Analysis and Research of AR Services Implementation

Today, many services are emerging that transmit augmented reality traffic in real time. This leads to the complex task of formulating metrics for evaluating augmented reality services. This article examines a comparison of wireless augmented reality technologies for a mobile application. This leads to the difficult task of generating indicators that have the greatest impact on assessing the quality of augmented reality services. In this study, a comprehensive assessment of the quality of perception using subjective and objective methods was carried out for various wireless technologies used to provide augmented reality services through a mobile application. The application is highlighted, geographically distributed across different cities. The analysis of network parameters was performed and the results of calculations of the Hearst parameter and subjective quality assessment for various wireless technologies and different user densities were obtained. The relationship between subjective and objective assessments of the quality of augmented reality services has been established. The relevance of this work is determined by the need to determine subjective assessments and the Hurst exponent depending on the wireless augmented reality technologies used.

Method. When processing the experimental results, the method of analyzing the variance graph was used.

The results are substantiated and can be added to the network characteristics for evaluating the performance of a mobile augmented reality application.

The novelty of the obtained results lies in the fact that an approach to assessing the quality of augmented reality services is considered, based on the established relationship between subjective assessments and the Hurst exponent.

Practical significance: an application is geographically distributed across cities with different population densities. Network analysis is performed over different time periods and calculation results are obtained for Wi-Fi and 4G wireless technologies in order to determine the relationship between the time series coefficient and the average packet size intensity. A comprehensive assessment of the quality of perception by subjective and objective methods was carried out.

1. Ateya A.A., Abd El-Latif A.A., Muthanna A., Volkov A., Koucheryavy A. Enabling Metaverse and Telepresence Services in 6G Networks. River Publishers; 2025. DOI:10.1201/9788770046749

2. Alkady Y., Rizk R., Alsekait D.M., Alluhaidan A.S., Abdelminaam D.S. SINS_AR: An Efficient Smart Indoor Navigation System Based on Augmented Reality. IEEE Access. 2024;12:109171–109183. DOI:10.1109/ACCESS.2024.3439357. EDN:FLGUIN

3. Villagran-Vizcarra D.C., Luviano-Cruz D., Pérez-Domínguez L.A., Méndez-González L.C., Garcia-Luna F. Applications Analyses, Challenges and Development of Augmented Reality in Education, Industry, Marketing, Medicine, and Entertainment. Applied Sciences. 2023;13(5):2766. DOI:10.3390/app13052766. EDN:EDGKHL

4. Dargan S., Bansal S., Kumar M., Mittal A., Kumar K. Augmented Reality: A Comprehensive Review. Archives of Computational Methods in Engineering. 2022;30:1057–1080. DOI:10.1007/s11831-022-09831-7. EDN:MNIGGL

5. Anwar M.S., Yang J., Frnda J., Choi A., Baghaei N., Ali M. Metaverse and XR for cultural heritage education: applications, standards, architecture, and technological insights for enhanced immersive experience. Virtual Reality. 2025;29:51. DOI:10.1007/s10055-025-01126-z. EDN:BSELAT

6. Makolkina M., Prokopiev A., Paramonov A., Koucheryavy A. The Quality of Experience Subjective Estimations and the Hurst Parameters Values Interdependence. Internet of Things, Smart Spaces, and Next Generation Networks and Systems. 2014:8638:311–318. DOI:10.1007/978-3-319-10353-2_27. EDN:UEUIQL

7. Kirichek R., Makolkina M., Sene J., Takhtuev V. Estimation Quality Parameters of Transferring Image and Voice Data over ZigBee in Transparent Mode. Distributed Computer and Communication Networks. 2016;601:260–267. DOI:10.1007/978-3-319-30843-2_27. EDN:VPGRAZ

8. Dini G., Dalle Mura M. Application of Augmented Reality Techniques in Through-life Engineering Services. Procedia CIRP. 2015;38:14–23. DOI:10.1016/j.procir.2015.07.044

9. Chandra G.R., Rekha K.Ch.C., Varshitha K., Sravani D., Vadlamudi V. HoloComm: An Augmented Reality – Based Public Information and Navigation System. International Journal for Research in Science & Advanced Technologies. 2026;26(4):532–536. DOI:10.65726/ijrsat.2026.V26.I04.22. EDN:GKFTBK

10. Pendit U.C., Zaibon S.B., Bakar J.A.A. Conceptual model of mobile augmented reality for cultural heritage site towards enjoyable informal learning aspect. Jurnal Teknologi. 2025;77:29. DOI:10.11113/jt.v77.684

11. Lv Z., Lloret J., Song H. Internet of Things and augmented reality in the age of 5 G. Computer Communications. 2020;164:158–161. DOI:10.1016/j.comcom.2020.08.019. EDN:TJEGNO

12. Aguero M., Maharjan D., del Pilar Rodriguez M., Mascarenas D.D.L., Moreu F. Design and Implementation of a Connection between Augmented Reality and Sensors. Robotics. 2020;9(1):3. DOI:10.3390/robotics9010003

13. Sheloukhin O.I., Osin A.V., Smolsky S.M. Self-Similarity and Fractals: Telecommunication Applications. Moscow: Fizmatlit Publ.; 2008. 368 p. (in Russ.)

14. Rec. ITU-T P.910. Subjective video quality assessment methods for multimedia applications. 2023.