REVIEW 1 cited by
Predicting User Grasp Intentions in Virtual Reality
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
Predicting User Grasp Intentions in Virtual Reality
read the original abstract
Predicting user intentions in virtual reality (VR) is crucial for creating immersive experiences, particularly in tasks involving complex grasping motions where accurate haptic feedback is essential. In this work, we leverage time-series data from hand movements to evaluate both classification and regression approaches across 810 trials with varied object types, sizes, and manipulations. Our findings reveal that classification models struggle to generalize across users, leading to inconsistent performance. In contrast, regression-based approaches, particularly those using Long Short Term Memory (LSTM) networks, demonstrate more robust performance, with timing errors within 0.25 seconds and distance errors around 5-20 cm in the critical two-second window before a grasp. Despite these improvements, predicting precise hand postures remains challenging. Through a comprehensive analysis of user variability and model interpretability, we explore why certain models fail and how regression models better accommodate the dynamic and complex nature of user behavior in VR. Our results underscore the potential of machine learning models to enhance VR interactions, particularly through adaptive haptic feedback, and lay the groundwork for future advancements in real-time prediction of user actions in VR.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
Cognitive State Inference from VR Motion via Motion Foundation Model
VR head and hand motion data can be adapted to motion foundation models to classify cognitive states like confusion and hesitation at 82% accuracy with better cross-user generalization than baseline models on a new 24...
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.