Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Comparative Analysis of the Performance of ARCore and WebXR APIs for AR Applications
Blekinge Institute of Technology, Faculty of Computing, Department of Computer Science.
Blekinge Institute of Technology, Faculty of Computing, Department of Computer Science.
2023 (English)Independent thesis Basic level (university diploma), 10 credits / 15 HE creditsStudent thesis
Abstract [en]

Background: Augmented Reality has become a popular technology in recent years. Two of the most prominent AR APIs are ARCore, developed by Google, and We- bXR, an open standard for AR and Virtual Reality (VR) experiences on the web. A comparative analysis of the performance of these APIs in terms of CPU load, network latency, and frame rate is needed to determine which API is more suitable for cloud-based object visualisation AR applications that are integrated with Firebase. Firebase is a cloud-based backend-as-a-service platform made for app development. 

Objectives: This study aims to provide a comparative analysis of the performance of the ARCore API and WebXR API for an object visualisation application integrated with Firebase Cloud Storage. The objective is to analyze and compare the performance of the APIs in terms of latency, frame rate, and CPU load to provide insights into their strengths and weaknesses and identify the key factors that may influence the choice of API for object visualisation. 

Methods: To achieve the objectives, two object visualisation AR applications were developed using ARCore API and WebXR API with Firebase cloud. The frame rate, CPU load, and latency were used as performance metrics, the performance data was collected from the applications. The collected data was analysed and visualized to provide insights into the strengths and weaknesses of each API. 

Results: The results of the study provided a comparative analysis of the performance of the ARCore API and WebXR API for object visualisation applications. The performance metrics of the AR applications, including frame rate, CPU load, and latency, were analyzed and visualized. WebXR API was found to be performing better in terms of CPU load and frame rate, while ARCore API was found to be performing better in terms of latency. 

Conclusion: The study concluded that the WebXR API showcased advantages in terms of lower CPU load, and higher frame rates compared to the ARCore API which has reduced network latency. These results suggest that the WebXR API is more suitable for efficient and responsive object visualization in augmented reality applications. 

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2023. , p. 80
Keywords [en]
ARCore, Augmented Reality, Object Visualisation, WebXR
National Category
Computer Sciences
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:bth-25185OAI: oai:DiVA.org:bth-25185DiVA, id: diva2:1782862
Subject / course
DV1478 Bachelor Thesis in Computer Science
Educational program
DVGDT Bachelor Qualification Plan in Computer Science 60.0 hp
Supervisors
Examiners
Available from: 2023-07-19 Created: 2023-07-17 Last updated: 2023-07-19Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

fulltext(7706 kB)1248 downloads
File information
File name FULLTEXT02.pdfFile size 7706 kBChecksum SHA-512
d01f5aa6ba1ff5daf6cc3f6d018da061029c131ea2777b2c64af21e483fc66f31a258dd05fe387957b286c8b5f97741d5c7218b1297c93f5f7b2de86aa254ccc
Type fulltextMimetype application/pdf

By organisation
Department of Computer Science
Computer Sciences

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
Total: 1248 downloads
The number of downloads is the sum of all downloads of full texts. It may include eg previous versions that are now no longer available

urn-nbn

Altmetric score

urn-nbn
Total: 1282 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf