arxiv: 2604.03730 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-04 · 💻 cs.RO

A Multi-View 3D Telepresence System for XR Robot Teleoperation

Enes Ulas Dincer , Manuel Zaremski , Alexandra Nick , Elias Wucher , Barbara Deml , Gerhard Neumann This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-13 17:21 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 💻 cs.RO

keywords robot teleoperationVR telepresencepoint cloud renderingmulti-view 3DXR interfacesuser studymanipulation tasksdepth cues

0 comments

The pith

A hybrid multi-view point cloud and wrist RGB system outperforms RGB streams in XR robot teleoperation

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper develops a VR-based telepresence system for controlling robots that combines 3D point clouds generated from three camera views with a high-resolution RGB feed from a wrist-mounted camera. This setup runs on standalone VR hardware like the Meta Quest 3 and aims to deliver better depth perception than standard 2D displays or single-view methods. In a study involving 31 participants performing three manipulation tasks, the hybrid system delivered the highest success rates, fastest completion times, and best usability scores compared to RGB-only streams, point clouds alone, and a stereo projection method called OpenTeleVision.

Core claim

The system fuses geometry from three cameras to produce GPU-accelerated point-cloud rendering on standalone VR hardware while integrating a wrist-mounted RGB stream for high-resolution local detail. This combination supports real-time rendering of approximately 75k points and, in a within-subject study with 31 participants across three teleoperated manipulation tasks, achieved the best overall performance in task success, completion time, perceived workload, and usability, with the point cloud modality without RGB also outperforming the RGB streams and OpenTeleVision.

What carries the argument

The multi-view fusion pipeline that renders GPU-accelerated point clouds from three cameras on VR hardware and supplements them with wrist-mounted RGB for localized detail.

If this is right

Real-time rendering of around 75,000 points is achievable on standalone VR devices such as the Meta Quest 3.
Point cloud visualizations without additional RGB information already provide better performance than traditional RGB streams or stereo projections.
Combining global 3D structure with localized high-resolution detail improves telepresence for manipulation tasks.
This approach offers a strong foundation for developing next-generation robot teleoperation systems in applications like remote maintenance and search and rescue.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

Operators in hazardous environments could achieve more precise control with reduced training time using such 3D interfaces.
Data collected through this teleoperation method might improve robot learning algorithms by providing richer demonstration examples.
Challenges like maintaining accurate calibration across cameras in varying conditions may limit deployment in unstructured settings.
Integrating eye-tracking or haptic feedback could further enhance the system's intuitiveness.

Load-bearing premise

That the fused point clouds from three cameras will deliver reliable and accurate depth information on VR hardware without introducing noticeable latency or errors in typical manipulation settings.

What would settle it

Observing no significant improvement or even decreased performance in task success rates and increased workload when using the hybrid system compared to simpler RGB streams in a replication study with different tasks or hardware.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.03730 by Alexandra Nick, Barbara Deml, Elias Wucher, Enes Ulas Dincer, Gerhard Neumann, Manuel Zaremski.

**Figure 2.** Figure 2: Visualization modalities evaluated in our VR teleoperation study, illustrated here for the cup–insertion task. From left to right: (a) RGBs: four virtual [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** Figure 3: An overview of the study procedure, highlighting the elements [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: Cup Insertion. This task involves two sequential insertions while avoiding nearby obstacles (Figure 4a). The scene contains four plastic cups (red, yellow, blue, orange) and two box-shaped obstacles (cereal and sugar boxes). At the start of each trial, the red and yellow cups start in a designated [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_4.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: The three manipulation tasks used in the study, shown as start [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: summarizes the NASA–TLX ratings for all six workload dimensions across the four visualization conditions (RGBs, PC, PC+RGB, OT). Overall, the distributions show condition-dependent variation in mental, physical, and temporal demands, as well as in performance expectations, effort, and frustration. Descriptively RGBs generally elicited higher mental and temporal demand, whereas PC and PC+RGB tended to prod… view at source ↗

