Toggle search
Toggle menu
5.1K
5.9K
229
48K
VR & AR Wiki
Toggle preferences menu
Toggle personal menu
Not logged in
Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits.

Visuo-haptic mixed reality

From VR & AR Wiki
More actions

Visuo-haptic mixed reality (VHMR) is a form of mixed reality in which a user can both see and touch virtual objects at the same location in space, usually while also seeing the real environment around them. In the definition given by Cosco, Garre, Bruno, Muzzupappa and Otaduy in 2013, it "consists of adding to a real scene the ability to see and touch virtual objects", which requires see-through display technology to mix real and virtual objects visually and haptic devices to add touch interaction with the virtual objects.[1] When the setting is described as augmented reality, the same arrangement is called visuo-haptic augmented reality (VHAR).[2]

The defining feature is co-location: the place where a virtual object is drawn and the place where its force or tactile feedback is felt coincide, as they do when a person handles a real object. Swapp, Pawar and Loscos described the use of visual markers to represent the haptic contact points as "a commonly-implemented compromise"; in that arrangement the hand works at a different place from where contact is shown.[3] Studies with force feedback mostly use a general-purpose stylus device, often a PHANToM from SensAble Technologies, combined with a half-silvered mirror display or a head-mounted display, and they depend on careful calibration and tracking so that graphics and forces line up precisely.[4][5][6] Applications described in the literature include medical training simulators, assembly planning, maintenance training and product design.[4][5]

Reviewed 6 October 2026. Bibliographic details of all cited papers checked against OpenAlex, CiNii and PubMed; claims checked against full texts (Sandor 2007 WHC and IEICE, HARP, Eck 2015/2016/MIAR, Swapp 2006, Aygun 2020, Fu 2011, IEEE Spectrum) or abstracts (others). About review dates.

Definition and terminology

A research group at Canon's Human Machine Perception Laboratory (Christian Sandor, Tsuyoshi Kuroki, Shinji Uchiyama and Hiroyuki Yamamoto) used the name in the title of a January 2007 IEICE technical report, "Exploring Visuo-Haptic Mixed Reality". Its abstract describes "systems that allow users to see and touch virtual objects in the same space" and says the authors refer to them as visuo-haptic mixed reality (VHMR) systems.[7] In a companion paper at the 2007 World Haptics Conference, the same group noted that the senses of touch and vision "do not operate in isolation, but are rather closely coupled", and that this observation had motivated systems letting users "see and touch virtual objects at the same location in space".[6]

Later papers use the augmented reality form of the name. Eck and Sandor's 2013 HARP framework paper states that when co-located haptic feedback is integrated into an AR environment, "we refer to it as Visuo-Haptic Augmented Reality".[2] Eck and colleagues define visual and haptic feedback as co-located "if users perceive their interaction as consistent in their visual and kinesthetic input channels".[8] In Swapp, Pawar and Loscos's 2006 study, the opposite case, "non-co-located haptics", is a setup where visual markers stand in for the haptic contact point while the hand works elsewhere.[3]

A related but narrower term is haptic augmented reality. Seokhee Jeon and Seungmoon Choi of POSTECH defined it in 2009 as a technology that "enables the user to feel a real environment augmented with synthetic haptic stimuli". Their paper reviewed and classified earlier haptic AR studies on a "composite visuo-haptic reality-virtuality continuum", which they extended from the conventional reality-virtuality continuum used for visual AR, and tested the idea by using virtual force feedback to change how stiff a real object feels.[9] In a 2024 analysis of haptic AR systems in the International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, Arpit Bhatia, Kasper Hornbaek and Hasti Seifi argued that the definition, use cases and value to end users of haptic AR "remain unclear", and that existing work focuses on technical implementation and lacks a user-centered perspective.[10]

How it works

A typical VHMR system combines four elements: a display that can place graphics in the user's real workspace, a haptic device whose contact point lies inside that workspace, tracking of the user's head and of the haptic tool, and calibration that ties all of their coordinate frames together.[5][2] The visual and haptic loops run at very different speeds. In the HARP framework, haptic rendering runs at 1,000 frames per second, while graphics are limited to the rate at which camera images are captured and processed, typically 30 frames per second.[2]

Displays

Display approach How graphics reach the haptic workspace Examples in the literature
Half-silvered mirror (semi-transparent mirror) Stereo graphics are shown through a semi-transparent mirror so that they appear inside the haptic workspace ImmersiveTouch, the Reachin Display and SenseGraphics systems, which Sandor et al. listed as half-mirror products in 2007;[6] the half-mirror fish tank VR setup of Fu et al. (2011)[11]
Video see-through head-mounted display Cameras on the headset capture the scene; graphics are composited into the video, which allows opaque virtual objects and masking of the user's hand Canon COASTAR HMD in Sandor et al. (2007), who cited the ETH Zurich system of Bianchi et al. (2006) as an earlier HMD example;[6] later ETH Zurich work by Harders and colleagues[12]
Optical see-through head-mounted display Graphics are added optically to the direct view of the world Magic Leap 1 in Aygun et al. (2020)[4]
Projection Images are projected onto physical surfaces or the user's body HaptoMapping (Miyatake et al., 2021)[13]
Mid-air image A micromirror array plate forms a floating image that the user touches HaptoFloater (Nagano et al., 2024)[14]

Sandor, Uchiyama and Yamamoto noted in 2007 that most visuo-haptic systems of the time used a half-mirror and argued for a video see-through HMD instead: it does not dim the user's view of the real world and the graphics, and it can draw fully opaque virtual objects and handle occlusion between the user's hands and virtual objects ("handmasking"), which a half-mirror can hardly do. The cost is that real scene, graphics and forces all have to be aligned very precisely.[6]

Haptic devices

Kinesthetic (force) feedback in VHMR most often comes from grounded stylus devices, where the user holds a pen or tool handle attached to a motorized arm. The arm reports the stylus position, so separate hand tracking is not needed, but the device is bulky and blocks part of the view.[4][5] The stylus is often dressed visually as a task-specific tool such as a dental drill, a paint brush or a prototyping tool, or it is hidden altogether.[5] Eck and colleagues distinguish two ways of integrating tools: a real tool rigidly mounted on the haptic device, or a virtual tool drawn over the device handle.[8]

Encountered-type haptic displays take another approach. Typically an industrial robot positions its end-effector at the location of a virtual object and waits for the user's hand or tool to meet it, so the user does not have to hold a device stylus at all times.[4] Aygun et al. note that bare-hand interaction is mostly limited to surface haptics with tactile stimuli.[4] The projection-based HaptoMapping system uses finger-worn and stylus devices that give vibrotactile sensations and an arm-mounted device that gives stroking sensations, while HaptoFloater uses a fingertip device.[13][14] Normand and colleagues compared vibrotactile contact feedback delivered at four positions on the hand during bare-hand manipulation in AR.[15]

Calibration and registration

Eck and colleagues describe precise co-location of the graphics and the haptic stylus as a key requirement.[5] When the Canon group compared readings from a PHANToM Desktop against a Vicon optical tracker, they measured absolute position errors of up to 20 mm and described the device's measurements as non-linearly distorted; their workaround applied the measured offset in every haptic rendering pass.[6] Common error sources include joint-angle sensor errors in the haptic arm, inaccurate device initialization, gimbal sensor errors that affect stylus orientation, and timing offsets between trackers.[5]

Several calibration methods have been published:

