# Authoring training scenarios “from within” in an immersive environment with the CESTATE framework

Alexis Evain, Audrey Fertier, David Panzoli, Jess Kropczynski, Shane Halse, Frederick Benaben

<figure><img src="image_1.png" /></figure>

## To cite this version:

Alexis Evain, Audrey Fertier, David Panzoli, Jess Kropczynski, Shane Halse, et al.

HAL Id: hal-04676408

https://imt-mines-albi.hal.science/hal-04676408v1

Submitted on 20 Nov 2024

HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access
archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci-
entific research documents, whether they are pub-
lished or not. The documents may come from
teaching and research institutions in France or
abroad, or from public or private research centers.

L'archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est
destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents
scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non,
émanant des établissements d'enseignement et de
recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires
publics ou privés.

<figure><img src="image_2.png" /></figure>

Distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
# Authoring training scenarios “from within” in an immersive environment with the CESTATE framework

Alexis Evainª, Audrey Fertierª, David Panzoliᵇ, Jess Kropczynskiᶜ, Shane Halseᶜ, Frédérick Bénabenª

ªCGI, IMT Mines Albi, Albi, France; ᵇIRIT, National University Institute Jean-Francois Champollion, Albi, France; ᶜUniversity of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, United States

## ARTICLE HISTORY

Compiled July 11, 2024

## ABSTRACT

Virtual reality (VR) can be used to train for complex, dynamic and dangerous situations, such as disaster response. The aim of this research is to support trainers with an immersive authoring tool that facilitates the implementation of training environments, enabling both the design and execution of complex and dynamic exercises. A systematic literature review was conducted to identify VR-based authoring tools. Each environment was assessed based on variability, reusability, and design assistance, with each criterion graded on a 3- point scale. Following a model-driven approach, the work presented in this article introduces the CESTATE (Cascading Effect Simulation To Authoring Training Environments) framework. It uses a metamodel to design training exercises, thus ensuring their reusability. Inheriting from the Physics of Decisions paradigm, this metamodel can be used to describe all types of potentialities and cascading effects. This ensures the dynamic, and therefore the plausibility of the virtual training environment. In addition, this framework supports the design of immersive training environments, at both design and run time. It is a generic approach. Its applicability is demonstrated in several iterations of a case study involving the training of practitioners on a complex and realistic crisis situation: a fire in a cathedral.

## KEYWORDS

Virtual worlds, Educational technology, Crisis simulation, Smart environment, Experimental learning

## 1. Introduction

Virtual reality (VR) training allows us to transform abstract concepts into concrete representations, to learn by doing rather than by reading, looking, and/or watching to experience situations in inaccessible places/times. It also allows us to abstract ourselves from the rules of the world, and do things that would otherwise be impossible (Slater, 2018). It facilitates experience-based learning in dangerous environments by ensuring safety and control (Carruth, 2017; Falloon, 2019; Kolb, 1984).

Designing and developing VR training is generally time-consuming and not intuitive. To facilitate these steps, algorithms capable of automatically producing ready-to-use environments (Freiknecht and Effelsberg, 2017), including crowds of characters (Culié
et al., 2023), have been developed and perfected to alleviate the burden imparted on the designers and the developers. Designers also tend to focus on a single application case for one specific scenario, that can be deployed on a large scale, but which results in very rigid and inflexible training scenarios.

Although the virtual environment inside which the training is set to happen must be implemented prior to the training, there are a few different ways the trainer can be involved in the training activity: i) during the design phase, when objectives and conditions of success/failure are defined; (ii) during the execution phase, to guide the training by adjusting the scenario or supervising the players; (iii) at the end of the training, to collect performance cues and deliver appropriate feedback or assessment to the learners. Authoring tools could be used to enable trainers to participate in the design of VR training courses (Coelho et al., 2019). They are designed to help authors produce content. The main features expected for a such an authoring tool are the following:

* The scenario and environment are configurable during design and execution (variability) (Nagle et al., 2014);

* Some parts of the scenario and environment are reusable in other training courses (reusability) (Aouadi et al., 2016; Prieto et al., 2011);

* Immersion is an increasingly important feature of educational serious games. The more the user is integrated into the environment, the more effective the learning experience (immersive) (Lohre et al., 2020);

* Learners and trainers want plausibility in their simulation (Skarbez et al., 2021; Slater, 2018). This influences their actions and their interventions will be credible in their training context.

