See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/287060269

Comparative research of AR and VR technology based on user experience

Article · October 2014

DOI: 10.1109/ICMSE.2014.6930456

CITATIONS READS

2 663

5 authors, including:

Xiao Li Yue Teng

The University of Hong Kong The University of Hong Kong
24 PUBLICATIONS   876 CITATIONS    15 PUBLICATIONS   340 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

National Key R&D Project: IoTs-enabled BIM Platform for Prefabrication Housing Production View project

A Social Network Analysis and NK-model based study of stakeholder relationship in mega construction projects View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Xiao Li on 29 September 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 2014 International Conference on Management Science & Engineering (21
August 17-19,2014
Comparative Research of AR and VR Technology
Based on User Experience
LI Xiao, XU Bo, TENG Yue,
School of Construction Management and Real Estate, Chongqing University, Chongqing 400030, P.R.China
Abstract: The research on Augmented Reality and
Virtual Reality technology is one of the most important
directions in current information technology field, these
two technologies have been applied in various fields,
such as education, medical treatment, construction,
military affairs, entertainment, and the research on
technical level is improving at the same time, while the
research on evaluation of these two technologies and
putting forward optimization program based on the user
experience is quite unwonted. This paper choose the real
estate exhibition as entry point, through comparative
experiments of AR and VR technology in real estate
display field, select corresponding evaluation index and
quantifY method, then make a comparative analysis
towards the evaluation consequences of VR and AR
technology, fmally construct a user experience evaluation
model of AR and VR technology.
Keywords: augmented reality, virtual reality, user
experience
1 Introduction
With the rapid development of computer science,
Human-computer interaction technology has been widely
used, besides which the VR and AR technology are part
of the important application directions. Virtual
Reality(VR)Pl refers that observers immerse straightly in
the three-dimensional world created by computer, rather
than using the traditional human machine interface or
windows, VR integrates the three-dimensional computer
graphics technology, sensing technology, artificial
intelligence technology and so on. Augmented Reality
(AR)l2l develops on the base of VR technology, it can
add as well as locate virtual object or information by the
use of computer graphics and display technology, then
"place" the virtual objects accurately into the real
environment by using the sensing technology, which can
fuse the virtual and real objects successfully through
some related equipment, so that achieving the
information integration of real world with virtual world,
bringing a kind of real-time interaction to observers. AR
Supported by the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central
Universities(106112013CDJSK030003) and the Fundamental
Research Funds for the Central Universities (CDJXSII031123)
- 1820 -
978-1-4799-5376-9/14/$31.00 102014 IEEE
th)
Helsinki, Finland
REN Yi-tian, HU Zhu-min
and VR technology are widely used in education,
medical treatment, construction, military affairs,
entertainment, etc. The information service is emerging
in large scale, and the application service of these two
technologies is quite diverse in different fields. In order
to win the target market and get the brand loyalty,
information service providers are supposed to ensure a
good user experience quality. This paper based on the
angel of user experience (UX), and make comparative
experiment research of the AR and VR technology
application in real estate exhibition field, choose some
evaluation index and quantitative methods. Finally this
paper make a comparative analysis on the evaluation
results of AR and VR, and build a user experience
evaluation model of two technologies in the Real Estate
exhibition field.
2 Literature review
The standard ISO 9241-210 and its supplementary
instruction[3l define the "user experience" that it means
all feelings of users before, during and after using a
product or a system, including the fields of emotion, faith,
fond, cognitive impression, physiological and
psychological reaction, behavior and achievement, etc.
The supplementary instruction also lists three factors
which influence the user experience: system, user and
using environment. Each factor concludes different
elements, such as system factor can be divided into two
directions (design feature and user define)l4l, it can also
be divided into three layers (service layer, application
layer and network layer). Each direction or layer can also
be divided into quantifiable or qualitative specific
elements[5l. User experience has time attribute, it
concludes the whole process from the expectation before
experience to the overall review after experience [6l. In
order to measure the effects of user experience, we need
to quantify its quality, there are three main ways of
quantifYing: "Two types of law"[7l , "Paired
Comparisons"[8l and the widely used method "Mean
Opinion Score"(MOS), which is recommended by
International Telecommunication Union(JTU)l9l. After
quantification, we can evaluate the result from the
subjective, objective or combination of subjective and
objective thinking, and evaluate the quality of user
experience basing on the statistics, psychology and
Artificial lntelligence[i01 .
� of project
Specific location of I
of project
Introduction of
There are two features of VR technology: on the surrounding
and surroundinK
H Surrounding traffic conditions I
one hand, it consists of a Interdisciplinary combination. environment
enviNonment H commercial and municipal facilities l
The research about VR technology on modeling, drawing, Y Natural and cultural environment I
human-computer interaction and some other aspects need
to synthesize the research result in mathematics, physics,
r-1 of sale office
Project scale and location of