**Figure 7.** Figure 7: Participants’ subjective preference rankings for the four visualization [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_7.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 6.** Figure 6: Boxplots of VR usability ratings (effectiveness, efficiency, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_6.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 8.** Figure 8: Task-wise performance across visualization conditions (RGBs, PC, PC+RGB, OT). Left: mean completion time for each task. Right: success rate [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_8.png] view at source ↗

read the original abstract

Robot teleoperation is critical for applications such as remote maintenance, fleet robotics, search and rescue, and data collection for robot learning. Effective teleoperation requires intuitive 3D visualization with reliable depth cues, which conventional screen-based interfaces often fail to provide. We introduce a multi-view VR telepresence system that (1) fuses geometry from three cameras to produce GPU-accelerated point-cloud rendering on standalone VR hardware, and (2) integrates a wrist-mounted RGB stream to provide high-resolution local detail where point-cloud accuracy is limited. Our pipeline supports real-time rendering of approximately 75k points on the Meta Quest 3. A within-subject study was conducted with 31 participants to compare our system to other visualisation modalities, such as RGB streams, a projection of stereo-vision directly in the VR device and point clouds without providing additional RGB information. Across three different teleoperated manipulation tasks, we measured task success, completion time, perceived workload, and usability. Our system achieved the best overall performance, while the Point Cloud modality without RGB also outperforming the RGB streams and OpenTeleVision. These results show that combining global 3D structure with localized high-resolution detail substantially improves telepresence for manipulation and provides a strong foundation for next-generation robot teleoperation systems.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

The paper shows a workable multi-view point cloud VR system for robot teleoperation on standalone headsets plus a user study, but the performance rankings rest on unshown statistics.

read the letter

The core advance is a pipeline that fuses geometry from three cameras into GPU-accelerated point clouds rendered at roughly 75k points on the Meta Quest 3, then layers in a wrist-mounted RGB stream for local detail where the clouds fall short. They ran a within-subject study with 31 participants on three manipulation tasks and report that the combined system came out ahead on success, time, workload, and usability, with plain point clouds also beating the RGB-only and OpenTeleVision baselines. That combination is a reasonable engineering response to the depth-versus-detail trade-off in teleoperation for maintenance or rescue work. The metrics chosen line up with what matters for real use, and running everything on standalone hardware removes a practical barrier. The soft spot is the missing statistical support for the ranking. The abstract gives the order of results but no p-values, effect sizes, confidence intervals, or mention of how order effects or multiple comparisons were handled. With 31 participants and several conditions, the differences could easily be non-significant or driven by sequence, so the claim that the system achieved the best overall performance is only moderately grounded until the full analysis appears. No other load-bearing problems show up in the description. This is aimed at people building or evaluating XR interfaces for robot manipulation. A reader who needs concrete pipeline details or a template for a visualization comparison study would find it useful. It should go to peer review because the system is described at a level that could be reproduced and the study provides a baseline evaluation, provided the stats are added and checked.

Referee Report

1 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript introduces a multi-view VR telepresence system for XR robot teleoperation that fuses geometry from three cameras into GPU-accelerated point clouds (approximately 75k points) rendered on standalone hardware such as the Meta Quest 3, augmented by a wrist-mounted RGB stream for high-resolution local detail. It reports a within-subject user study with 31 participants comparing the system to RGB streams, stereo-vision projection (OpenTeleVision), and point clouds without RGB across three manipulation tasks, measuring task success, completion time, NASA-TLX workload, and SUS usability, with the claim that the proposed system achieved the best overall performance.

Significance. If the empirical claims hold after statistical validation, the work demonstrates a practical advance in providing reliable depth cues and detail for teleoperation on consumer VR devices, with potential applications in remote maintenance, search and rescue, and data collection for robot learning. The GPU-accelerated multi-view fusion pipeline is a concrete engineering contribution, but the current absence of statistical support limits the strength of the performance conclusions.

major comments (1)

[Abstract and Results section] Abstract and Results section: The central claim that the proposed system 'achieved the best overall performance' while the 'Point Cloud modality without RGB also outperforming the RGB streams and OpenTeleVision' is unsupported by any reported statistical tests (ANOVA, Friedman, or equivalent), p-values, effect sizes, confidence intervals, or handling of order effects for the metrics of success rate, completion time, NASA-TLX, or SUS. With only 31 participants and multiple conditions in a within-subject design, the observed rankings cannot be taken as evidence of superiority without these details; this directly undermines the primary performance assertion.

minor comments (2)