The methodology adopted for this article is based on an in-depth analysis of the existing literature, highlighting little-explored gaps. The aim of this assessment was to highlight three specific aspects (variability, reusability, assistance) that are often neglected in research and commercial tools. In response to these findings, a new approach focusing on these under-studied elements is presented. This approach will then be tested in a concrete case study in order to gather significant results and better understand its effectiveness and potential in practice. The detailed methodology comprises several stages. First, the article conducted a literature review, collecting relevant academic publications and technical reports and identifying gaps in existing work. Secondly, the article developed a new approach incorporating the three neglected aspects, defining the criteria and tools needed to assess them. Next, the article designed a representative case study to put the new approach into practice, and applied it to the case study. Finally, the article analysed the result, evaluating the effectiveness of the approach and comparing the prototype with the initial objectives to measure the impact of variability, reusability and assistance. This methodology aims to provide an in-depth and practical understanding of the impact of neglected aspects in the modelling of educational situations, particularly in a crisis environment and its behaviour.

Section 2 offers a literature review of authoring tools related to training and immersive environments. Section 3 details our contribution, the Cascading Effect Simulation To Authoring Training Environments (CESTATE) framework, which aims to help trainers design immersive, plausible, dynamic and configurable experiential learning courses in immersive environments. This contribution can be divided into two separate but complementary propositions. The first one, described in subsection 3.2, is a meta-model that facilitates the design of configurable and plausible learning environments,
where elements can be linked one with another with causal effects. The second, in sub-section 3.3, details an immersive paradigm (a set of visual cues and VR interactions) that enable trainers to define, configure and operate a training directly from within the virtual environment. The proposed framework is tested in a use-case scenario of a crisis, described in section 4 and analysed in section 5. Finally, 7 concludes with a discussion and outlook.

## 2. Literature review

Available training environments fall into two categories.

*Industrial projects* are mostly designed by companies specialised in 3D games or simulation. Some applications are configurable off-the-shelf training tools that address generic skills of a whole line of work, like medical training or safety in the workplace. However most of them are tailored solutions specific to a customer's needs. Re-usability and configurability are not necessarily of concern.

Academic research projects do not benefit from the same visibility and marketing budget as commercial products. In order to find them, the authors run a query on two scientific databases, namely Scopus and WebOfScience. The query presented in table 1, searches articles describing tools or applications for creating immersive training environments.

<table><caption>**Table 1.** The following query was used to look up for immersive training application in scientific literature databases.</caption><tr><td></td><td>(virtual OR immersive* OR mixed OR extended)</td></tr><tr><td>NEAR/2</td><td>(learning* OR training*)</td></tr><tr><td>AND</td><td>(creation OR authoring)</td></tr><tr><td>NEAR/3</td><td>(tool* OR application*)</td></tr><tr><td>Doc. Types</td><td>Articles</td></tr></table>

The query fetched 42 articles on the Web Of Science database (111 if omitting to specify the document type) and 47 on Scopus (138 respectively), many entries appearing simultaneously in both. The results were manually filtered by title, abstract and then full text, to identify all articles dedicated to the creation of a generic immersive learning environment, in virtual, augmented or extended reality. As a result, learning methods using videos or 360° videos were not included. Table 2 shows the industrial and academic research projects that meet our requirements. Information necessary to complete the analysis of industrial projects was obtained from practical observations or inferred from public information. Academic projects were studied based on associated scientific publications. Each row is evaluated on the basis of three criteria, each graded on a 3 points scale, as explained in the following paragraph.

A range of studies have highlighted the benefits of game-based learning in various educational contexts (Hamari et al., 2014; Santos et al., 2022; Wubale et al., 2023). Plass et al. (2015) emphasizes the importance of considering multiple perspectives in game-based learning, while Brown et al. (2019) and Bhat et al. (2023) both demonstrate the effectiveness of game-based activities in enhancing learning outcomes and student engagement. Brown's use of an escape room simulation in a nursing scenario and Bhat's proposed game-based activity for addressing comprehension issues both underscore the potential of game-based learning to improve learning experiences. Smith and Ericson (2009) further supports this, showing that game-based virtual reality can enhance children's motivation and engagement in learning fire-safety skills.
These studies collectively suggest that game-based learning can be a valuable tool for educators in various fields. Hamari et al. (2014) has designed a framework to examine the positive aspects of gamification in learning situations. However, this does not meet the needs set out here, which is to analyse immersive teaching using virtual reality that offers tools for setting training parameters. Unfortunately, these studies cannot be considered as tools for designing teaching scenarios based on the environment and do not meet the needs set out here, i.e. the analysis of immersive teaching using virtual reality and offering tools for setting training parameters.