  • Milan Ikits, Charles Hansen and Christopher Johnson described a three-stage calibration and registration procedure for the Visual Haptic Workbench in 2003, reporting that it could improve static display accuracy "by at least an order of magnitude".[16]
  • Harders, Bianchi, Knoerlein and Szekely at ETH Zurich rigidly attached a tracking target to the stylus, measured it with an external tracker at 30 positions covering the workspace, and alternated between estimating the tracker-to-device transform and compensating joint-angle errors with Levenberg-Marquardt optimization.[5][12]
  • Eck, Pankratz, Sandor, Klinker and Laga extended that method in 2015 to also calibrate stylus orientation and to align sensor data in time by software. Against the previous state of the art, they reported reductions of up to 38 percent in remaining position error and up to 85 percent in remaining orientation error.[5]
  • In 2025, Kim, Yong and Kim proposed a neural network that estimates the pose of a haptic device's base from the HMD position, a hand-tracked fingertip position and the device's end-effector pose, without markers or external trackers. They reported a mean positional error of 2.718 mm and a mean rotation error of 0.5330 degrees.[17]

Visual integration of hand and device

In a see-through display, the haptic device and the user's hand are part of the scene, so the system has to decide what the user sees. Yokokohji, Hollis and Kanade used chroma keying to extract live video of the user's hand and blend it into the virtual scene.[18] Cosco et al. identified two problems with commodity haptic devices, visual obstruction and misalignment between the virtual tool and the real hand, and addressed them in four steps: color-based segmentation of the hand, tracking-based segmentation of the haptic device, repainting the background from image-based models, and compositing the hand without misalignment.[1] Aygun et al. had the user wear a Leap Motion Controller along with the headset for hand tracking, so that occlusions could be corrected when the user's hand was between the eyes and virtual objects.[4]

History

Early systems (1990s)

Louis Rosenberg's Virtual Fixtures project began in 1991 as part of his doctoral research at Stanford University. He pitched it to the Human Sensory Feedback Group of the US Air Force's Armstrong Laboratory, and it was developed partly at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base. The system combined a real task with computer-generated guides that could be felt. Users wore an upper-body exoskeleton and moved real metal pegs between holes on a pegboard; when the hand entered a region corresponding to a virtual surface, motors in the exoskeleton pushed back. In a 2022 account in IEEE Spectrum, Rosenberg wrote that VR experts look back on it as "the first interactive augmented-reality system that enabled users to engage simultaneously with real and virtual objects".[19] He published the virtual fixture concept at the 1993 IEEE Virtual Reality Annual International Symposium (VRAIS).[20]

At VRAIS 1996, Yasuyoshi Yokokohji, Ralph Hollis and Takeo Kanade of Carnegie Mellon University proposed the "WYSIWYF" ("what you see is what you feel") display. It used vision-based tracking and video keying so that the user's hand "encounters" the haptic device exactly when it touches a virtual object in the blended scene.[18] An expanded version in Presence (1999) framed the goal as visual and haptic sensations that are "both spatially and temporally consistent" for training visuomotor skills.[21] Aygun et al. later described this group as "one of the pioneer teams working on colocated visuo-haptic feedback".[4]

In 1998 Hunter Hoffman reported a "tactile augmentation" study in which participants physically picked up a virtual kitchen plate "possessing solidity and weight". Compared with a group that picked up the plate with a 3D wand, these participants predicted that other virtual objects in the scene would be more solid, heavier and more likely to obey gravity. Hoffman described the technique as a "mixed-reality force feedback technique".[22]

Research systems (2000s to present)

