019. An olfactory display to study the integration of vision and olfaction in a virtual reality environment. Journal of Computing and Information Science in Engineering 19, 3 (2019). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  94. [94] Miccini Riccardo and Spagnol Simone. 2020. HRTF individualization using deep learning. In 2020 IEEE Conference on Virtual Reality and 3D User Interfaces Abstracts and Workshops (VRW). 390395. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  95. [95] Milgram Paul and Kishino Fumio. 1994. A taxonomy of mixed reality visual displays. IEICE Transactions on Information and Systems 77, 12 (1994), 13211329.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  96. [96] Mourtzis Dimitris, Angelopoulos John, and Panopoulos Nikos. 2021. Smart manufacturing and tactile internet based on 5G in Industry 4.0: Challenges, applications and new trends. Electronics 10, 24 (2021). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  97. [97] Nakamura Hiromi and Miyashita Homei. 2012. Development and evaluation of interactive system for synchronizing electric taste and visual content. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Austin, Texas, USA) (CHI’12). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 517520. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  98. [98] Neges Matthias, Adwernat Stefan, and Abramovici Michael. 2018. Augmented virtuality for maintenance training simulation under various stress conditions. Procedia Manufacturing 19 (2018), 171178. Proceedings of the 6th International Conference in Through-life Engineering Services, University of Bremen, 7th and 8th November 2017.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  99. [99] Oakley Ian, McGee Marilyn Rose, Brewster Stephen, and Gray Philip. 2000. Putting the feel in ‘look and feel’. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (The Hague, The Netherlands) (CHI’00). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 415422. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  100. [100] Odenheimer Sandra, Goyal Deepika, Jones Veena Goel, Rosenblum Ruth, Ho Lam, and Chan Albert S.. 2018. Patient acceptance of remote scribing powered by Google Glass in outpatient dermatology: Cross-sectional study. J. Med. Internet Res. 20, 6 (21 Jun. 2018), e10762. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  101. [101] Olivier Anne-Hélène, Bruneau Julien, Kulpa Richard, and Pettré Julien. 2018. Walking with virtual people: Evaluation of locomotion interfaces in dynamic environments. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 24, 7 (2018), 22512263. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  102. [102] (PETCU) Florina Besnea, Cismaru Stefan, Trasculescu Andrei, Resceanu Ionut, Ionescu Marian, Hamdan Hani, and Bizdoaca Nicu. 2021. Integration of a haptic glove in a virtual reality-based environment for medical training and procedures. Acta Technica Napocensis - Series: Applied Mathematics, Mechanics, and Engineering 64, 1-S2 (2021). https://atna-mam.utcluj.ro/index.php/Acta/article/view/1524Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  103. [103] Peters Micah D. J., Godfrey Christina M., Khalil Hanan, McInerney Patricia, Parker Deborah, and Soares Cassia Baldini. 2015. Guidance for conducting systematic scoping reviews. JBI Evidence Implementation 13, 3 (2015), 141146. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  104. [104] Philbeck Thomas and Davis Nicholas. 2018. The Fourth Industrial Revolution: Shaping a new era. Journal of International Affairs 72, 1 (2018), 1722. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26588339Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  105. [105] Pinhanez Claudio S.. 2001. The everywhere displays projector: A device to create ubiquitous graphical interfaces. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Ubiquitous Computing (Atlanta, Georgia, USA) (UbiComp’01). Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 315331.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  106. [106] Pratticò F. Gabriele, Lorenzis Federico De, and Lamberti Fabrizio. 2021. Look at it this way: A comparison of metaphors for directing the user’s gaze in extended reality training systems. In 2021 7th International Conference of the Immersive Learning Research Network (iLRN). 18. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  107. [107] Proske Uwe and Gandevia Simon C.. 2012. The proprioceptive senses: Their roles in signaling body shape, body position and movement, and muscle force. Physiological Reviews 92, 4 (2012), 16511697. PMID: 23073629.