<table><caption>**Table 2.** This table reviews a mix of training environments issued from academic literature (5/11) and commercial projects (6/11), categorised by their respective application domains. Each environment is evaluated following several criteria: variability, re-usability and assistance to design.</caption><thead><tr><th></th><th>Variability</th><th>Reusability</th><th>Assistance to design</th><th>Applications</th><th>Industrial</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>NextWaveSafety</td><td>*</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>safety</td><td>yes</td></tr><tr><td>ImmersiveFactory</td><td>*</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>safety</td><td>yes</td></tr><tr><td>Defense</td><td>*</td><td>*</td><td>-</td><td>crisis</td><td>yes</td></tr><tr><td>SkillsVR</td><td>*</td><td>*</td><td>-</td><td>tourism/security/management</td><td>yes</td></tr><tr><td>Motive.io</td><td>*</td><td>*</td><td>-</td><td>medical/safety</td><td>yes</td></tr><tr><td>Palmer et al. (2022)</td><td>*</td><td>*</td><td>*</td><td>mechanic</td><td>-</td></tr><tr><td>Muñoz-Cristóbal et al. (2017)</td><td>*</td><td>*</td><td>*</td><td>various</td><td>-</td></tr><tr><td>SimXVR</td><td>**</td><td>*</td><td>*</td><td>medical</td><td>yes</td></tr><tr><td>Cassola et al. (2022)</td><td>**</td><td>**</td><td>*</td><td>mechanic</td><td>-</td></tr><tr><td>Karakostas et al. (2018)</td><td>**</td><td>**</td><td>*</td><td>various</td><td>-</td></tr><tr><td>Horst et al. (2020)</td><td>**</td><td>**</td><td>*</td><td>various</td><td>-</td></tr><tr><td>Ideal target</td><td>**</td><td>**</td><td>**</td><td>unlimited</td><td>-</td></tr></tbody></table>

*Variability* expresses how much the experience can differ between two sessions on the same scenario by changing and tweaking parameters. If no such need was expressed, it is likely that neither the environment nor the scenario can be changed before or during the training (noted - in the table). It can allow the trainer to select options when setting up the training sessions. This requires extra work during the implementation because additional and alternative content resources must be produced to accommodate the multiple paths (respectively graded * in the table). It can also allow the trainer to pilot the training and change the course of events in run time. This requires specific interfaces on top of the additional content required to allow several options (graded **).

*Reusability* measures how much of the content already designed in a previous training can be reused in a new scenario. It impacts both the cost of the project and the ease for the trainer to design new environments. In a poorly reusable training, the trainer cannot reuse parts of an existing environment or scenario (-). Generic objects or non-player characters can be selected from a library and placed inside a new environment, with their attached rules and behaviours applied alongside, but without
any control over the coherence (*). Objects newly placed can be further integrated in the environment, by connecting to those already in place and establish their potential influence on surrounding objects (**). This could not only enhance the plausibility of the training, but also highlight the availability of objects relevant to the training environment.

*Assistance to design* measures the degree of assistance provided to the trainer while designing or piloting the training experience. Whatever the training scenario, setting up the virtual environment and the expected sequence of events and actions can often exceed the trainer's competencies. Without assistance, the coherence, and therefore plausibility, of the training may be too weak to be effective. Regardless, it is common for a training application to offer very little assistance, apart from a few logical rules conditioning how the objects are supposed to interact with one another at run-time (-). A general model governing the interactions between the objects in the environment is a possible way to help maintaining the coherence of the environment by constraining its dynamic at design time (*). The application could also enable to modify the scenario or the environment at run time, while maintaining their consistency. This would enable the trainer to adapt to his learners. (**). The development of car navigation systems can be compared to our three levels of assistance. In the past, a journey was planned offline, at design time, and any unexpected event required a new itinerary to be planned. The advent of GPS navigation systems has made it possible to recalculate a new itinerary at run time. Finally, mobile applications now provide real-time information on upcoming unforeseen events, and suggest better alternative routes.

The analysis summarised in table 2 highlights a difference between industrial and academic projects: customer-specific immersive training environments, as opposed to more innovative proofs of concept. Therefore variability, reusability and assistance to design are more commonly associated with academic projects. Nevertheless, these features would benefit the industry: reusability reduces development costs, and variability is a nice-to-have feature that will soon be a must-have, if on the market.

