The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Visual Discomfort and Visual Fatigue of Stereoscopic Displays: A Review
Abstract
Visual discomfort has been the subject of considerable research in relation to stereoscopic and autostereoscopic displays. In this paper, the importance of various causes and aspects of visual discomfort is clarified. When disparity values do not surpass a limit of 1°, which still provides sufficient range to allow satisfactory depth perception in stereoscopic television, classical determinants such as excessive binocular parallax and accommodation-vergence conflict appear to be of minor importance. Visual discomfort, however, may still occur within this limit and we believe the following factors to be the most pertinent in contributing to this: (1) temporally changing demand of accommodation-vergence linkage, e.g., by fast motion in depth; (2) three-dimensional artifacts resulting from insufficient depth information in the incoming data signal yielding spatial and temporal inconsistencies; and (3) unnatural blur. In order to adequately characterize and understand visual discomfort, multiple types of measurements, both objective and subjective, are required.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Slant from texture and disparity cues: Optimal cue combination
Hillis, J. M., Watt, S. J., Landy, M. S., & Banks, M. S. (2004) · Journal of Vision · doi:10.1167/4.12.1 · Cited by 421
Cited by
State of the art of virtual reality technology
Anthes, C., Garcia-Hernandez, R. J., Wiedemann, M., & Kranzlmuller, D. (2016) · 2016 IEEE Aerospace Conference · doi:10.1109/aero.2016.7500674 · Cited by 541
Stereoscopic 3D displays and human performance: A comprehensive review
McIntire, J. P., Havig, P. R., & Geiselman, E. E. (2014) · Displays · doi:10.1016/j.displa.2013.10.004 · Cited by 225
Metadata
- Authors
- Lambooij, M., Fortuin, M., Heynderickx, I., & IJsselsteijn, W.
- Venue
- Journal of Imaging Science and Technology
- Published
- 2009-05-01
- Volume
- 53
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 30201-1-30201-14
- ISSN
- 1062-3701 (ISSN-L)
- 1943-3522
- OpenAlex
- W2127418128
- Cited by
- 1,006
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 126.42
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