electronics, cybernetics, computer science, psychology,

i �H (products,
Overall project plan (products"

I
-1
Introduction of
IntNOqUction of sand landsca e, community
landscape" communit facilities)
Artificial Intelligence and other different disciplines; On

I
table
Building materials, construction
the other hand, VR technology has a significant
applicability[ll]. On the field of real estate exhibition
-1 technolo aJ)d
teclmo)ogy and intebligent
intelli ent faciliti
facilities
e
' s

I
of property management
Standards of
field, we mainly use the desktop virtual reality system, and sales information
'!nd
its emphasis is solving the technical problems, such as
--i l
�--1
of apartment layout
Size of
the accuracy of virtual environment expressing, the
I
Introduction of
Introquction of
veracity of virtual environment perceiving information layout plan
pl,an
of apartment layout
Structure of J
synthesis, real-time display, collision detection and of apartment
Features of apartment layout J
navigation[i21. The most significant difference between
of delivery
Standards of I
VR and AR technology is the requirement on immersion,
r
Introduction of
TntrQduction of
and AR system emphasizes the existence of users in real sample house
of sample house
Size and structure of I
world. At the same time, AR technology requires more of design
Style of design I
on the registration accuracy, larger registration error Fig.l The
Fig.1 The process
process and
and content
content of
of user
user experience
experience
cannot let the users imagine the existence and integrity of in traditional
in real estate
traditional real estate display
display
virtual objects in real environment, while the AR
technology can ease the strict requirement on system One-dimensional Developers
calculating capability when establishing realistic virtual Project text information
t�x.t
Overview Project location
environment[i31. Currently, the research in AR and user Two-dimensional
experience mainly focus on the availability evaluation[i41, image, video Design Style
the human factor analysis in AR[151, the design and
evaluation method of AR[161. Meanwhile some scholars Automatic Roam
Outdoors
put forward the idea that AR can be applied in real estate Autonomy Roam
Roam
fully furnished room, by which we can promote the user Building, road, landscape, figure
Building,
experience [171. environment are vivid and true
In summary, there are quite a lot research on the Apartment layout automatic roam
'Apartment
system, key technology of VR and AR technology, the Indoors
Apartment layout autonomy roam
research on application level mainly focus on the fields Roam
of education and tourism, while the research of user Introduction of apartment layout
experience on these two technologies is less, especially Internet platform: Information exchange
the comparison research about the user experience of AR Users to
Sharing AR screenshot and video etc
and VR technology. And this is one of the most share
Virtual reality experience based on Web
important reasons that current application of VR and AR
technology is restricted in some fields. simultaneously, Fig.2 The process and content
there are quantity of elements which effect user of user experience based on VR
experience, while about how to divide the layers of these
elements, what is the relationship between these 4 Selection of quantitative methods and
elements and how to experience or evaluate the methods evaluation index
towards different products are quite worth exploring.
By the above comparing, we found that the real
3 The comparison on the process of UX estate display which is based on AR technology use the
real environment as carrier, and user replaces the sand
During the traditional real estate display phase, its table, layout plan, apartment layout model, decoration
content mainly concludes the area map, sand table, material and furniture with the virtual objects(words,
layout plan, apartment layout model, sample house, etc. pictures, video, audio, information model, etc) and place
Customers could only get the corresponding information them into the real environment; while the real estate
from oral descriptions of salesman, and only visiting display which is based on VR technology use the new
sample house could have user experience. virtual environment as carrier, just like experiencing
Compared with the process of traditional real estate houses and outdoors in game environment. Both of them
display, the experience process based on VR and AR own different user experience consequences, so this
technology is as follows (Fig.l ,Fig.2). paper will select a unified evaluation index and standard