Traditional design methodologies followed by company as NextWaveSafety, or ImmersiveFactory consists of, in design time: (i) recover the needs and objectives, (ii) design and develop the immersive training environment, and (iii) test and deploy the training environment which trains learners and offers feedback. This feedback will be used for new development cycles.

None of the tools recovered from our state of the art enable a trainer to immerse the learners, to configure the scenario and environment during design and run-time (variability), to re-use parts of past scenarios or environments, and to ensure the plausibility of the scenario and its environment. In the following section, the article proposed an approach which attempts to meet all our criteria.

### 3. The CESTATE Framework

The Cascading Effect Simulation To Authoring Training Environments (CESTATE) Framework includes (i) an approach that enables VR training courses to be configured both at design time and run time, (ii) a metamodel that facilitates the design of plausible and dynamic exercises, and (iii) a VR human-machine interface for designing, controlling and modifying exercises at the design and execution stages. The Framework is intended to assist trainers and does not include functionality to enhance learner learning. 3D environments are considered as inputs.
## 3.1. The Approach

Fig. 1 shows the difference between a traditional design methodology, described in the Section 2, at the top, and the methodology proposed by the CESTATE Framework, at the bottom. The CESTATE design approach consists of (i) recover the needs and objectives, (ii) design and develop the immersive training environment, and (iii) test and deploy the training environment which trains learners, enable trainers to adapt the scenario at run-time and provides real-time feedback. The double arrows highlight the role of the trainer and the feedback during both design time and run time.

<figure><img src="image_3.png" /><figcaption>**Figure 1.** A traditional design approach (top) versus the CESTATE approach (bottom) emphasising the continued role of the trainer during the training, who can operate at run-time to adapt the training based on information pertaining to the learner fed back continuously during the training session.</figcaption></figure>

## 3.2. The Metamodel

The article proposed the use of a Metamodel to facilitate the re-usability, plausibility and dynamic of the training. To model cause-and-effect relationships, and ensure environmental dynamics, the authors took inspiration from the Physics Of Decisions (POD) metamodel (Benaben et al., 2021, 2023; Evain et al., 2023). POD is a research project focusing on the visualisation of project management in any domain on the basis of a physical model. The approach is based on the analysis of a system with the principle of forces impacting on its performance (Thomas, 1985). The metamodel represents a VR training environment as a set of components which can impact or be impacted by each other. The model-based approach guarantees interoperability with other information systems, so that the proposed framework can be applied to any training scenario. The metamodel can be extended, by inheritance, to suit any domain or application such as fire-fighting, machine maintenance, driving, group management...

Table 3 presents the definition of all the concepts of the metamodel, illustrated in the Fig. 2. The six concepts are linked to each other by relations. The two concepts highlighted in orange, on the left, represent the *Components* and *Actualities* that will be physically present in the VR environment for the learners. The concepts highlighted in green, on the right, represent abstract concepts, the two types of *Potential* and *Potentialities*, which will not be visible to the learners, but which will be visible to the trainer. The *Potentials*, *Potentialities* and *Actualities* represents positive and negative consequences on the learners or on the components of the training environment. Depending on the scale of training in the environment, the simulation may include static elements. For example, if for technological performance reasons the sun cannot evolve over time, it will be fixed and so will its light. Nevertheless, it's reasonable to assume that this will be a temporary opposite in view of the evolution of the hardware.

This conceptualization is the key to a dynamic and plausible training environment and is one of the contributions of this paper. In addition to providing a dynamic
<table><caption>**Table 3.** Definitions of the concepts, and relations of the CESTATE Metamodel</caption><thead><tr><td>Concept</td><td>Definition</td><td>Example</td></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Component</td><td>A component is a concrete or abstract asset at stake in the training scenario.</td><td>A cigarette, a fire extinguisher, a firefighter, a painting.</td></tr><tr><td>able to</td><td>A component is able to create/generate potentials or to be/sensitive affected by potentials.</td><td>A cigarette is able to create fire, a painting is able to be susceptible to the fire. It can be also a law or an atmosphere.</td></tr><tr><td>Potential</td><td>A source of potentiality. A negative potential is a danger. A positive potential is a favorability.</td><td>To be in fire, to do fire.</td></tr><tr><td>Potentiality</td><td>An event impacting component. A negative potentiality is a risk. A positive potentiality is an opportunity.</td><td>Potentiality to catch fire, potentiality to be saved.</td></tr><tr><td>generates</td><td>An "able to do" potentials. They generate a potentiality under conditions of susceptibility.</td><td>The cigarette can ignite object around and can damage the health of the smoker.</td></tr><tr><td>susceptibles</td><td>An "able to be" potential. A component is susceptible to a potentiality under certain conditions. If the conditions are met, an actuality occurs.</td><td>The painting can receive the flame if it is close enough. If a lamp can receive electricity this will turn on the light.</td></tr><tr><td>Actuality</td><td>The concrete impact of a potentiality on a component. A negative actuality is a damage. A positive actuality is a benefit.</td><td>A fire, an injury, healing someone.</td></tr><tr><td>affects</td><td>Actualities affect components which can in turn emit new potentials.</td><td>A fire affects all sufficiently enclosed components that have the potential to catch fire.</td></tr></tbody></table>