[Methods section] Methods section: Expand on camera calibration procedures, latency measurements for the three-camera fusion on standalone VR, task definitions, and error-handling protocols to allow replication and assessment of potential confounds.
[Figures and tables] Figures and tables: Add error bars, statistical annotations, and clear labels distinguishing the four modalities (proposed system, point cloud only, RGB streams, OpenTeleVision) in all result visualizations.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive feedback on the need for statistical support. We agree this is essential and will revise the manuscript to include the required analyses.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: [Abstract and Results section] Abstract and Results section: The central claim that the proposed system 'achieved the best overall performance' while the 'Point Cloud modality without RGB also outperforming the RGB streams and OpenTeleVision' is unsupported by any reported statistical tests (ANOVA, Friedman, or equivalent), p-values, effect sizes, confidence intervals, or handling of order effects for the metrics of success rate, completion time, NASA-TLX, or SUS. With only 31 participants and multiple conditions in a within-subject design, the observed rankings cannot be taken as evidence of superiority without these details; this directly undermines the primary performance assertion.

Authors: We agree that the performance claims require statistical backing. The current manuscript reports only descriptive rankings without inferential tests. In revision we will add repeated-measures ANOVA or Friedman tests (as appropriate for each metric), p-values, effect sizes, and 95% confidence intervals. We will also report the counterbalancing scheme used for condition order and any checks for order effects. These additions will appear in the Results section; the Abstract will be updated to reflect only statistically supported statements. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: empirical user study with no derivation chain

full rationale

The paper describes a multi-view VR telepresence pipeline and reports measured outcomes from a 31-participant within-subject study on three manipulation tasks. No equations, first-principles derivations, fitted parameters, or predictions appear in the abstract or described content. Performance claims rest directly on observed task success, completion time, NASA-TLX, and SUS scores rather than any reduction to self-defined inputs or self-citations. The work is therefore self-contained against external benchmarks with no load-bearing steps that collapse by construction.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The system depends on standard domain assumptions about camera geometry and VR rendering performance rather than new fitted parameters or invented entities.

axioms (2)

domain assumption Three cameras provide sufficient overlapping geometry for accurate real-time point cloud fusion in typical manipulation scenes.
Invoked to justify the GPU-accelerated rendering pipeline.
domain assumption Standalone VR hardware can sustain real-time rendering of approximately 75k points with acceptable latency.
Required for the claimed practical deployment on devices like the Meta Quest 3.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5540 in / 1369 out tokens · 59820 ms · 2026-05-13T17:21:41.225401+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

41 extracted references · 41 canonical work pages

[1]

Connecting human-robot interaction and data visualization,

D. Szafir and D. A. Szafir, “Connecting human-robot interaction and data visualization,” inProceedings of the 2021 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction, ser. HRI ’21. New York, NY , USA: Association for Computing Machinery, 2021, p. 281–292. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1145/3434073.3444683

work page doi:10.1145/3434073.3444683 2021
[2]

The cyber-physical control room: A mixed reality interface for mobile robot teleoperation and human-robot teaming,

N. Walker, A. T. Stull, and A. Steinfeld, “The cyber-physical control room: A mixed reality interface for mobile robot teleoperation and human-robot teaming,” inACM/IEEE International Conference on Human–Robot Interaction (HRI), 2024. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1145/3610977.3634981

work page doi:10.1145/3610977.3634981 2024
[3]

Teleoperation of humanoid robots: A survey,

K. Darvish, L. Penco, J. Ramos, R. Cisneros, J. Pratt, E. Yoshida, S. Ivaldi, and D. Pucci, “Teleoperation of humanoid robots: A survey,” IEEE Transactions on Robotics, vol. 39, no. 3, p. 1706–1727, Jun

work page
[4]

Available: https://doi.org/10.1109/TRO.2023.3236952

[Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1109/TRO.2023.3236952

work page doi:10.1109/tro.2023.3236952 2023
[5]

Baxter’s homunculus: Virtual reality spaces for teleoperation in manufacturing,

J. I. Lipton, A. J. Fay, and D. Rus, “Baxter’s homunculus: Virtual reality spaces for teleoperation in manufacturing,”IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 179–186, 2018. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1109/LRA.2017.2737046

work page doi:10.1109/lra.2017.2737046 2018
[6]

Ros reality: A virtual reality framework using consumer-grade hardware for ros-enabled robots,

