skip to main content
research-article

Improving the Perception of Mid-air Tactile Shapes with Spatio-temporally-modulated Tactile Pointers

Published:25 October 2023Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

Ultrasound mid-air haptic (UMH) devices can remotely render vibrotactile shapes on the skin of unequipped users, e.g., to draw haptic icons or render virtual object shapes. Spatio-temporal modulation (STM), the state-of-the-art UMH shape-rendering method, provides large freedom in shape design and produces the strongest possible stimuli for this technology. Yet, STM shapes are often reported to be blurry, complicating shape identification. Dynamic tactile pointers (DTP) were recently introduced as a technique to overcome this issue. By tracing a contour with an amplitude-modulated focal point, they significantly improve shape identification accuracy over STM, but at the cost of much lower stimulus intensity. Building upon this, we propose spatio-temporally-modulated Tactile Pointers (STP), a novel method for rendering clearer and sharper UMH shapes while at the same time producing strong vibrotactile sensations. We ran two human participant experiments, which show that STP shapes are perceived as significantly stronger than DTP shapes, while shape identification accuracy is significantly improved over STM and on par with that obtained with DTP. Our work has implications for effective shape rendering with UMH and provides insights that could inform future psychophysical investigation into vibrotactile shape perception in UMH.

REFERENCES

  1. Jr. Stanley J. Bolanowski, Gescheider George A., Verrillo Ronald T., and Checkosky Christin M.. 1988. Four channels mediate the mechanical aspects of touch. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 84, 5 (1988), 16801694.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  2. Brown Eddie, Large David R., Limerick Hannah, Frier William, and Burnett Gary. 2021. Validating the salience of haptic icons for automotive mid-air haptic gesture interfaces. In Contemporary Ergonomics & Human Factors 2022, 82.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Carter Tom, Seah Sue Ann, Long Benjamin, Drinkwater Bruce, and Subramanian Sriram. 2013. UltraHaptics: Multi-point mid-air haptic feedback for touch surfaces. In Proc. of the 26th ACM Symposium on User Interface Software & Technology. ACM, 505514.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Freeman Euan. 2022. Ultrasound haptic feedback for touchless user interfaces: Design patterns. In Ultrasound Mid-air Haptics for Touchless Interfaces. Springer, 7198.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. Frier William, Ablart Damien, Chilles Jamie, Long Benjamin, Giordano Marcello, Obrist Marianna, and Subramanian Sriram. 2018. Using spatiotemporal modulation to draw tactile patterns in mid-air. In Proc. of the Eurohaptics Conference. Springer, 270281.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. Frier William, Pittera Dario, Ablart Damien, Obrist Marianna, and Subramanian Sriram. 2019. Sampling strategy for ultrasonic mid-air haptics. In Proc. of the CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 111.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Georgiou Orestis, Frier William, Freeman Euan, Pacchierotti Claudio, and Hoshi Takayuki. 2022. Ultrasound Mid-air Haptics for Touchless Interfaces. Springer Cham. DOI:Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. Hajas Daniel, Pittera Dario, Nasce Antony, Georgiou Orestis, and Obrist Marianna. 2020. Mid-air haptic rendering of 2D geometric shapes with a dynamic tactile pointer. IEEE Transactions on Haptics 13 (2020), 806–817.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Hoshi Takayuki. 2012. Handwriting transmission system using noncontact tactile display. In Proc. of the IEEE Haptics Symposium.399401.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Howard Thomas, Gallagher Gerard, Lécuyer Anatole, Pacchierotti Claudio, and Marchal Maud. 2019. Investigating the recognition of local shapes using mid-air ultrasound haptics. In Proc. of the IEEE World Haptics Conference (WHC’19). IEEE, 503508.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. Howard Thomas, Marchal Maud, and Pacchierotti Claudio. 2022. Ultrasound mid-air tactile feedback for immersive virtual reality interaction. In Ultrasound Mid-air Haptics for Touchless Interfaces. Springer, 147183.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. Inoue Seki, Makino Yasutoshi, and Shinoda Hiroyuki. 2015. Active touch perception produced by airborne ultrasonic haptic hologram. In 2015 IEEE World Haptics Conference (WHC’15). IEEE, 362367.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  13. Ito Mitsuru, Wakuda Daisuke, Inoue Seki, Makino Yasutoshi, and Shinoda Hiroyuki. 2016. High spatial resolution midair tactile display using 70 kHz ultrasound. In Proc. of the Eurohaptics Conference. Springer, 5767.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Iwamoto Takayuki, Tatezono Mari, and Shinoda Hiroyuki. 