system environment based on POD principles, the environment is deployed here for creation and training purposes. As a training tool of all kinds. At run time, the trainer can either (i) add *components*, *potentials* or *actuality* from libraries creating at design time, (ii) modify the conditions of *susceptibility*, (iii) delete *components*, *potentials* or *actualities*. These changes will add new *potentials*, *potentialities* and *actualities* to the model. This allows us to maintain a logical and credible path, while leaving the trainer free to intervene.

### 3.3. Graphic interface and trainer assistance

The trainer, unlike the learners, can see all the physical objects (*components*) and abstract objects (*potentials* and *potentialities*) in the model. They can manipulate them at will, before and during the exercise. To enhance their experience, their user interface needs to be as clear and concise as possible (Fig. 3).

User Experience (UX) define the quality of the user depending on the interface and the application (Wechsung and De Moor, 2014). To aim a good interface design, the experience is based on minimal interaction and intuitive functionalities (Laviola et al.,
<figure><img src="image_4.png" /><figcaption>**Figure 2.** The CESTATE framework’s Metamodel inspired from (Benaben et al., 2021; Evain et al., 2023). The environment is furnished with objects and populated with people, indistinctly referred to as components, potentially able to generate events or susceptible to be affected by others.</figcaption></figure>

2022). It is important to avoid providing too much information, as this creates noise that can confuse the user. Therefore, the prototype chooses to show different view enabling abstract objects only when the trainer asks more information. Then, the trainer will see all the abstract objects linked to it (its *Potentials* and *susceptibilities*).

Fig. 4 represents, on the left, the operational view, as seen by the learners or the trainer, and on the right, the conceptual view, representing the same environment at the same time, as seen by the trainer, if s/he asks for more information about the painting. The learners cannot see the trainer, but the trainer can see all the learners. The trainer, unlike the learners, is free from rules of the world and can fly and go through walls. The trainer moves, and adds, updates or deletes *components, potentials, actualities* or conditions of *susceptibility* with its VR controllers.

Fig. 5 illustrates all these possible interactions between the trainer and the training model. For example, if a non-player character (*Component*) smokes, the user has the *Potential* to make fire. A painting has the *Potential* to be on fire. The painting has the *Potentiality* to catch fire if s/he gets close enough to it (condition of *susceptibility*). The trainer can choose to bring the non-player character close to the painting to activate the *potential* to generate (*able*) the fire (*Actuality*). S/He can also choose to add a fire extinguisher with the *potential* to put out the fire (*able* to generate water). Learners can then use the extinguisher to put an end to the incident and perhaps save the painting in time.

## 4. Use-case

This section presents a real training scenario for firefighters in a French town who want to practice putting out a fire in their town’s cathedral (Albi, Occitanie, France). This
<figure><img src="image_5.png" /><figcaption>**Figure 3.** Screenshot example of interfaces when a component potential is selected. In the interface, it is possible to view the potentials and potentialities of the component. Buttons and gauges can be used to adjust their values.</figcaption></figure>

use case was developed as part of the EGCERSIS project, part-funded by the Occitanie region (FEDER EU-FUNDING) and private companies. The version presented in this document is the result of the third iteration of the project.

The CESTATE Framework was used on a 3D environment based on a model of Albi Cathedral. The aim of the firefighters' trainer is to practice an official plan for the evacuation of works of art, revised to take account of the specific features of the cathedral. This exercise is designed to test the application of the procedure, the communication within the fire team and the communication with other stakeholders, such as the police team.