Year System or study Group Notes
2003 Visual Haptic Workbench calibration University of Utah (Ikits, Hansen, Johnson) Procedure for co-locating the visual and haptic workspaces of a PHANToM-based workbench[16]
2006 High-fidelity visuo-haptic interaction in multimodal AR ETH Zurich (Bianchi, Jung, Knoerlein, Szekely, Harders) Hybrid head-pose refinement and 3D landmark refinement for stable overlay; haptic feedback from real and virtual deformable objects; presented at ISMAR 2006[23]
2007 Visuo-haptic AR ping-pong ETH Zurich (Knoerlein, Szekely, Harders) Two-player game with a virtual ball in a real room; virtual bats co-located with haptic devices let players feel the ball's impact[24]
2007 HMD-based VHMR painting Canon Human Machine Perception Laboratory (Sandor, Kuroki, Uchiyama, Yamamoto) Users paint virtual teacups with a virtual brush overlaid on a PHANToM; "cross-reality color picking" samples colors from real objects[6][7]
2009 Open-surgery training prototype ETH Zurich (Harders et al.) Calibration, hybrid tracking and a distributed framework for low latency, applied to co-located interaction with real and virtual scene parts[12]
2009 Stiffness modulation POSTECH (Jeon, Choi) Virtual force feedback changes the perceived stiffness of a real object[9]
2013 Unobstructed tool-hand integration University of Calabria and Universidad Rey Juan Carlos (Cosco et al.) Removes the haptic device from the video image and composites the real hand with the virtual tool[1]
2013 HARP software framework University of South Australia (Eck, Sandor) Scene graph framework that loads X3D scenes and supports Python scripting; used in nine VHAR research projects[2]
2015 Position and orientation calibration University of South Australia, Technical University of Munich and Nara Institute of Science and Technology (Eck et al.) Evaluated with two PHANToMs, two optical trackers and a mechanical tracker[5]
2016 Neurosurgery planning interface Technical University of Munich, Murdoch University and Nara Institute of Science and Technology (Eck et al.) HMD and PHANToM Premium for stereotactic trajectory planning with haptic guides[25]
2020 Unbound handheld tools with an encountered-type display TOBB University of Economics and Technology, TED University and HAVELSAN (Aygun et al.) Magic Leap 1 headset, hexapod positioner and force/torque transducer; users hold real-life tools fitted with tracking markers[4]
2021 HaptoMapping Osaka University and University of Tsukuba (Miyatake et al.) Projection-based VHAR; control signals for wearable haptic devices hidden in the projected image[13]
2024 HaptoFloater University of Tsukuba and University of Tokyo (Nagano et al.) Mid-air image with imperceptible color vibration read by a photodiode on the fingertip device[14]
2025 Neural-network alignment Chonnam National University (Kim, Yong, Kim) Marker-free alignment of a haptic device to an HMD using hand tracking[17]

Perception and user performance

Marc Ernst and Martin Banks showed in a 2002 Nature study that people combine visual and haptic estimates of an object's height in a way close to a maximum-likelihood integrator. Vision dominates when its estimate is less variable than the haptic one, but haptics can shift the combined percept in other circumstances.[26]

Experimental results on co-location include:

  • Swapp, Pawar and Loscos (2006) tested six participants on accuracy, manipulation and juggling tasks with a PHANToM Desktop and CrystalEyes shutter glasses, crossing co-location with haptic feedback. They concluded that haptic feedback helps 3D interaction and that co-location is a significant factor for tasks that need accuracy and rapid motion.[3]
  • Sandor et al. (2007) had ten participants touch 50 haptically rendered balls as fast as possible. Lacking a physical half-mirror, they emulated one inside the HMD. Task completion was significantly faster in the HMD condition than in the emulated half-mirror condition; the authors pointed to the lack of head tracking, the low transparency of half-mirrors and poor visibility of the user's hand as possible reasons.[6]
  • Fu, Hershberger, Sano and Cavusoglu (2011) compared co-located and non-co-located performance in a 3D Fitts' task in a half-mirror setup with a Phantom Omni. End-point error was 1.5 times lower in the co-located condition, while throughput did not differ significantly.[11]
  • Barbieri, Bruno, Cosco and Muzzupappa (2014) studied device obtrusion and tool-hand misalignment in VHMR.[27] In Eck et al.'s summary, their participants performed better with improved co-location but did not perceive it as more natural.[8]
  • Eck et al. (2016) measured just-noticeable co-location errors in a peg-in-hole task and found users significantly more sensitive to errors with virtual tools than with real tools:[8]
Tool type Position error threshold Orientation error threshold
Real tool 3.56 +/- 1.90 mm 2.66 +/- 0.63 degrees
Virtual tool 1.36 +/- 1.42 mm 0.69 +/- 0.72 degrees