- 1821 -
 Field Sales Stage Visiting Housing Sta
t-------� Visiting Sta2e-+------� Sharing Stage
�------------�� �------�--�--�

�-r�
Customer self­
self-
Picture Tracking Home plan designated Other

�-t� o.."!'l Customers choose family client customer

�-t-�
Marker Tracking Two-dimensional code (1)
(")
"~
obo ects and s Ie
ob'
Q S4.
a o· Customer view AR effect
Site
Instant Tracking Material object
Material o· ~ perso'1nel
Salors
~ 0 in the scene
'"" Customer self-
manage sale design
3 AR tracking mode preservation decoration
ment
effect
Customer autonomy Indoor Traditional
Traditional way
Housing ire syste
diversity
Select diversity SceneAR
displayAR settings
Demonstrate plentiful Escape Information
tTl tTl ""I
Panoramic Air communicate
guidelines
Multi-dimensional
Multi-dimensional (t)
""'i =
..0
__ ~ • ::s
-< "
() view
information
information Special quipment operation ~§ (3 g. Landscape roam I Network platform
platform
inter ration Positioning real-time ~ (1)
~ ::s ('D
8 ~ Transport facility

� ��
reviews Cutomers share AR
'" ;:;:; § a Environment
r - - - - - - - - - - - --'
IIl dimensional
dimensional texttext - Intergrated in the panel 1 Analyze of § 0.. 8:
(") en en
display picture, videos
, c.
o ~ en -0
_ Landscape
onstructio
construction Companies provide
12 drawingS
dimensional drawings
2 dimensional �+ � l
Home plan and renderings technology
technology
::s (t ~
S
en
0
>-+,
and lighting markers,information,news
simulate
3 dimensional modelmodel �L* 1
Water?roof
3D model achieved by AR Waterproof
heatmg
heating
real­
system real-
time field
field
rehearsal
Fig.3 The process and content of user experience based on AR

to compare these two technologies in real estate display subjective evaluation standard to measure the
field, now we would go from the combination of convenience and information receiving frequency of
objective and subjective angel, choose three dimensions these two systems. In the utility value evaluation, "i"
--technical function, utility value and aesthetic refers to each function in each process(Tab.2), "t" refers
sensibility[18] of popular VR and AR real estate display to the behavior of each function, and define the degree of
products in the current market.(Tab.1) experience that "i" brings as "Sti", so there is a
Tab.1 Evaluation Index mathematical formulas among "Sti", "Tti" and "Pti"[19]:
Evaluation index Index description Stl =
If= f (Pti . rtf); (I)
Widely welcomed, easy to And in technical functions evaluation, the function's
Common use operate utility value of three different usage conditions is quite
(CU) high rate of access to distinct, we can denote the overall functional user
information experience as UX in quantity, and denote the score of
Some users welcome, smooth functional experience degree as S(ti), then we can get:
Technical Uncommon operation, T.LJiX IE: (Stmi + Stud +Stpa); (2)
functions
=

use(UC) effective access to Additionally, the user experience of comprehensive

information evaluation product can be set up weight function
Personality groups welcome, "Wtcu","Wtuc" and "Wtpc" according to the three
Personal
common(PC) provide personality group aspects: common use(CU), uncommon use(UC) and
with information needed
personal common(PC), so UX can be expressed as :
Procedure (P) How many processes? Pti
llJiX = I};.;I(Wt"cu X St-cW + WtuC' x: Stud + W"tp' x:
Time (T) How long does it take? Tti
Utility value Information Stpo) (3)
Information receiving
receiving Aesthetic sensibility is evaluating the feelings after
situation Pti/Tti
frequency(P/T) user experience from the subjective layer, to evaluate by
Satisfaction (C) Subjective satisfaction score the means of questionnaire, including the overall
Subjective emotional satisfaction(C), aesthetic evaluation(F), the emotion
Aesthetic Emotion (E)
reactions score changes after usage(A), and denote the subjective
sensibility
Aesthetic experience degree as E, then we can get E=C+F+A.
Aesthetic response score
sensibility(A)
Theoretically E=UX, then we can construct an evaluation
It is a kind of evaluation towards experience process model from the combination of subject and object
by using the technical functions and utility value as experience degree later.