In this case study, the trainer will influence the simulation by creating a crisis. S/he will activate *potentials* for certain *components* of the environment. This will automatically induce *potentialities*. All the trainer has to do is observe the consequences of these actions and see how the environment evolves. The smoke detector will then be triggered if smoke is created as a result of having a fire. In this exercise, learners will use their skills and *component* to act on these *potentials* to secure the environment and reduce or eliminate the *potentialities*.

The training was simulated under different conditions to test the framework's functionality. Here are the 3 main steps of the exercise; the trainer's main actions concern the first stage, dedicated to setting up the training:

(1) The trainer flies to the roof and adds a fire. The fire triggers the smoke detector and alerts the departmental prefecture's crisis cell. The crisis cell chooses a response process according to the plan for the evacuation of works of art and sends instructions

(2) Then learners, such as firefighters and policemen, get in the VR training environment and receive their instructions. One firefighter checks the cathedral for dangerous objects or victims to evacuate, another evacuates the building while a police officer sets up a security perimeter around the cathedral;
<figure><img src="image_6.png" /><figcaption>**Figure 4.** On the left (a), the VR training environment as seen by the learners or the trainer (operational view). On the center (b), the environment as seen by the trainer when asking for information about the paining and its potentials and susceptibilities (conceptual view mixed with operational view). On the right (c), the operational view is deactivated to focus on the trainer's understanding with the conceptual view.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_7.png" /><figcaption>**Figure 5.** Metamodel with possible trainer interactions highlighted in orange</figcaption></figure>

(3) The fire brigade then searches for the fire and began to extinguish it;

Once this has been done, the training is considered complete, and all the trainer has to do is conclude the simulation.

Fig. 6 presents the part of the model for the first step of the training, instantiat-
ing the metamodel, which concerns the trainer adding fire (*potential*). *Potentialities*
and *actualities* are automatically deduced. The trainer places *components* (i.e. object,
human...) where desired. The trainer selects the *component*: ceiling. On an interface,
s/he accesses all the attributes of the ceiling and activates its fire-generating *potential*.
The trainer modifies its value to accentuate the danger, by adjusting a gauge linked to
its intensity (Fig. 3). Once this change has been confirmed, thanks to the framework
model, the environment adapts and deduces the *potentialities* and *actualities*. The
trainer's user interface always displays whether the *component* has the ability to *be*
affected by or to *do* things. Certain *components* already possess such capacities. For
instance, a fire extinguisher can *generate* water.

The trainer can provoke in this manner a crisis and modify the scenario to achieve
its pedagogical objectives. With these interfaces and simulation control functions, the
<figure><img src="image_8.png" /><figcaption>**Figure 6.** The instance of the model for the EGCERSIS exercise. To create the crisis training, modifications is necessary for the trainer. The crisis need to have one danger created in order to start the training. In run-time the trainer has to activate the generation of the fire. As pointed here in red in the figure. The rest is deduced in runtime without action of the trainer.</figcaption></figure>

trainer is able to design and run immersive, dynamic and reusable training.

## 5. Results

Using the CESTATE framework, the trainer can add, modify or delete *Components* in the environment (variability). If added, the component will inherit default characteristics and linked *Potentials* (plausibility). By using the same way of analysing this framework as for the review literature, it is possible to establish a comparison on the various associated criteria. This framework has been evaluated by the three main criteria defined in Section 2:

* The *Variability* :

** the trainer can modify the environment or scenario during design and execution. Training will always be different as the elements are dynamically changed. The trainer's actions will have a nuance that causes variability. In addition to the possibility for a scenario to evolve in an adaptive way, the notion of variability in the CESTATE framework is raised to a higher level than the applications listed in section 2 by allowing the author, by means of controls directly in the immersive environment, to influence the evolution of the scenario in real time.

* The *Reusability* :

** the trainer can use generic objects, components, rules or non-player characters, stored in a library, which will automatically adapt to their new environment (plausibility) and react to other elements according to the context. In other approaches listed in section 2, reusing existing components only extends to porting them to a new scene and start over building a new scenario. With the CESTATE framework, any component or object placed
from the library to a new scene integrates automatically by connecting to the others and adjusting its influence with them.

* The Assistance to design:

** the trainer can be immersed in the training and can also modify and/or foresee the effects of its modifications thanks to interfaces. The trainer will have visual aids and visual suggestions depending on the context of the situation. No application from the literature review in section 2 offer any guarantee that the components laid out in the environments will cohere with one another, even less any assistance to the author for selecting the right components regarding the educational objectives. The metamodel in the CESTATE framework allows one to do exactly this.

* The Application : Using a metamodel enables training in any domain or environment (Various).