Latency between the visual and haptic channels matters as well. HaptoMapping's user studies found visual-haptic latency tolerances of 100, 159 and 500 ms for its finger-worn, stylus and arm-mounted devices respectively.[13] HaptoFloater measured a visual-haptic delay tolerance of 110.6 ms on a mid-air display and delivered tactile patterns in 59.5 ms.[14] Normand et al. (2024) found that, for bare-hand manipulation in AR, vibrotactile feedback placed close to the contact point improved perceived effectiveness, realism and usefulness, and that a visual rendering of the hand seemed less necessary to users when haptic hand rendering was present.[15]

Applications in VR and AR

Medical training and planning

Aygun et al. describe medicine as one of the most effective application areas of VHMR.[4] The ETH Zurich group aimed its systems at medical training, where calibration accuracy, stability and low latency are needed to avoid breaks in presence that could weaken the training outcome.[12] Sutherland and colleagues built a spinal needle insertion simulator that overlays an augmented reality cutaway of patient anatomy on a torso mannequin, with a MicronTracker2 optical tracker and a PHANToM supplying needle forces computed from a finite-element tissue model.[28] Eck et al.'s neurosurgery planning interface combined a custom HMD, an optical tracking system and a PHANToM Premium. After calibration, the remaining registration errors between haptic and visual stimuli were typically 1 to 2 mm. The interface rendered haptic guides such as plane constraints, rigid surfaces (for example the patient's head surface during entry point definition) and safe corridors around marked risk structures.[25]

Design, training and entertainment

Aygun et al. list maintenance training and product design as other notable application areas.[4] Canon's painting prototype let users paint on virtual objects placed in the real scene instead of using a computer screen as the canvas, and the authors reported around 1 mm precision for color selection from real objects.[6] The ETH ping-pong game showed a multi-user, collaborative entertainment use.[24] Aygun et al. described their unbound-tool concept with examples such as a scalpel in surgical simulation or a screwdriver in maintenance training; in their prototype, forces up to 12 N were rendered with accuracy and repeatability under 0.2 N, and visual-haptic synchronization error was just over 0.2 mm.[4]

Related techniques in virtual reality

In fully immersive virtual reality, a similar effect can be produced with passive physical props instead of actuated haptic devices. Haptic retargeting, presented at CHI 2016 by Azmandian, Hancock, Benko, Ofek and Wilson, lets one physical prop provide passive haptics for several virtual objects by manipulating the virtual world, the user's virtual body, or both, relying on the dominance of vision when the senses conflict.[29] Substitutional reality, described by Simeone, Velloso and Gellersen in 2015, pairs every physical object around the user with a virtual counterpart that may differ from it to some degree.[30] In these VR techniques the user sees only the rendered virtual environment, while touch comes from real physical objects.