D. Whitney, E. Rosen, D. Ullman, E. Phillips, and S. Tellex, “Ros reality: A virtual reality framework using consumer-grade hardware for ros-enabled robots,” inProc. IEEE/RSJ Intl. Conf. on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS), 2018, pp. 1–9. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1109/IROS.2018.8593513

work page doi:10.1109/iros.2018.8593513 2018
[7]

Reality fusion: Robust real-time immersive mobile robot teleoperation with volumetric visual data fusion,

K. Li, R. Bacher, S. Schmidt, W. Leemans, and F. Steinicke, “Reality fusion: Robust real-time immersive mobile robot teleoperation with volumetric visual data fusion,” in2024 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS), 2024, pp. 8982–8989. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1109/IROS58592. 2024.10802431

work page doi:10.1109/iros58592 2024
[8]

Open-television: Teleoperation with immersive active visual feedback.arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.01512, 2024

X. Cheng, J. Li, S. Yang, G. Yang, and X. Wang, “Open-television: Teleoperation with immersive active visual feedback,” 2024. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2407.01512

work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2407.01512 2024
[9]

Monoscopic vs. stereoscopic views and display types in the teleoperation of unmanned ground vehicles for object avoidance,

Y . Luo, J. Wang, H.-N. Liang, S. Luo, and E. G. Lim, “Monoscopic vs. stereoscopic views and display types in the teleoperation of unmanned ground vehicles for object avoidance,” in2021 30th IEEE International Conference on Robot & Human Interactive Communication (RO-MAN), 2021, pp. 418–425. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1109/RO-MAN50785.2021.9515455

work page doi:10.1109/ro-man50785.2021.9515455 2021
[10]

Iris: An immersive robot interaction system,

X. Jiang, Q. Yuan, E. U. Dincer, H. Zhou, G. Li, X. Li, X. Jia, T. Schnizer, N. Schreiber, W. Liao, J. Haag, K. Li, G. Neumann, and R. Lioutikov, “Iris: An immersive robot interaction system,” inProceedings of The 9th Conference on Robot Learning, vol. 305, 2025, pp. 2555–2582. [Online]. Available: https://proceedings.mlr.press/v305/jiang25c.html

work page 2025
[11]

Xrobotoolkit: A cross-platform framework for robot teleoperation,

Z. Zhao, L. Yu, K. Jing, and N. Yang, “Xrobotoolkit: A cross-platform framework for robot teleoperation,” 2025. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2508.00097

work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2508.00097 2025
[12]

3d- point-cloud registration and real-world dynamic modelling-based virtual environment building method for teleoperation,

D. Ni, A. Song, X. Xu, H. Li, C. Zhu, and H. Zeng, “3d- point-cloud registration and real-world dynamic modelling-based virtual environment building method for teleoperation,”Robotica, vol. 35, no. 10, p. 1958–1974, 2017. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0263574716000631

work page doi:10.1017/s0263574716000631 1958
[13]

Study of visualization modalities on industrial robot teleoperation for inspection in a virtual co-existence space,

D. Mazeas and B. Namoano, “Study of visualization modalities on industrial robot teleoperation for inspection in a virtual co-existence space,” inVirtual Worlds, vol. 4, no. 2, 2025. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.3390/virtualworlds4020017

work page doi:10.3390/virtualworlds4020017 2025
[14]

Open teach: A versatile teleoperation system for robotic manipulation,

A. Iyer, Z. Peng, Y . Dai, I. Guzey, S. Haldar, S. Chintala, and L. Pinto, “Open teach: A versatile teleoperation system for robotic manipulation,” 2024, arXiv:2403.07870. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/2403.07870

work page arXiv 2024
[15]

Arviz: An augmented reality-enabled visualization platform for ros applications,

K. C. Hoang, W. P. Chan, S. Lay, A. Cosgun, and E. A. Croft, “Arviz: An augmented reality-enabled visualization platform for ros applications,”IEEE Robotics & Automation Magazine, vol. 29, no. 1, pp. 58–67, 2022. [Online]. Available: https: //doi.org/10.1109/MRA.2021.3135760

work page doi:10.1109/mra.2021.3135760 2022
[16]

iviz: A ros visualization app for mobile devices,

A. Zea and U. D. Hanebeck, “iviz: A ros visualization app for mobile devices,”Software Impacts, vol. 8, p. 100057, 2021. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.simpa.2021.100057

work page doi:10.1016/j.simpa.2021.100057 2021
[17]

