Science Fiction Prototypes Illustrating Future See-Through Digital Structures in Mobile Work Machines

  • Tiina KymäläinenEmail author
  • Olli Suominen
  • Susanna Aromaa
  • Vladimir Goriachev
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Electrical Engineering book series (LNEE, volume 532)


In the context of mobile work machines, efficient and safe operation is often significantly impeded by the lack of visibility due to obstacles such as the engine cover, moving booms and safety features obstructing the view. At the moment, the work machine industry is putting substantial effort into trying to solve the problem; however, it seems that the current maturity of relevant technologies is preventing solutions from entering the market in the immediate future. Therefore, this paper takes a stance that leans firmly into the future and describes the potential of see-through applications by operator-driven Science Fiction Prototypes. The research has included field studies with expert machine operators in tractor, harvester, mining, and cargo handling contexts. The main contribution of the paper is the introduced visual Science Fiction Prototypes and a brief consideration of the potential technologies that are presented as design outcomes of research.


Science fiction prototype (SFP) Augmented reality (AR) Diminished reality Mixed reality (MR) User-centered design Industrial work 



The work was carried out under the SeeWork project with the VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland, Tampere University of Technology and FIMA (Forum for Intelligent Machines) partners. We gratefully acknowledge the financial support from TEKES (the Finnish Funding Agency for innovation).


  1. 1.
    R.M. Sarmiento, G. Pasman, P.J. Stappers, Vision concepts within the landscape of design research. Proceedings of DRS 2016, DRS International Conference Series, 4, 1659–1676 (2016)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    B.D. Johnson, Science Fiction Prototyping: Designing the Future with Science Fiction, Synthesis Lectures (Morgan & Claypool, San Rafael, CA, 2011)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    T. Kymäläinen, Science fiction prototypes as design outcome of research (Aalto University Press, Helsinki, Finland, 2015)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    D. Hales, in The Decadence of Mimetic Science: Against Nature 2.0. Workshop Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Intelligent Environments (IOS Press, 2011)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    G. Clarke, M. Lear, in We All Wear Dark Glasses Now. Workshop Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Intelligent Environments (IOS Press, 2010) pp. 242–250Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    T. Kymäläinen, P. Perälä, J. Hakulinen, T. Heimonen, J. James, J. Perä, in Evaluating a Future Remote Control Environment with an Experience-Driven Science Fiction Prototype. International Conference on Intelligent Environments (IE 2015), pp. 81–88Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    T. Kymäläinen, E. Kaasinen, M. Aikala, J. Hakulinen, T. Heimonen, H. Paunonen, J. Ruotsalainen, L. Lehtikunnas, P. Mannonen, in Evaluating Future Automation Work in Process Plants With an Experience-Driven Science Fiction Prototype. International Conference on Intelligent Environments (IE 2016), pp. 54–61Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    T. Keinonen, R. Takala, Product Concept Design: A Review of the Conceptual Design of Products in Industry (Springer, Berlin, Germany, 2010)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    J.O. Schwarz, F. Liebl, Cultural products and their implications for business models: Why science fiction needs socio-cultural fiction. Futures 50, 1–25 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    The tomorrow project anthology – Cautions, dreams and curiosities, Open access electronic article (2013),
  11. 11.
    R. Azuma, R. Behringer, S. Feiner, S. Julier, B. Macintyre, Recent advances in augmented reality. IEEE Compu. Graph. 2011, 1–27 (2001)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    J. Herling, W. Broll, Advanced Self-Contained Object Removal for Realizing Real-Time Diminished Reality in Unconstrained Environments. 9th IEEE International Symposium on Mixed and Augmented Reality (ISMAR, 2010), pp. 207–212Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    J. Chen, X. Granier, N. Lin, Q. Peng, On-Line Visualization of Underground Structures Using Context Features. Proceedings of 17th ACM Symposium on Virtual Reality Software and Technology (2010), pp. 167–170Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    B. V. Lu, T. Kakuta, R. Kawakami, T. Oishi, K. Ikeuchi, Foreground and Shadow Occlusion Handling for Outdoor Augmented Reality. 9th IEEE International Symposium on Mixed and Augmented Reality (ISMAR 2010), pp. 109–118Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    N. Kawai, M. Yamasaki, T. Sato, N. Yokoya, AR Marker Hiding Based on Image Inpainting and Reflection of Illumination Changes. 2012 IEEE International Symposium on Mixed and Augmented Reality (ISMAR), pp. 293–294Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    J. Herling, W. Broll, PixMix: A Real-Time Approach to High-Quality Diminished Reality. 2012 IEEE International Symposium on Mixed and Augmented Reality (ISMAR), pp. 141–150Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    G. Schall, E. Mendez, D. Schmalstieg, Virtual Redlining for Civil Engineering in Real Environments. 2008 IEEE International Symposium on Mixed and Augmented Reality (ISMAR), pp. 95–98Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    L. Norros, Acting Under Uncertainty - The Core Task Analysis in Ecological Study of Work (VTT, Espoo, Finland, 2004), p. 241Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    E. Kaasinen, V. Roto, J. Hakulinen, T. Heimonen, J.P. Jokinen, H. Karvonen, T. Keskinen, H. Koskinen, Y. Lu, P. Saariluoma, H. Tokkonen, M. Turunen, Defining user experience goals to guide the design of industrial systems. Behav. Inform. Technol. 34(10), 1–16 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    T. Kymäläinen, S. Siltanen, Co-Designing Novel Interior Design Service That Utilises Augmented Reality – A Case Study (2012), pp. 1–12Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    S. Aromaa, S.-P. Leino, J. Viitaniemi, Virtual Prototyping in Human-Machine Interaction Design (VTT Technology, Espoo, 2014)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    K. Helin, J. Karjalainen, T. Kuula, N. Philippon, in Virtual/Mixed/Augmented Reality Laboratory Research for the Study of Augmented Human and Human-Machine Systems. 12th International Conference on Intelligent Environments (IE 2016), pp. 163–166Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    S. Ylirisku, J. Buur, Designing With Video (Springer, Berlin, Germany, 2007)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    M. Kuniavsky, Observing the User Experience (Morgan Kaufmann, Burlington, MA, 2003), pp. 419–437CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    A.P. Rios, Exploring Mixed Reality in Distributed Collaborative Learning Environments, Doctoral dissertation (University of Essex, 2016)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    B. Avery, C. Sandor, B. H. Thomas, in Improving Spatial Perception for Augmented Reality X-Ray Vision. Virtual Reality Conference (2009), pp. 79–82Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    S. Feiner, B. MacIntyre, T. Höllerer, A. Webster, A touring machine: Prototyping 3D mobile augmented reality systems for exploring the urban environment. Pers. Ubiquit. Comput. 1(4), 208–217 (1997)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    M. Inami, N. Kawakami, S. Tachi, Optical Camouflage Using Retro-Reflective Projection Technology, in Proceedings of the 2nd IEEE/ACM International Symposium on Mixed and Augmented Reality, 2003, p. 34Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    K. Kiyokawa, An optical see-through display for mutual occlusion with a real-time stereovision system. Comput. Graph. 25(5), 765–779 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Tiina Kymäläinen
    • 1
    Email author
  • Olli Suominen
    • 2
  • Susanna Aromaa
    • 1
  • Vladimir Goriachev
    • 1
  1. 1.Human Factors, Virtual- and Augmented Reality, VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland Ltd.TampereFinland
  2. 2.Department of Signal ProcessingTampere University of TechnologyTampereFinland

Personalised recommendations