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  108. [108] Pusch Andreas and Noël Frédéric. 2019. Augmented reality for operator training on industrial workplaces – comparing the Microsoft HoloLens vs. small and big screen tactile devices. In Product Lifecycle Management in the Digital Twin Era, Fortin Clement, Rivest Louis, Bernard Alain, and Bouras Abdelaziz (Eds.). Springer International Publishing, Cham, 313.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  109. [109] Putze Felix, Weiß Dennis, Vortmann Lisa-Marie, and Schultz Tanja. 2019. Augmented reality interface for smart home control using SSVEP-BCI and eye gaze. In 2019 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man and Cybernetics (SMC). 28122817. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  110. [110] Qian Jing, Ma Jiaju, Li Xiangyu, Attal Benjamin, Lai Haoming, Tompkin James, Hughes John F., and Huang Jeff. 2019. Portal-ble: Intuitive free-hand manipulation in unbounded smartphone-based augmented reality. In Proceedings of the 32nd Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology (New Orleans, LA, USA) (UIST’19). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 133145. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  111. [111] Raisamo Roope. 1999. Multimodal Human-Computer Interaction: A Constructive and Empirical Study. Tampere University Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  112. [112] Rakkolainen Ismo, DiVerdi Stephen, Olwal Alex, Candussi Nicola, Hüllerer Tobias, Laitinen Markku, Piirto Mika, and Palovuori Karri. 2005. The interactive fogscreen. In ACM SIGGRAPH 2005 Emerging Technologies (Los Angeles, California) (SIGGRAPH’05). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 8–es. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  113. [113] Rakkolainen Ismo, Farooq Ahmed, Kangas Jari, Hakulinen Jaakko, Rantala Jussi, Turunen Markku, and Raisamo Roope. 2021. Technologies for multimodal interaction in extended reality-a scoping review. Multimodal Technologies and Interaction 5, 12 (2021), 81.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  114. [114] Ranasinghe Nimesha, Cheok Adrian, Nakatsu Ryohei, and Do Ellen Yi-Luen. 2013. Simulating the sensation of taste for immersive experiences. In Proceedings of the 2013 ACM International Workshop on Immersive Media Experiences (Barcelona, Spain) (ImmersiveMe’13). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 2934. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  115. [115] Ranasinghe Nimesha, Nguyen Thi Ngoc Tram, Liangkun Yan, Lin Lien-Ya, Tolley David, and Do Ellen Yi-Luen. 2017. Vocktail: A virtual cocktail for pairing digital taste, smell, and color sensations. In Proceedings of the 25th ACM International Conference on Multimedia (Mountain View, California, USA) (MM’17). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 11391147. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  116. [116] Raskar Ramesh. 2004. Projectors: Advanced graphics and vision techniques. In ACM SIGGRAPH 2004 Course Notes (Los Angeles, CA) (SIGGRAPH’04). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 23–es. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  117. [117] Regenbrecht H., Lum T., Kohler P., Ott C., Wagner M., Wilke W., and Mueller E.. 2004. Using augmented virtuality for remote collaboration. Presence 13, 3 (2004), 338354. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  118. [118] Regenbrecht H., Ott C., Wagner M., Lum T., Kohler P., Wilke W., and Mueller E.. 2003. An augmented virtuality approach to 3D videoconferencing. In The Second IEEE and ACM International Symposium on Mixed and Augmented Reality, 2003. Proceedings.290291. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  119. [119] Rekimoto Jun and Nagao Katashi. 1995. The world through the computer: Computer augmented interaction with real world environments. In Proceedings of the 8th Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface and Software Technology (Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA) (UIST’95). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 2936. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  120. [120] Rolland Jannick P., Holloway Richard L., and Fuchs Henry. 1995. Comparison of optical and video see-through, head-mounted displays. In Telemanipulator and Telepresence Technologies, Vol. 2351. SPIE, 293307.