A practical roadmap to learning from demonstration for robotic manipulators in manufacturing,

A. Barekatain, H. Habibi, and H. V oos, “A practical roadmap to learning from demonstration for robotic manipulators in manufacturing,”Robotics, vol. 13, no. 7, p. 100, 2024. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.3390/robotics13070100

work page doi:10.3390/robotics13070100 2024
[18]

Adaptix - a transitional xr framework for development and evaluation of shared control applications in assistive robotics,

M. Pascher, F. F. Goldau, K. Kronhardt, U. Frese, and J. Gerken, “Adaptix - a transitional xr framework for development and evaluation of shared control applications in assistive robotics,”Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, vol. 8, no. EICS, pp. 1–28,

work page
[19]

Available: https://doi.org/10.1145/3660243

[Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1145/3660243

work page doi:10.1145/3660243
[20]

Levr: A modular vr teleoperation framework for imitation learning in dexterous manipulation,

Z. K. Weng, M. L. Elwin, and H. Liu, “Levr: A modular vr teleoperation framework for imitation learning in dexterous manipulation,” 2025. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2509.14349

work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2509.14349 2025
[21]

Openvr: Teleoperation for manipulation,

A. George, A. Bartsch, and A. Barati Farimani, “Openvr: Teleoperation for manipulation,”SoftwareX, vol. 29, p. 102054, 2025. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.softx.2025.102054

work page doi:10.1016/j.softx.2025.102054 2025
[22]

Real-time point cloud transmission for immersive teleoperation of autonomous mobile robots,

N. Barone, W. Brescia, G. Santangelo, A. P. Maggio, I. Cisternino, L. De Cicco, and S. Mascolo, “Real-time point cloud transmission for immersive teleoperation of autonomous mobile robots,” in Proceedings of the 16th ACM Multimedia Systems Conference, New York, NY , USA, 2025, p. 311–316. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1145/3712676.3719263

work page doi:10.1145/3712676.3719263 2025
[23]

Eschmann, D

M. Wilder-Smith, V . Patil, and M. Hutter, “Radiance fields for robotic teleoperation,” in2024 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS), 2024, pp. 13 861–13 868. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1109/IROS58592.2024.10801345

work page doi:10.1109/iros58592.2024.10801345 2024
[24]

LiDAR-PTQ: Post-training quantization for point cloud 3d object detection

D. Zingsheim, M. Plack, H. Dr ¨oge, J. Pfeifer, P. Stotko, M. B. Hullin, and R. Klein, “Riftcast: A template-free end-to-end multi-view live telepresence framework and benchmark,” inProceedings of the 33rd ACM International Conference on Multimedia. New York, NY , USA: Association for Computing Machinery, 2025, p. 9090–9099. [Online]. Available: https://d...

work page doi:10.1145/3746027.3754789 2025
[25]

Teleoperation methods and enhancement techniques for mobile robots: A comprehensive survey,

M. Moniruzzaman, A. Rassau, D. Chai, and S. M. S. Islam, “Teleoperation methods and enhancement techniques for mobile robots: A comprehensive survey,”Robotics and Autonomous Systems, vol. 150, p. 103973, 2022. [Online]. Available: https: //doi.org/10.1016/j.robot.2021.103973

work page doi:10.1016/j.robot.2021.103973 2022
[26]

A systematic review of xr-enabled remote human-robot interaction systems,

X. Wang, L. Shen, and L.-H. Lee, “A systematic review of xr-enabled remote human-robot interaction systems,”ACM Computing Surveys, vol. 57, no. 11, pp. 1–37, Jun. 2025. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1145/3730574

work page doi:10.1145/3730574 2025
[27]

Virtual, augmented, and mixed reality for human-robot interaction: A survey and virtual design element taxonomy,

M. Walker, T. Phung, T. Chakraborti, T. Williams, and D. Szafir, “Virtual, augmented, and mixed reality for human-robot interaction: A survey and virtual design element taxonomy,”ACM Transactions on Human-Robot Interaction, vol. 12, no. 4, Jul. 2023. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1145/3597623

work page doi:10.1145/3597623 2023
[28]

Haptic and visual feedback assistance for dual-arm robot teleoperation in surface conditioning tasks,