- 1822 -
 Tab.2 Function behavior of AR and VR real estate display system

AR real estate display system VR real estate display system

Process Function(i) Process Function (i)
Project introduction(words, pictures, video) Project Project introduction(words,
Project overview
Detailed information web links overview pictures, video)
Apartment overview Automatic roaming
Sales information
Model edit
Building
(decoration scheme, weather scheme, self-editing) Autonomous roaming
Display apartment outdoor
Characteristic introduction (zoom, rotation, move)
roaming
Screen shot/video
User sharing
Touch function(zoom, select, freeze, annotation) navigation
Set of decorative scheme selection Automatic roaming
Sample house
Independent fixed layout Autonomous roaming
customize
Screen shot/video/user sharing (zoom, rotation, move)
Fire protection system/special Apartment
Hidden project
equipment/construction technology roaming navigation
preview
/water heating system
Select different decorative
Surroundings display Outdoors landscape/traffic
scheme apartment

5 Experimental study

By selecting the evaluation index and quantify

method above, then we can through specific experiment
to quantify and compare the AR and VR real estate
display system, Specific implementation is as follows:
Firstly, get the finish time and process of each
function by the group experiment. This paper chose the
method of sampling in small-scale, and twenty-eight
people participated who were divided into two groups,
the age of them is range from twenty-nine to forty-six ,
having the intent of pursuing houses, and their cognition
degrees about AR and VR technology are ahnost the
same. The members of these two groups are all
experiencing the AR and VR real estate display by the
mobile equipment: ipad, meanwhile we set a better sales
environment to reduce the influence towards operation
process by the environment and other external factors.
And record the operation process and time of operators
by video. Then after each function has been achieved,
operators are required to answer the questionnaire about
satisfaction degree , emotion reaction and aesthetic
Fig.4 The real estate display operation process based on AR
reaction timely, so that we can record the operators'
By the objective , quantified observation and
subjective experience feelings during the whole process.
The operation processes are as figure 4 and figure 5. calculation data, we can get the conclusion that: the
The full mark of satisfaction degree is 100, the information receiving frequency of AR real estate display
emotion reaction is also divided into 100 degrees(very system is generally higher than VR real estate display
pleasant after usage is 100, very disappointed after usage system, and the average information receiving frequency
is 0), the aesthetic reaction is also divided into 100 of various functions in AR real estate display
degrees(feeling very concise after usage is 100, feeling system(CU, UC PC) is higher than that in VR real estate
very chaos after usage is 0); the weights of each function display system.
is defined by the fond degree of volunteers who From the research data in the subjective
participated in the experiment, the common functions are quantification table, we can see that the average
counted by 80%, uncommon functions are counted by satisfaction and emotion feeling in AR real estate display
15%,and the personal use functions are counted by 5%. system are generally higher than that in VR real estate
Finally we can get the statistical data as Tab.3-6 display system, while the aesthetic sensibility of AR real
estate display system is lower than YR.

- 1823 -
 265 ••• •••••••••••• •••••••••••• • •••••••••••• ••••••••••••• •••••••••••• •••• ••••••• •

260 ·· T' ,
1, T
"
············ ············ • ············ : ············ • ········, T
255 -- : ------------:: ------------ : ------------:: ------------ : ------------[, - - - -_ !: , -
---[T ----------:------------1---T ----:-------------f------------:
T
_. _

__ __

250 -- - --- _ -
2AS
j -----:------------t------ - (
---'------------'------------ --- -- .:

:: I ' 1 t': - : ' ----"'rl _

230

225
"'f

••
-
. . . - . . --.-- � - . .--- ----" '-- - . - . . -- - - :..... - - "

f
, o ,---. .- ' - -- o-,--

f
..�... �... . . .. . . ! . . ... . ... . . . '� . . ...... . ... � . .. . ... . .... �'
0.26 0_28 oJ o J2 0_34 0.36 0.38

Fig.7 The twice fitting curve of UC

.3",_ pl3

2.0 - - i - - -� - - - + - - - i- - - - i - -AA 3
,,
- -- -- -- - - -- -- - -- -- - -- - - -- - -- -- -- - --- --

. ,
. ,
. ,

24, I I , - - --- , - - - - - - --- - -

•
. .. . . - ---- - --. -- .. - .. - .. -.. - --- -- - --0 -- -- - - . -- --
I
- - .- .. .. ..
•
-
,
-- . .- .. -

· . .

� r l i t 1
· . ,
. .
240
· , ,
··- - · - · ·-··-·· ··-· ·-··-- -·-···-··- - - .. ·····-

,
-··-··'-' '·-

1 r � r
Fig.S The real estate display operation process based on VR ·
·
·
,
, ,
.
.
"
.
.
· . .
· , .
· . .
· . .
.
23.
· .

6 User experience degree evaluation model

I
-------- ------ . .--·--------- --------! ---

T
-- ---------- --------- -------

In
Tn order to make synthesized comparison of user 2 10 ··f .......... : . . . . . . .....;...........� .... ...... � . .. . .. . . . . �.......... .;.......... -� .•.
experience based on VR and AR systems much easier , .
.
.
. ,
.

022 024 026 028 03 032 0_].1 036

afterwards, we need to build a function
3tl = IY;,,:c
Stl = t(Pti.. Ttl) = B about AR and VR system to
IY=:Il t(Pti =
Fig.8 The twice fitting curve of PC
finally define the UX evaluation model of of these two
systems. Firstly, we choose AR system as an example to With the same method, we can get the following
functions:
(�)[531ro (�r - (~) (�) -471.9,1
build the Stc:ui
Stc:u.i..... Stud
St:u. d ..... St¥d
St� .. While building the
function, it finds the observation data fluctuate a lot, so Stud = l(J9~,m,
= l!l9�,��'h (~) [53S0 (~) ~ - 2482 - 471.91
this paper select the sample average data as standard
value to reduce the error, and balance all data by using
the logarithmic function of sample average. average. Log is a kind
Stpa:i'
Stpo;C -109() , Zi� (~)
- lfJtJo,z;~ (�)[74. ae(�r
174.aa -662.4(~)
(~r - 662.4 (�) -- 40.6J
4G.aJ
of
of common function to balance the data, and we Finally we can get the evaluation model of
of user
hypothesize the function relationship between experience of AR real estate display system:
experience of
degree, process and time as:
lagO:' a25"�[&�" b� = O.3iG9(r,;tlE(~) I- Louse + Oll4 (~t +
31;1 = lago:.;tl5"~[a~" ++b~ +
-
UXJ..l'I
31:1 = f]
+i:]
Then by using the data of fourteen
fourteen experiment 4472 (~) - 243.1 J+ ili1Sfu9O;~<i4(~) 15380 {~r

24132 (D - 47UZ] + o.O'5fugo:,z~ (0174.38 {0 -

groups we can get the function
function relationship after twice 6
fitting:
Stc::ui = i"o,gU:'ll<l5" (�) [-1.00510 + 004 (�a + 4472 wa.4 (0 - 40,S]
e1\1i; pt1
280 Similarly, we can get the evaluation model of
of user
•

-ARl

ofVR
experience of VR real estate display system:

UX Vffr =
[lXw 0.SlD-9(), (B (-(-1.268e
ZiZio (0
fJI.fUQ90,z;z;. (B2'Zi ++
1.268e ++ OU4 (0
(B -llfJI.1]
- 1.10.1] +
=