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  121. [121] Rolland Jannick P. and Hua Hong. 2005. Head-mounted display systems. Encyclopedia of Optical Engineering 2 (2005).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  122. [122] Romano Simone, Capece Nicola, Erra Ugo, Scanniello Giuseppe, and Lanza Michele. 2019. On the use of virtual reality in software visualization: The case of the city metaphor. Information and Software Technology 114 (2019), 92106. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  123. [123] Romat Hugo, Collins Christopher, Riche Nathalie Henry, Pahud Michel, Holz Christian, Riddle Adam, Buxton Bill, and Hinckley Ken. 2020. Tilt-responsive techniques for digital drawing boards. In Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology (Virtual Event, USA) (UIST’20). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 500515. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  124. [124] Sagayam K. Martin, Timothy Alex J., Ho Chiung Ching, Henesey Lawrence Edward, and Bestak Robert. 2020. Augmented reality-based solar system for e-magazine with 3-D audio effect. International Journal of Simulation and Process Modelling 15, 6 (2020), 524534. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  125. [125] Saimon Rianty, Ng Giap Weng, and Tanalol Siti Hasnah. 2022. Application of speech augmented reality for Sabah tourism industry. In Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Computational Science and Technology, Alfred Rayner and Lim Yuto (Eds.). Springer Singapore, Singapore, 7587.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  126. [126] Sakai Yusuke, Watanabe Toshimitsu, Ishiguro Yoshio, Nishino Takanori, and Takeda Kazuya. 2019. Effects on user perception of a’modified’ speed experience through in-vehicle virtual reality. In Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications: Adjunct Proceedings (Utrecht, Netherlands) (AutomotiveUI’19). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 166170. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  127. [127] Sand Antti, Remizova Vera, MacKenzie I. Scott, Spakov Oleg, Nieminen Katariina, Rakkolainen Ismo, Kylliäinen Anneli, Surakka Veikko, and Kuosmanen Julia. 2020. Tactile feedback on mid-air gestural interaction with a large fogscreen. In Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on Academic Mindtrek (Tampere, Finland) (AcademicMindtrek’20). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 161164. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  128. [128] Santi Gian Maria, Ceruti Alessandro, Liverani Alfredo, and Osti Francesco. 2021. Augmented reality in Industry 4.0 and future innovation programs. Technologies 9, 2 (2021), 33. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  129. [129] Saylany Anissa, Spadola Michael, Blue Rachel, Sharma Nikhil, Ozturk Ali K., and Yoon Jang Won. 2020. The use of a novel heads-up display (HUD) to view intra-operative x-rays during a one-level cervical arthroplasty. World Neurosurgery 138 (2020), 369373. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  130. [130] Schmalstieg Dieter and Hollerer Tobias. 2016. Augmented Reality: Principles and Practice. Addison-Wesley Professional.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  131. [131] Serafin Stefania, Geronazzo Michele, Erkut Cumhur, Nilsson Niels C., and Nordahl Rolf. 2018. Sonic interactions in virtual reality: State of the art, current challenges, and future directions. IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications 38, 2 (2018), 3143. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  132. [132] Simsarian Kristian T. and Åkesson Karl-Petter. 1997. Windows on the world: An example of augmented virtuality.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  133. [133] Spence Charles, Obrist Marianna, Velasco Carlos, and Ranasinghe Nimesha. 2017. Digitizing the chemical senses: Possibilities & pitfalls. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 107 (2017), 6274. Multisensory Human-Computer Interaction.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  134. [134] Sra Misha, Xu Xuhai, and Maes Pattie. 2018. BreathVR: Leveraging breathing as a directly controlled interface for virtual reality games. In Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Montreal QC, Canada) (CHI’18). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 112. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  135. [135] Stawicki Piotr, Gembler Felix, Chan Cheuk Yin, Benda Mihaly, Rezeika Aya, Saboor Abdul, Grichnik Roland, and Volosyak Ivan. 2018. SSVEP-based BCI in virtual reality - control of a vacuum cleaner robot. In 2018 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics (SMC). 