* The Industrial : - (academic work).

The table 4 shows that the objectives defined in the introduction and supplemented by the literature reviews have been met by the article's contribution. The criteria used to highlight the strengths of this approach.

<table><caption>**Table 4.** CESTATE framework evaluated on the EGCERSIS use case using the literature review criteria</caption><thead><tr><th></th><th>Variability</th><th>Reusability</th><th>Freedom of the trainer</th><th>applications</th><th>industrial</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Targeted results</td><td>**</td><td>**</td><td>**</td><td>unlimited</td><td>-</td></tr><tr><td>CESTATE Framework</td><td>**</td><td>**</td><td>**</td><td>unlimited</td><td>-</td></tr></tbody></table>

The CESTATE framework allows a trainer to be in an immersive environment to design, control, modify and evaluate immersive, plausible, dynamic and configurable experiential learning courses. This is consistent with the research problem. The trainer's free and immersive navigation fulfils the Freedom condition. The interface for modifying the various attributes of the elements allows for variability during the simulation. And the possibility of having a catalogue of *components* to add or remove in any environment ensures reusability.

The interfaces enable the rapid adjustment of the training and its environment. Interfaces and notifications provide real-time advice to the trainer, while icons help locate *components* within the environment. Tracking the impact of these *components* reinforces the assistance provided. It is also worth noting that learners are viewed as *components* of the learning environment. They are identified by icons. For instance, when a learner carries or uses an object, the trainer observes an object icon and an action icon.

For the time being, it is possible that this work will require additional functionality features. This framework could be integrated to enhance the learning, for instance, vocal communication. To illustrate, the trainer might convey instructions to one or multiple learners to rectify an error or provide them with pertinent information. The limitations and potential challenges that the results of this framework may face will be detailed in the next section.
Cascading Effect Simulation To Authoring Training Environments offers a novel outlook for immersive training. The framework employs a personalised and social teaching method, aimed at enhancing the understanding between learners and trainers. This proximity pedagogy benefits both parties and is similar to the experience of being physically present in a conventional classroom. Evaluation is not limited to graded reports stored away but encompasses a more comprehensive approach.

With a view to managing large-scale exercises, multiplayer could also enable a group of trainers to work together. This would give an extra dimension to a single trainer, as proposed in this document, interacting with the training environment. The article and its case study propose an example for a single trainer with a simulated environment for several learners. For better training management, each learner could have his or her own trainer in the environment. But it might be interesting to analyse one trainer for different environments, or several trainers for several environments.

This framework approach needs further qualification as it has not yet been evaluated in real training contexts and currently remains a research prototype. The goal is to develop the tool in collaboration with trainers to integrate it into future training sessions. This proposal introduces an innovative authoring tool. However, it is essential to note that it has already undergone successful testing within the EGCERSIS project, as presented previously (Evain et al., 2021, 2023). This positive experience bodes well for future tool development.

Although immersive environments can provide a realistic experience, they may also be disorientating or cause nausea in some participants, thereby reducing training effectiveness (Luks and Liarokapis, 2019). Furthermore, individuals with disabilities or cognitive limitations may encounter difficulties in accessing immersive training, which poses challenges in terms of accessibility and inclusion (Dudley et al., 2023; Mott et al., 2020). While these challenges are expected to diminish as technology evolves, addressing a diverse audience remains difficult at present. Training participants require compatible equipment, including virtual reality headsets, which may exclude individuals or organizations with budget constraints or limited technical abilities. Furthermore, users require adequate training to competently operate prototypes or commercial solutions. Not only does this pose a high initial expense, but it is also time-consuming to consider in advance. Organizations must therefore be prepared to invest financial resources in adopting this technology. In addition, they require support in acquiring knowledge on how to use these tools and applications.

Data protection is essential in the age of new technologies, particularly when the users are crisis managers. The integration of VR into crisis management training and simulations makes it possible to create immersive scenarios. These virtual environments collect and analyse vast amounts of personal data, ranging from users' physiological reactions to decisions taken in simulated situations. However, this massive use of data raises major concerns about its security and confidentiality. It is imperative that these tools adopt robust data protection measures to prevent information leaks. Crisis managers need to be aware of this to ensure ethical and secure use of personal information.

