4.7 Review

Toward the next-generation VR/AR optics: a review of holographic near-eye displays from a human-centric perspective

期刊

OPTICA
卷 7, 期 11, 页码 1563-1578

出版社

Optica Publishing Group
DOI: 10.1364/OPTICA.406004

关键词

-

类别

资金

  1. National Science Foundation [1553333, 1652150, 1839974]
  2. National Institutes of Health [R01EY029397, R21EB028375, R35GM128761]
  3. UCLA
  4. Ford (Alliance Project)
  5. Sloan Fellowship
  6. PECASE by the ARO
  7. OkawaResearchGrant
  8. Direct For Computer & Info Scie & Enginr
  9. Div Of Information & Intelligent Systems [1553333] Funding Source: National Science Foundation
  10. Div Of Civil, Mechanical, & Manufact Inn
  11. Directorate For Engineering [1839974] Funding Source: National Science Foundation
  12. National Research Foundation of Korea [4120200113758] Funding Source: Korea Institute of Science & Technology Information (KISTI), National Science & Technology Information Service (NTIS)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Wearable near-eye displays for virtual and augmented reality (VR/AR) have seen enormous growth in recent years. While researchers are exploiting a plethora of techniques to create life-like three-dimensional (3D) objects, there is a lack of awareness of the role of human perception in guiding the hardware development. An ultimate VR/AR headset must inte grate the display, sensors, and processors in a compact enclosure that people can comfortably wear for a long time while allowing a superior immersion experience and user-friendly human-computer interaction. Compared with other 3D displays, the holographic display has unique advantages in providing natural depth cues and correcting eye aberrations. Therefore, it holds great promise to be the enabling technology for next-generation VR/AR devices. In this review, we survey the recent progress in holographic near-eye displays from the human-centric perspective. (c) 2020 Optical Society of America under the terms of the OSA Open Access Publishing Agreement

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据