534537. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  136. [136] Sun Zhongda, Zhu Minglu, Chen Zhaocong, Shan Xuechuan, and Lee Chengkuo. 2021. Haptic-feedback ring enabled human-machine interface (HMI) aiming at immersive virtual reality experience. In 2021 21st International Conference on Solid-State Sensors, Actuators and Microsystems (Transducers). 333336. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  137. [137] Sutherland Ivan E.. 1968. A head-mounted three dimensional display. In Proceedings of the December 9-11, 1968, Fall Joint Computer Conference, Part I (San Francisco, California) (AFIPS’68 (Fall, part I)). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 757764. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  138. [138] Suzuki Chie, Narumi Takuji, Tanikawa Tomohiro, and Hirose Michitaka. 2014. Affecting tumbler: Affecting our flavor perception with thermal feedback. In Proceedings of the 11th Conference on Advances in Computer Entertainment Technology (Funchal, Portugal) (ACE’14). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article 19, 10 pages. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  139. [139] Szajna Andrzej, Stryjski Roman, Woźniak Waldemar, Chamier-Gliszczyński Norbert, and Kostrzewski Mariusz. 2020. Assessment of augmented reality in manual wiring production process with use of mobile AR glasses. Sensors 20, 17 (2020). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  140. [140] Tang Zhiyong, Yang Jianbing, Pei Zhongcai, and Song Xiao. 2020. A novel intelligence-based pan-tilt platform system for measuring the trajectories of parachute. In 2020 15th IEEE Conference on Industrial Electronics and Applications (ICIEA). 16. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  141. [141] Toornman Greg. 2018. AGCO corporation’s vision: Building a globally digitised supply network. Journal of Supply Chain Management, Logistics and Procurement 1, 4 (2018), 368385.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  142. [142] Tseng Juin-Ling. 2021. Intelligent augmented reality system based on speech recognition. International Journal of Circuits, Systems and Signal Processing 15 (2021), 178186.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  143. [143] Ullah Hameed, Malik Fahad Mumtaz, Saeed Anjum, Akbar Zeeshan Ali, and Hussain Sajjad. 2019. Sampled-data control of pan-tilt platform using discrete-time high gain observer. In IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering, Vol. 707. IOP Publishing, 012005.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  144. [144] Dam Andries van. 1997. Post-WIMP user interfaces. Commun. ACM 40, 2 (Feb. 1997), 6367. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  145. [145] Erp Jan B. F. van, Kyung Ki-Uk, Kassner Sebastian, Carter Jim, Brewster Stephen, Weber Gerhard, and Andrew Ian. 2010. Setting the standards for haptic and tactile interactions: ISO’s work. In Haptics: Generating and Perceiving Tangible Sensations, Kappers Astrid M. L., Erp Jan B. F. van, Tiest Wouter M. Bergmann, and Helm Frans C. T. van der (Eds.). Springer Berlin, Berlin, 353358.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  146. [146] Vega Maria Torres, Mehmli Taha, Hooft Jeroen van der, Wauters Tim, and Turck Filip De. 2018. Enabling virtual reality for the tactile internet: Hurdles and opportunities. In 2018 14th International Conference on Network and Service Management (CNSM). 378383.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  147. [147] Wang Peng, Bai Xiaoliang, Billinghurst Mark, Zhang Shusheng, Wei Sili, Xu Guangyao, He Weiping, Zhang Xiangyu, and Zhang Jie. 2021. 3DGAM: Using 3D gesture and CAD models for training on mixed reality remote collaboration. Multimedia Tools and Applications 80, 20 (2021), 3105931084. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  148. [148] Wang Tzu-Yang, Sato Yuji, Otsuki Mai, Kuzuoka Hideaki, and Suzuki Yusuke. 2019. Effect of full body avatar in augmented reality remote collaboration. In 2019 IEEE Conference on Virtual Reality and 3D User Interfaces (VR). 12211222. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  149. [149] Wang Xiangyu and Dunston Phillip S.. 2008. User perspectives on mixed reality tabletop visualization for face-to-face collaborative design review. Automation in Construction 17, 4 (2008), 399412. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  150. [150] Wang Zenglei, Zhang Shusheng, and Bai Xiaoliang. 2021. A mixed reality platform for assembly assistance based on gaze interaction in industry. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology 116, 9 (2021), 31933205. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  151. [151] Wei Nancy J., Dougherty Bryn, Myers Aundria, and Badawy Sherif M.. 2018. Using Google Glass in surgical settings: Systematic review. JMIR mHealth and uHealth 6, 3 (2018), e9409. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  152. [152] Wolf Mario, Trentsios Pascalis, Kubatzki Niklas, Urbanietz Christoph, and Enzner Gerald. 2020. Implementing continuous-azimuth binaural sound in unity 3D. In 2020 IEEE Conference on Virtual Reality and 3D User Interfaces Abstracts and Workshops (VRW). 384389. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  153. [153] Xu Hongjin, Wang Lihui, Tabata Satoshi, Watanabe Yoshihiro, and Ishikawa Masatoshi. 2021. Extended depth-of-field projection method using a high-speed projector with a synchronized oscillating variable-focus lens. Appl. Opt. 60, 13 (May 2021), 39173924. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  154. [154] Xu Li Da, Xu Eric L., and Li Ling. 2018. Industry 4.0: State of the art and future trends. International Journal of Production Research 56, 8 (2018), 29412962. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  155. [155] Yanagida Yasuyuki. 2012. A survey of olfactory displays: Making and delivering scents. In SENSORS, 2012 IEEE. 14. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  156. [156] Yao Powen, Lympouridis Vangelis, and Zyda Michael. 2021. Virtual equipment system: Face mask and voodoo doll for user privacy and self-expression options in virtual reality. In 2021 IEEE Conference on Virtual Reality and 3D User Interfaces Abstracts and Workshops (VRW). 747748. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  157. [157] Zhang Guangtao and Hansen John Paulin. 2019. A virtual reality simulator for training gaze control of wheeled tele-robots. In 25th ACM Symposium on Virtual Reality Software and Technology (Parramatta, NSW, Australia) (VRST’19). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article 49, 2 pages. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  158. [158] Zheng Xianjun Sam, Foucault Cedric, Silva Patrik Matos da, Dasari Siddharth, Yang Tao, and Goose Stuart. 2015. Eye-wearable technology for machine maintenance: Effects of display position and hands-free operation. In Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Seoul, Republic of Korea) (CHI’15). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 21252134. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  159. [159] Zhipeng Mao, Jianfeng Wu, Jianqing Li, Lianjie Zhou, Xiaomin Li, and Yurong Yang. 2012. A thermal tactile display device with multiple heat sources. In 2012 International Conference on Industrial Control and Electronics Engineering. 192195. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Extended Reality (XR) Toward Building Immersive Solutions: The Key to Unlocking Industry 4.0

          Recommendations

          Comments

          Login options

          Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

          Sign in

          Full Access

          • Published in

            cover image ACM Computing Surveys
            ACM Computing Surveys  Volume 56, Issue 9
            October 2024
            980 pages
            ISSN:0360-0300
            EISSN:1557-7341
            DOI:10.1145/3613649
            Issue’s Table of Contents

            Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

            Publisher

            Association for Computing Machinery

            New York, NY, United States

            Publication History

            • Published: 25 April 2024
            • Online AM: 14 March 2024
            • Accepted: 7 March 2024
            • Revised: 30 December 2023
            • Received: 30 June 2022
            Published in csur Volume 56, Issue 9

            Check for updates

            Qualifiers

            • tutorial
          • Article Metrics

            • Downloads (Last 12 months)255
            • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)198

            Other Metrics

          PDF Format

          View or Download as a PDF file.

          PDF

          eReader

          View online with eReader.

          eReader

          Full Text

          View this article in Full Text.

          View Full Text