430 6 (f)
4306
fJI.15EQ90,~~4,(0
0.15lD-9(),n4> (B [-1.0~7e
[-1.037"e++ ou4(0~
OU4 (B� ++347"B
347S (0 (�) -108.1]
-108.1] ++
fJI.G5lQ90,z;~
0.05ED-9(), (BI(--989818
Zi� (0 (B� ++3293
1B. (0<i (B -10F,
329~ (0 .7"]
- 1 0�!' .7]

Fig.6 The twice fitting curve of CU

- 1824 -
 Tab.3 AR real estate display system objective quantification

Volunteer A B C D E F G H J K L M N Average
CU P1 84 89 96 78 82 87 74 73 76 85 80 65 75 94 81.29
Process UC P2 24 32 26 35 11 34 19 16 25 32 19 22 23 18 24.00
(times)P PC P3 10 20 12 4 18 17 8 6 14 1 9 13 18 13 11.64
Total 118 141 134 117 III 138 101 95 115 118 108 100 116 125 116.93
CU n 398 470 412 343 380 415 308 289 331 387 359 276 300 454 365.86
Time UC T2 69 98 85 121 42 89 51 63 70 97 53 68 87 49 74.43
(second)T PC T3 35 59 40 18 50 51 34 23 43 4 42 42 49 40 37.86
Total 502 627 537 482 472 555 393 375 444 488 454 386 436 543 478.14
pl/n 0.211 0.189 0.233 0.227 0.216 0.210 0.240 0.253 0.230 0.220 0.223 0.236 0.250 0.207 0.225
Informatio P2/T2 0.348 0.327 0.306 0.289 0.262 0.382 0.373 0.254 0.357 0.330 0.358 0.324 0.264 0.367 0.324
n receiving
frequency P3/T3 0.286 0.339 0.300 0.222 0.360 0.333 0.235 0.261 0.326 0.250 0.214 0.310 0.367 0.325 0.295
PIT 0.235 0.225 0.250 0.243 0.235 0.249 0.257 0.253 0.259 0.242 0.238 0.259 0.266 0.230 0.246

Tab.4 VR Real Estate Display System Objective Quantification

volunteer 0 P Q R S T U v w x y Z a b Average
CU PI 64 61 58 51 49 69 54 75 45 60 74 38 67 56 58.64
Process UC P2 18 15 12 9 20 5 19 17 14 31 7 10 24 8 14.93
(times)P PC P3 6 10 4 2 5 3 1 12 13 3 9 8 6 5.93
Total 88 86 74 61 71 79 76 93 71 104 84 57 99 70 79.50
CU T1 414 401 410 399 394 482 414 501 385 411 497 342 463 399 422.29

Time UC T2 63 70 54 46 79 31 70 60 55 100 29 48 81 41 59.07

(second)T PC T3 29 41 23 6 18 36 20 3 32 40 12 21 18 20 22.79
Total 506 512 487 451 491 549 504 564 472 551 538 411 562 460 504.14
P1IT1 0.155 0.152 0.141 0.128 0.124 0.143 0.130 0.150 0.117 0.146 0.149 0.111 0.145 0.140 0.138
Information P2/T2 0.286 0.214 0.222 0.196 0.253 0.161 0.271 0.283 0.255 0.310 0.241 0.208 0.296 0.195 0.242
receiving
frequency P3/T3 0.207 0.244 0.174 0.167 0.111 0.139 0.150 0.333 0.375 0.325 0.250 0.429 0.444 0.300 0.261
PIT 0.174 0.168 0.152 0.135 0.145 0.144 0.151 0.165 0.150 0.189 0.156 0.139 0.176 0.152 0.157