See also

References

  1. ↑ 1.0 1.1 1.2 Francesco Cosco, Carlos Garre, Fabio Bruno, Maurizio Muzzupappa, Miguel A. Otaduy (2013-01). "Visuo-Haptic Mixed Reality with Unobstructed Tool-Hand Integration". IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 159-172. https://doi.org/10.1109/TVCG.2012.107. Retrieved 2026-10-06.
  2. ↑ 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 Ulrich Eck, Christian Sandor (2013-03). "HARP: A Framework for Visuo-Haptic Augmented Reality". 2013 IEEE Virtual Reality Conference (poster), pp. 145-146. doi:10.1109/VR.2013.6549404. https://xr-lab.org/publication/eck-ieeevr-13/eck-ieeevr-13.pdf. Retrieved 2026-10-06.
  3. ↑ 3.0 3.1 3.2 David Swapp, Vijay Pawar, Celine Loscos (2006). "Interaction with co-located haptic feedback in virtual reality". Virtual Reality, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 24-30. doi:10.1007/s10055-006-0027-5. https://ima.udg.edu/~closcos/Publications/HapticSymposium2006.pdf. Retrieved 2026-10-06.
  4. ↑ 4.00 4.01 4.02 4.03 4.04 4.05 4.06 4.07 4.08 4.09 4.10 4.11 Mehmet Murat Aygun, Yusuf Cagri Ogut, Hulusi Baysal, Yigit Tascioglu (2020-08-03). "Visuo-Haptic Mixed Reality Simulation Using Unbound Handheld Tools". Applied Sciences, vol. 10, no. 15, article 5344. https://doi.org/10.3390/app10155344. Retrieved 2026-10-06.
  5. ↑ 5.00 5.01 5.02 5.03 5.04 5.05 5.06 5.07 5.08 5.09 Ulrich Eck, Frieder Pankratz, Christian Sandor, Gudrun Klinker, Hamid Laga (2015-12). "Precise Haptic Device Co-Location for Visuo-Haptic Augmented Reality". IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, vol. 21, no. 12, pp. 1427-1441. doi:10.1109/TVCG.2015.2480087. https://xr-lab.org/publication/sandor-vcg-15/sandor-vcg-15.pdf. Retrieved 2026-10-06.
  6. ↑ 6.0 6.1 6.2 6.3 6.4 6.5 6.6 6.7 6.8 Christian Sandor, Shinji Uchiyama, Hiroyuki Yamamoto (2007-03). "Visuo-Haptic Systems: Half-Mirrors Considered Harmful". Second Joint EuroHaptics Conference and Symposium on Haptic Interfaces for Virtual Environment and Teleoperator Systems (WHC'07), pp. 292-297. doi:10.1109/WHC.2007.125. https://xr-lab.org/publication/sandor-2007-b/sandor-2007-b.pdf. Retrieved 2026-10-06.
  7. ↑ 7.0 7.1 Christian Sandor, Tsuyoshi Kuroki, Shinji Uchiyama, Hiroyuki Yamamoto (2007-01-19). "Exploring Visuo-Haptic Mixed Reality". IEICE Technical Report, vol. 106, no. 470 (PRMU2006-199), pp. 31-36. Institute of Electronics, Information and Communication Engineers. https://cir.nii.ac.jp/crid/1520853834024973952. Retrieved 2026-10-06.
  8. ↑ 8.0 8.1 8.2 8.3 Ulrich Eck, Liem Hoang, Christian Sandor, Goshiro Yamamoto, Takafumi Taketomi, Hirokazu Kato, Hamid Laga (2016-03). "Exploring the Perception of Co-Location Errors during Tool Interaction in Visuo-Haptic Augmented Reality". 2016 IEEE Virtual Reality Conference (poster), pp. 171-172. doi:10.1109/VR.2016.7504708. https://xr-lab.org/publication/eck-icvr-16/eck-icvr-16.pdf. Retrieved 2026-10-06.
  9. ↑ 9.0 9.1 Seokhee Jeon, Seungmoon Choi (2009-10). "Haptic Augmented Reality: Taxonomy and an Example of Stiffness Modulation". Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments, vol. 18, no. 5, pp. 387-408. MIT Press. https://doi.org/10.1162/pres.18.5.387. Retrieved 2026-10-06.
  10. ↑ Arpit Bhatia, Kasper Hornbaek, Hasti Seifi (2024). "Augmenting the feel of real objects: An analysis of haptic augmented reality". International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, vol. 185, article 103244. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2024.103244. Retrieved 2026-10-06.
  11. ↑ 11.0 11.1 Michael J. Fu, Andrew D. Hershberger, Kumiko Sano, M. Cenk Cavusoglu (2011-09). "Effect of Visuo-Haptic Co-location on 3D Fitts' Task Performance". 2011 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS), pp. 3460-3467. doi:10.1109/IROS.2011.6094707. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3915521/. Retrieved 2026-10-06.
  12. ↑ 12.0 12.1 12.2 12.3 Matthias Harders, Gerald Bianchi, Benjamin Knoerlein, Gabor Szekely (2009-01). "Calibration, Registration, and Synchronization for High Precision Augmented Reality Haptics". IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 138-149. https://doi.org/10.1109/TVCG.2008.63. Retrieved 2026-10-06.
  13. ↑ 13.0 13.1 13.2 13.3 Yamato Miyatake, Takefumi Hiraki, Daisuke Iwai, Kosuke Sato (2023-04). "HaptoMapping: Visuo-Haptic Augmented Reality by Embedding User-Imperceptible Tactile Display Control Signals in a Projected Image". IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, vol. 29, no. 4, pp. 2005-2019. https://doi.org/10.1109/TVCG.2021.3136214. Retrieved 2026-10-06.
  14. ↑ 14.0 14.1 14.2 14.3 Rina Nagano, Takahiro Kinoshita, Shingo Hattori, Yuichi Hiroi, Yuta Itoh, Takefumi Hiraki (2024). "HaptoFloater: Visuo-Haptic Augmented Reality by Embedding Imperceptible Color Vibration Signals for Tactile Display Control in a Mid-Air Image". IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, vol. 30, no. 11, pp. 7463-7472 (arXiv preprint 2408.06552). doi:10.1109/TVCG.2024.3456175. https://arxiv.org/abs/2408.06552. Retrieved 2026-10-06.
  15. ↑ 15.0 15.1 Erwan Normand, Claudio Pacchierotti, Eric Marchand, Maud Marchal (2024-04). "Visuo-Haptic Rendering of the Hand during 3D Manipulation in Augmented Reality". IEEE Transactions on Haptics, vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 277-291. https://doi.org/10.1109/TOH.2024.3358910. Retrieved 2026-10-06.
  16. ↑ 16.0 16.1 Milan Ikits, Charles D. Hansen, Christopher R. Johnson (2003-05-22). "A comprehensive calibration and registration procedure for the Visual Haptic Workbench". Proceedings of the Workshop on Virtual Environments 2003 (IPT/EGVE), pp. 247-254. https://doi.org/10.1145/769953.769982. Retrieved 2026-10-06.
  17. ↑ 17.0 17.1 Hyeonsu Kim, Hanbit Yong, Myeongjin Kim (2025-09-15). "Deep Neural Network-Based Alignment of Virtual Reality onto a Haptic Device for Visuo-Haptic Mixed Reality". Applied Sciences, vol. 15, no. 18, article 10071. https://doi.org/10.3390/app151810071. Retrieved 2026-10-06.
  18. ↑ 18.0 18.1 Yasuyoshi Yokokohji, Ralph L. Hollis, Takeo Kanade (1996). "What you can see is what you can feel - development of a visual/haptic interface to virtual environment". Proceedings of the IEEE 1996 Virtual Reality Annual International Symposium, pp. 46-53. https://doi.org/10.1109/VRAIS.1996.490509. Retrieved 2026-10-06.
  19. ↑ Louis Rosenberg (2022-04-07). "How a Parachute Accident Helped Jump-start Augmented Reality". IEEE Spectrum. https://spectrum.ieee.org/history-of-augmented-reality. Retrieved 2026-10-06.
  20. ↑ Louis B. Rosenberg (1993). "Virtual fixtures: Perceptual tools for telerobotic manipulation". Proceedings of IEEE Virtual Reality Annual International Symposium, pp. 76-82. https://doi.org/10.1109/VRAIS.1993.380795. Retrieved 2026-10-06.