V . Girb´es-Juan, V . Schettino, Y . Demiris, and J. Tornero, “Haptic and visual feedback assistance for dual-arm robot teleoperation in surface conditioning tasks,”IEEE Transactions on Haptics, vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 44–56, 2021. [Online]. Available: https: //doi.org/10.1109/TOH.2020.3004388

work page doi:10.1109/toh.2020.3004388 2021
[29]

Su, X.-Q

Y .-P. Su, X.-Q. Chen, C. Zhou, L. H. Pearson, C. G. Pretty, and J. G. Chase, “Integrating virtual, mixed, and augmented reality into remote robotic applications: A brief review of extended reality-enhanced robotic systems for intuitive telemanipulation and telemanufacturing tasks in hazardous conditions,”Applied Sciences, vol. 13, no. 22,

work page
[30]

Available: https://doi.org/10.3390/app132212129

[Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.3390/app132212129

work page doi:10.3390/app132212129
[31]

Nonlinear electrodynamics effects on the geometry, thermodynamics, and quantum dynamics of (2+1)-dimensional black holes.Nucl

Y . Su, X. Chen, T. Zhou, C. Pretty, and G. Chase, “Mixed reality- integrated 3d/2d vision mapping for intuitive teleoperation of mobile manipulator,”Robotics and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing, vol. 77, p. 102332, 2022. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1016/j. rcim.2022.102332

work page doi:10.1016/j 2022
[32]

Measuring cognitive task demands using dual-task methodology, subjective self-ratings, and expert judgments,

A. R ´ev´esz, M. Michel, and R. Gilabert, “Measuring cognitive task demands using dual-task methodology, subjective self-ratings, and expert judgments,”Studies in Second Language Acquisition, vol. 38, no. 4, p. 703–737, 2016. [Online]. Available: https: //doi.org/10.1017/S0272263115000339

work page doi:10.1017/s0272263115000339 2016
[33]

Development of NASA-TLX (Task Load Index): Resultsnum of empirical and theoretical research

S. G. Hart and L. E. Staveland, “Development of nasa-tlx (task load index): Results of empirical and theoretical research,” inHuman Mental Workload, ser. Advances in Psychology, P. A. Hancock and N. Meshkati, Eds. North-Holland, 1988, vol. 52, pp. 139–183. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0166-4115(08)62386-9

work page doi:10.1016/s0166-4115(08)62386-9 1988
[34]

A personal resource for technology interaction: Development and validation of the affinity for technology interaction (ati) scale,

C. A. Thomas Franke and D. Wessel, “A personal resource for technology interaction: Development and validation of the affinity for technology interaction (ati) scale,”International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, vol. 35, no. 6, pp. 456–467, 2019. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2018.1456150

work page doi:10.1080/10447318.2018.1456150 2019
[35]

Measuring presence in virtual environments: A presence questionnaire,

B. G. Witmer and M. J. Singer, “Measuring presence in virtual environments: A presence questionnaire,”Presence, vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 225–240, 1998. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1162/ 105474698565686

work page 1998
[36]

Measuring presence in virtual environments,

R. Scheuchenpflug, “Measuring presence in virtual environments,” in HCI International, vol. 2001. HCI International, 2001, pp. 56–58

work page 2001
[37]

Development of a virtual reality system usability questionnaire (vrsuq),

Y . M. Kim and I. Rhiu, “Development of a virtual reality system usability questionnaire (vrsuq),”Applied Ergonomics, vol. 119, p. 104319, 2024. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo. 2024.104319

work page doi:10.1016/j.apergo 2024
[38]

R Core Team,R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing, R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria,

work page
[39]

Available: https://www.R-project.org/

[Online]. Available: https://www.R-project.org/

work page
[40]

[Online]

RStudio Team,RStudio: Integrated Development Environment for R, RStudio, Inc., Boston, MA, 2019. [Online]. Available: http://www.rstudio.com/

work page 2019
[41]

A comprehensive user study on augmented reality-based data collection interfaces for robot learning,

X. Jiang, P. Mattes, X. Jia, N. Schreiber, G. Neumann, and R. Lioutikov, “A comprehensive user study on augmented reality-based data collection interfaces for robot learning,” inProceedings of the 2024 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI ’24). New York, NY , USA: Association for Computing Machinery, 2024, pp. 333–342. [Online...

work page doi:10.1145/3610977.3634995 2024