Tab.5 AR Real Estate Display System Subjective Quantification

Volunteer Weight A B C D E F G H I J K L M N
CU 80% 87 96 85 81 86 89 80 76 83 91 87 77 79 98
UC 15% 84 89 81 83 85 92 84 7894 86 85 82 80 78
Satisfaction
(C) PC 5% 83 90 84 76 79 90 85 86 90 78 88 87 83 89
Average
86.35 94.65 84.35 81.05 85.5 89.5 80.85 76.8 83.8 89.45 86.3 77.95 79.05 96.95
weight
CU 80% 91 93 88 87 88 84 82 81 82 93 86 79 82 96
UC 15% 84 79 74 74 75 90 87 81 83 83 86 80 78 91
Emotion
(F) PC 5% 90 86 76 75 81 82 75 74 78 81 79 74 87 83
Average
89.9 90.55 85.3 84.45 85.7 84.8 82.4 80.65 81.95 90.9 85.65 78.9 81.65 94.6
weight
CU 80% 78 69 62 71 78 80 72 70 79 86 76 74 69 91
UC 15% 75 70 69 68 64 79 83 76 76 72 78 69 67 80
Aesthetic
sensibility PC 5% 80 71 69 77 80 74 76 81 72 85 74 76 70 79
(A) Average
77.65 69.25 63.4 70.85 76 79.55 73.85 71.45 78.2 83.85 76.2 73.35 68.75 88.75
weight
L:Ecu 256 258 235 239 252 253 234 227 244 270 249 230 230 285
Experience L:Euc 243 238 224 225 224 261 254 235 245 240 246 229 223 265
degree (E) L:Epc 253 247 229 228 240 246 236 241 240 244 241 237 240 251
L:Ecfa 253.9 254.45233.05236.35 247.2 253.85237.1 228.9 243.95264.2248.15230.2 229.45280.3

- 1825 -
 Tab.6 VR Real Estate Display System Subjective Quantification

Volunteer Weight 0 P Q R S T U V W X Y Z a b
CU 80% 90 82 85 76 81 83 92 96 88 75 73 84 77 79
UC 15% 91 76 87 72 79 80 88 93 83 79 75 85 76 74
Satisfaction
(C) PC 5% 86 85 84 82 84 79 86 97 81 77 72 87 71 80
Average
89.95 81.25 85.25 75.7 80.85 82.35 91.1 95.6 86.9 75.7 73.25 84.3 76.55 78.3
weis:ht
CU 80% 74 69 80 78 62 70 81 67 71 76 83 66 85 79
UC 15% 75 66 71 80 58 64 78 63 65 71 78 64 79 73
Emotion
(F) PC 5% 79 76 78 81 65 77 86 70 72 79 84 70 80 76
Average
74.4 68.9 78.55 78.45 61.55 69.45 80.8 66.55 70.15 75.4 82.3 65.9 83.85 77.95
weight
CU 80% 84 81 79 86 75 89 93 77 87 72 90 80 88 83
UC 15% 80 83 80 83 77 85 88 79 89 62 85 72 89 87
Aesthetic
sensibility PC 5% 75 79 82 85 69 87 80 72 84 65 87 76 85 80
(A) Average
82.95 81.2 79.3 85.5 75 88.3 91.6 77.05 87.15 70.15 89.1 78.6 88 83.45
weight
l:Ecu 248 232 244 240 218 242 266 240 246 223 246 230 250 241
Experience l:Euc 246 225 238 235 214 229 254 235 237 212 238 221 244 234
degree (E) l:Epc 240 240 244 248 218 243 252 239 237 221 243 233 236 236
l:Ecfa 247.3 231.35 243.1 239.65 217.4 240.1 263.5 239.2 244.2 221.25 244.65 228.8 248.4 239.7

7 Conclusions References

Through the comparative research of AR and VR
real estate display system, we find that the differences on
realizing way fmally cause the differences on the
functions which can be achieved in these two systems,
and the distinct functions will affect the consequence of
utility. The achievement of various functions in AR
system is based on the real environment, so lots of its
functions need to cooperate with the people as well as
the objects in real environment, as for the subjective
feeling, AR is a quite open system; while on the contrary,
VR system needs to build a totally virtual environment,
then achieve the functions on the base of it. The paper
quantified the user experience from three factors------the
classification of system function, the information
receiving frequency and the subjective evaluation of
users after using a product, and got the observation data
by group experiment, then drew the conclusion that AR
system is superior to VR system generally. Meanwhile,
the paper also built the user experience model on the
base of observation value and the result of subjective
evaluation.
While, the building method of evaluation model and
the selection method of index weight are not perfect
enough, the selection of index weight in the paper is a
kind of subjective, and it is supposed to be amended by
using the coefficient of variation method; in addition,
because the relationship between user experience degree
and information receiving frequency is nonlinear, and the
samples of group experiment in the paper are all
small-scale, so the final function fitting later should use
the support vector machine(SVM)l20J to consummate.
[1]Sutherland I E. The ultimate display [J]. Multimedia:
From Wagner to Virtual Reality, 1965.
[2]Tomcaudell A. Rat boeing [EB/OL].
http://www.ipo.tue.nllhomepages/mrauterb/ presentations
/ HCI2history/tsld096. htm. 1990.
[3]DTS I S O. 9241-210: 2010. Ergonomics of human
system interaction-part 210: Human-centred design for
interactive systems [J]. International Standardization
Organization (ISO). Switzerland, 2009.
[4]Hassenzahl M, Tractinsky N. User experience: A
research agenda. Behavior & Information Technology,
2006, 25(2): 91-97.
[5]Volk M, Sterle J, Sedlar U, et al. An approach to
modeling and control of QOE in next generation
networks [next generation telco it architectures [J].
Communications Magazine, IEEE, 2010, 48(8): 126-135.
[6]Roto V, Law E L, Vermeeren A P, et al. User
experience white paper: Results from Dagstuhl seminar
on demarcating user experience [J]. 20 I O.
[7]Agboma F, Liotta A. QOE-aware QPS management
[C]// Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on
Advances in Mobile Computing and Multimedia. ACM,
2008: 111-116.
[8]Chen K T, Wu C C, Chang Y C, et al. A crowd
sourceable QOE evaluation framework for multimedia
content [C]// Proceedings of the 17th ACM international
conference on Multimedia. ACM, 2009: 491-500.
[9]International Telecommunication Union.
Telecommunication standardization sector methods for
subjective determination of transmission quality [M].
International Telecommunication Union, 1996.
[10]Lin Chuang, Hu Jie, Kong Xiangzhen. The review of

- 1826 -
 QOE model and evaluation method [J] Journal of
Computers, 2012, 35(1): 1-15.
[l1]Zhao Qinping. The review of VR technology [1].
Chinese Science: volume F: Information Science, 2009,
39(1): 2-46.(in Chinese)
[12]Yuan Xiao, Yuan Ying. The application of VR
technology in real estate display system [J].
Microcomputer Information, 2008, 3: 177-179. (in
Chinese)
[13]Wang Congo The differences and relations between
AR and VR technology [J]. Science Tchnology and
Standardization, 2013(5): 57-6\. (in Chinese)
[14]Kruijff E, Swan II J E, Feiner S. Perceptual issues in
augmented reality revisited[C]IIISMAR. 2010, 9: 3-12.
[15]Gabbard J L, J Edward Swan I I, Hix D. The effects
of text drawing styles, background textures, and natural
lighting on text legibility in outdoor augmented reality
[1]. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments,
2006, 15(1): 16-32.
[16]Bowman D A, Gabbard J L, Hix D. A survey of
usability evaluation m virtual environments:
- 1827 -
View publication stats
Classification and comparison of methods [1]. Presence:
Teleoperators and Virtual Environments, 2002, 11(4):
404-424.
[17]Wang Tingkwei, Hu Pan-hui, Wang Zhirnei. The
application research about fully furnished room system
on the base of BlM and AR technology [1]. Engineering
Management Journal, 2013, 27(4): 40-45. (in Chinese)
[18]Yin Zhibo, Yang Ying. Research methods of
quantifYing user experience [C]II The Paper Volume of
Fourth Harmonious Human-Computer Joint Academic
Conference, 2008. (in Chinese)
[19]Ham D H, Heo J, Fossick P, et al. Model-based
approaches to quantifying the usability of mobile phones
[M]II Human-Computer Interaction. Interaction
Platforms and Techniques. Springer Berlin Heidelberg,
2007: 288-297.
[20]Farrugia R A, Debono C J. A support vector machine
approach for detection and localization of transmission
errors within standard H. 263++ decoders [J].
Multimedia, IEEE Transactions on, 2009, 11(7):
1323-1330.