| Literature DB >> 30322154 |
Pei-Huang Diao1, Naai-Jung Shih2.
Abstract
Traditional egress routes are normally indicated on floor plans and function as designed, assuming that people can identify their relative location and orientation. However, the evacuation process can easily become complicated in a dark or hazardous environment with potential blockage of unexpected obstacles. This study developed the mobile AR indoor navigation system (MARINS) using a smartphone as a device to guide users to exits in a 0-lux setting with the path only illuminated by the phone camera's LED. The system is developed using Apple ARKit SDK with the associated simultaneous localization and mapping (SLAM) function on a Unity platform in four modules. A maze scenario is planned in an environment built by carton walls. Time and distance traveled by the experimental group and the control group are measured. The results of statistical analysis demonstrate that the MARINS system can reduce travel time in known space and in total summation compared to the application of a traditional map. The system also reduces travel distance and misjudgments with higher system usability than the application of a traditional map.Entities:
Keywords: Navigation; augmented reality; dark environment; mobile; pathfinding
Year: 2018 PMID: 30322154 PMCID: PMC6210137 DOI: 10.3390/s18103442
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sensors (Basel) ISSN: 1424-8220 Impact factor: 3.576
Figure 1System structure (top) and development diagram (bottom) of MARINS.
Figure 2Screen shots of the MARINS interface in a dark environment (top left) and a bright environment (top right). The alternative path is selected by tapping the A2 option (bottom).
Figure 3Operational procedures of MARINS.
Figure 4Maze layout (mm).
Figure 5Panoramic view (left) and scene inside of the maze (right).
Maze elements and related influence.
| Element | Influence |
|---|---|
| Dead ends | Each path segment can be either a dead end or a route to another space, such as a living room, kitchen, or conference room. |
| Brightness | Brightness has a strong influence on a person’s awareness of location. As power failure frequently occurs in a disaster, a space can be totally dark or partially illuminated by an emergency lighting system. |
| Unexpected obstacles | Falling ceilings or broken construction elements can occasionally prevent people’s evacuation from a path with which they used to be familiar. So, unexpected instances of obstacles are installed without any indication on the map. |
| Unknown space | In reality, spaces are divided into known space, with which a person is familiar, and unknown space, which is new to a person or the original configuration is changed dramatically and no match can be found. It has become impossible for a test subject to search for another path to reach Exit A. As the subject is traversing from a known part of the maze to an unknown part, the location of Exit B is also unknown. |
Figure 6The interrelationship between lux and distance with light on (left) and off (right).
Test groups and rules.
| Group |
| Tool | Rules | Tool Icon |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Experimental | 16 | MARINS | Subject uses MARINS and smartphone light as the only source of light. |
|
| Control | 15 | 2D map | Subject can take a picture of the map as a reference. Subject uses smartphone light as the only source of light. |
|
Figure 7Experimental procedure.
Independent sample t-test of path-finding time between the two groups.
| Group |
| Mean(s) | SD |
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total pathfinding time | Experimental | 15 | 81.71 | 19.39 | −2.65 * | 0.95 |
| Control | 16 | 101.44 | 21.89 | |||
| Known space pathfinding time | Experimental | 15 | 47.50 | 15.50 | −3.00 ** | 1.08 |
| Control | 16 | 66.05 | 18.64 | |||
| Unknown space pathfinding time | Experimental | 15 | 34.21 | 4.82 | −0.41 | 0.15 |
| Control | 16 | 35.39 | 10.19 |
* p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01.
Independent sample t-test of traveled distance between the two groups.
| Group |
| Mean(m) | SD |
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total pathfinding distance | Experimental | 15 | 49.84 | 1.48 | −8.42 *** | 2.98 |
| Control | 16 | 66.68 | 7.85 | |||
| Known space pathfinding distance | Experimental | 15 | 27.60 | 0.88 | −3.61 ** | 1.28 |
| Control | 16 | 35.03 | 8.18 | |||
| Unknown space pathfinding distance | Experimental | 15 | 22.24 | 0.89 | −3.75 ** | 1.33 |
| Control | 16 | 31.65 | 10.00 |
** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001.
Independent sample t-test of PSSUQ between the two groups.
| Group |
| Mean | SD |
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Overall average | Experimental | 15 | 1.79 | 0.54 | −5.10 *** | 1.85 |
| Control | 16 | 3.61 | 1.28 | |||
| System usefulness | Experimental | 15 | 1.66 | 0.53 | −4.42 *** | 1.83 |
| Control | 16 | 3.36 | 1.45 | |||
| Information quality | Experimental | 15 | 1.83 | 0.66 | −4.76 *** | 1.70 |
| Control | 16 | 3.61 | 1.33 | |||
| Interface quality | Experimental | 15 | 2.04 | 0.68 | −4.86 *** | 1.73 |
| Control | 16 | 3.98 | 1.43 |
*** p < 0.001.