Search papers, labs, and topics across Lattice.
This paper analyzes the historical development and usage of VR, AR, MR, and XR terminology, highlighting the lack of consensus on the origin and meaning of "XR." It argues that XR functions primarily as a neutral umbrella term rather than an abbreviation for "Extended Reality," based on a timeline analysis of term coinage and adoption drivers. The authors propose that stable terminology usage necessitates collaborative governance across academia, industry, and standardization bodies.
XR's widespread use isn't about "Extended Reality" at all, but rather its neutrality as a symbolic container for VR, AR, and MR.
The term XR is currently widely used as an expression encompassing Virtual Reality (VR), Augmented Reality (AR), and Mixed Reality (MR). However, there is no clear consensus regarding its origin or meaning. XR is sometimes explained as an abbreviation for Extended Reality, but multiple interpretations exist regarding its etymology and formation process. This paper organizes the historical formation of terminology related to VR, AR, MR, and XR, and reexamines the context in which the term XR emerged and how it has spread. In particular, by presenting a timeline that distinguishes between the coinage of terms and the drivers of their adoption, we suggest that XR, as an umbrella term, functions not as an abbreviation of Extended Reality, but rather as a neutral symbolic label that encompasses multiple "reality"-related terms. Furthermore, we argue that stable usage of terminology, including XR, requires governance through collaboration among academia, industry, and standardization organizations.