  21. ↑ Yasuyoshi Yokokohji, Ralph L. Hollis, Takeo Kanade (1999-08). "WYSIWYF Display: A Visual/Haptic Interface to Virtual Environment". Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments, vol. 8, no. 4, pp. 412-434. MIT Press. https://doi.org/10.1162/105474699566314. Retrieved 2026-10-06.
  22. ↑ Hunter G. Hoffman (1998). "Physically touching virtual objects using tactile augmentation enhances the realism of virtual environments". Proceedings of the IEEE 1998 Virtual Reality Annual International Symposium, pp. 59-63. https://doi.org/10.1109/VRAIS.1998.658423. Retrieved 2026-10-06.
  23. ↑ Gerald Bianchi, Christoph Jung, Benjamin Knoerlein, Gabor Szekely, Matthias Harders (2006-10). "High-fidelity visuo-haptic interaction with virtual objects in multi-modal AR systems". 2006 IEEE/ACM International Symposium on Mixed and Augmented Reality (ISMAR), pp. 187-196. https://doi.org/10.1109/ISMAR.2006.297813. Retrieved 2026-10-06.
  24. ↑ 24.0 24.1 Benjamin Knoerlein, Gabor Szekely, Matthias Harders (2007-06-13). "Visuo-haptic collaborative augmented reality ping-pong". Proceedings of the International Conference on Advances in Computer Entertainment Technology (ACE 2007), pp. 91-94. https://doi.org/10.1145/1255047.1255065. Retrieved 2026-10-06.
  25. ↑ 25.0 25.1 Ulrich Eck, Philipp Stefan, Hamid Laga, Christian Sandor, Pascal Fallavollita, Nassir Navab (2016). "Exploring Visuo-Haptic Augmented Reality User Interfaces for Stereo-Tactic Neurosurgery Planning". Medical Imaging and Augmented Reality (MIAR 2016), Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pp. 208-220. Springer. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-43775-0_19. https://xr-lab.org/publication/eck-miar-16/eck-miar-16.pdf. Retrieved 2026-10-06.
  26. ↑ Marc O. Ernst, Martin S. Banks (2002-01-24). "Humans integrate visual and haptic information in a statistically optimal fashion". Nature, vol. 415, no. 6870, pp. 429-433. doi:10.1038/415429a. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11807554/. Retrieved 2026-10-06.
  27. ↑ Loris Barbieri, Fabio Bruno, Francesco Cosco, Maurizio Muzzupappa (2014-12). "Effects of device obtrusion and tool-hand misalignment on user performance and stiffness perception in visuo-haptic mixed reality". International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, vol. 72, no. 12, pp. 846-859. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2014.07.006. Retrieved 2026-10-06.
  28. ↑ Colin Sutherland, Keyvan Hashtrudi-Zaad, Rick Sellens, Purang Abolmaesumi, Parvin Mousavi (2013-11). "An Augmented Reality Haptic Training Simulator for Spinal Needle Procedures". IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering, vol. 60, no. 11, pp. 3009-3018. https://doi.org/10.1109/TBME.2012.2236091. Retrieved 2026-10-06.
  29. ↑ Mahdi Azmandian, Mark Hancock, Hrvoje Benko, Eyal Ofek, Andrew D. Wilson (2016-05). "Haptic Retargeting: Dynamic Repurposing of Passive Haptics for Enhanced Virtual Reality Experiences". Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 1968-1979. https://doi.org/10.1145/2858036.2858226. Retrieved 2026-10-06.
  30. ↑ Adalberto L. Simeone, Eduardo Velloso, Hans Gellersen (2015-04). "Substitutional Reality: Using the Physical Environment to Design Virtual Reality Experiences". Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI 2015), pp. 3307-3316. https://doi.org/10.1145/2702123.2702389. Retrieved 2026-10-06.
Retrieved from "https://vrarwiki.com/index.php?title=Visuo-haptic_mixed_reality&oldid=47485"