2008. Non-contact method for producing tactile sensation using airborne ultrasound. In Proc. of the Eurohaptics Conference.504513.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. Jones Lynette A. and Tan Hong Z.. 2012. Application of psychophysical techniques to haptic research. IEEE Transactions on Haptics 6, 3 (2012), 268284.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Kappus Brian and Long Ben. 2018. Spatiotemporal modulation for mid-air haptic feedback from an ultrasonic phased array. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 143, 3 (2018), 18361836.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  17. Komandur Sashidharan, Johnson Peter W., Storch Richard L., and Yost Michael G.. 2009. Relation between index finger width and hand width anthropometric measures. In Proc. of the Annual International Conference on IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society.823826.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  18. Korres Georgios and Eid Mohamad. 2016. Haptogram: Ultrasonic point-cloud tactile stimulation. IEEE Access 4 (2016), 77587769.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  19. Long Benjamin, Seah Sue Ann, Carter Tom, and Subramanian Sriram. 2014. Rendering volumetric haptic shapes in mid-air using ultrasound. ACM Transactions on Graphics 33, 6 (2014), 110.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Martinez Jonatan, Harwood Adam, Limerick Hannah, Clark Rory, and Georgiou Orestis. 2019. Mid-air haptic algorithms for rendering 3D shapes. In 2019 IEEE International Symposium on Haptic, Audio and Visual Environments and Games (HAVE’19). IEEE, 16.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Mulot Lendy, Gicquel Guillaume, Zanini Quentin, Frier William, Marchal Maud, Pacchierotti Claudio, and Howard Thomas. 2021. DOLPHIN: A framework for the design and perceptual evaluation of ultrasound mid-air haptic stimuli. In Proc. of the ACM Symposium on Applied Perception. 110.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. Obrist Marianna, Seah Sue Ann, and Subramanian Sriram. 2013. Talking about tactile experiences. In Proc. of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 16591668.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. Peirce Jonathan, Gray Jeremy R., Simpson Sol, MacAskill Michael, Höchenberger Richard, Sogo Hiroyuki, Kastman Erik, and Lindeløv Jonas Kristoffer. 2019. PsychoPy2: Experiments in behavior made easy. Behavior Research Methods 51 (2019), 195203.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  24. Rakkolainen Ismo, Freeman Euan, Sand Antti, Raisamo Roope, and Brewster Stephen. 2020. A survey of mid-air ultrasound haptics and its applications. IEEE Transactions on Haptics 14 (2020), 2–19.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. Reardon Gregory, Dandu Bharat, Shao Yitian, and Visell Yon. 2023. Shear shock waves mediate haptic holography via focused ultrasound. Science Advances 9, 9 (2023), eadf2037.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  26. Romanus Ted, Frish Sam, Maksymenko Mykola, Frier William, Corenthy Loïc, and Georgiou Orestis. 2019. Mid-air haptic bio-holograms in mixed reality. In Proc. of the 2019 IEEE ISMAR-Adjunct. 348352.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. Rutten Isa, Frier William, Bogaert Lawrence Van den, and Geerts David. 2019. Invisible touch: How identifiable are mid-air haptic shapes? In ACM CHI: Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 16.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. Sun Chongyang, Nai Weizhi, and Sun Xiaoying. 2019. Tactile sensitivity in ultrasonic haptics: Do different parts of hand and different rendering methods have an impact on perceptual threshold? Virtual Reality & Intelligent Hardware 1, 3 (2019), 265275.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  29. Takahashi Ryoko, Hasegawa Keisuke, and Shinoda Hiroyuki. 2018. Lateral modulation of midair ultrasound focus for intensified vibrotactile stimuli. In Proc. of the Eurohaptics Conference.276288.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref

Index Terms

  1. Improving the Perception of Mid-air Tactile Shapes with Spatio-temporally-modulated Tactile Pointers

      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 Transactions on Applied Perception
        ACM Transactions on Applied Perception  Volume 20, Issue 4
        Special Issue on SAP 2023
        October 2023
        68 pages
        ISSN:1544-3558
        EISSN:1544-3965
        DOI:10.1145/3630022
        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 October 2023
        • Online AM: 29 July 2023
        • Accepted: 26 July 2023
        • Received: 27 June 2023
        Published in tap Volume 20, Issue 4

        Permissions

        Request permissions about this article.

        Request Permissions

        Check for updates

        Qualifiers

        • research-article
      • Article Metrics

        • Downloads (Last 12 months)298
        • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)52

        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