In addition, virtual reality tools and applications are durable and offer significant benefits for crisis management training, they require regular maintenance of hardware and software. It is essential to remain vigilant to ensure that they function flawlessly. Technical malfunctions, such as hardware failures, software bugs or incompatibilities between different versions, can cause significant disruption. These problems can not
only interrupt training sessions, but also require extensive troubleshooting, mobilis-
ing considerable human and financial resources. To minimise these risks, it is crucial
to put in place a regular maintenance plan, including software updates, hardware
integrity checks and incident management protocols. In addition, training users in ba-
sic troubleshooting procedures can reduce response time in the event of a problem.
Partnerships with hardware and software suppliers can also ensure fast and efficient
technical support. In summary, although the benefits of VR training environments are
numerous, the sustainability and effectiveness of these tools is highly dependent on the
quality of maintenance and technical support. A proactive maintenance and incident
management strategy is therefore essential to maximise the effectiveness of training
and minimise interruptions.

The available content may be restricted, thereby limiting the range of training scenarios. To address this, there is a need to expand both the quantity and diversity of available *components*, *potentials*, and *actualities*. Currently, the application provides options only related to crisis management. Although the model's generic openness may permit its application to other domains, that option has not yet been implemented in this prototype. Furthermore, the creation of new *potentialities* and *actualities* at run-time remains severely restricted.

If all these limitations were integrated and corrected in advance, the result would be
universal immersive training. The main limitations noted here to be taken into account
are as follows ensuring that training programs are not only attractive, but also effec-
tive in imparting the necessary skills and knowledge, protecting user data, developing
robust systems enabling seamless multi-user interactions in the virtual environment,
increasing the ability to train large numbers of participants simultaneously without
compromising the quality of the experience, reduce cases of motion sickness through
improved hardware and software solutions, thereby increasing user comfort and ef-
ficiency, ensure regular maintenance of hardware and software to avoid disruptions,
including updates, troubleshooting and ensuring compatibility, and expand the range
of training scenarios and modules available to provide a complete training experience
in different crisis situations.

7. Conclusion

Authoring the scenario of an immersive training simulation for crisis management is
very complex due to the inherent unpredictability of the subject. "Narrowly scripted"
scenarios, closely re-enacting a typical course of events, offer controllable experiences
that are both easier to design and less likely to deviate from the initial learning objec-
tives. Yet, they may fall short of reflecting the correct acquisition of critical thinking
and decision-making skills.

On the other hand, trying to engineer an environment which realistically simulates
accurate reactions and consequences is a vain endeavour, let alone if said environment
is populated with autonomous characters. Besides, such an approach would deny the
role of the expert in the training.

This article has taken a very pragmatic approach to this issue, delineating a two-
part solution. Firstly, a metamodel has been proposed to guide and frame the author's
work when modelling a training environment that truly accounts for the causal chain of
events that makes in this case cascading disasters or crisis hard to model realistically.

Secondly, a graphical framework seconds the metamodel by assisting the author
with visual cues and UX metaphors for piloting the training from within and in real
time.

Key elements were identified, such as variability, reusability and assistance to design that are underutilized in commercial tools. The CESTATE framework has managed to reconcile them with a practical approach to create operating and efficient training simulations.

The overall proposal contributes to making training scenarios in immersive environments more robust, by controlling the positive/negative effects components may potentially and actually have on each other, and more flexible, by allowing authors to express their expertise online and keep the training under educational control.

In this article, the CESTATE framework was utilised in a use-case related to crisis management training. Yet, it may just as appropriately be used for related topics. It will be more developed in future project in a crisis management, and in the near future will take on more abstract approaches, for making projections of different scenarios in an aircraft assembly line.

While the interfaces are designed to prevent information overload, there is room for improvement. A prototype has been created for broad usability, however, enhancing the user experience and interfaces through new elements like eye movement tracking, guided by market feedback and best practice, could add further perfection.

The interface could also add information in a new window, such as suggested scenarios or possible scenario connections. The trainer could have a history of all his actions. This would allow him to go back if the learner has made a mistake. The trainer could point out an element in the environment that could be highlighted for the learner. These are all fairly common ideas that can be found in collaboration tools and that could be used in this kind of tool.

Although virtual reality has made great strides in training users to cope with critical dynamic situations, authoring immersive environments is still uncharted territory. Nevertheless, tools like the CESTATE framework are bound to evolve and develop increasingly in content control and ease of use. Let's hope that in 5 years time, this type of authoring tool will be more commonplace and will have found its audience and its place in commercial offerings.

## 8. Acknowledgments

This research was funded by the EGCERSIS project and supported by the Région Occitanie (Occitanie - FEDER Dispositif GRAINE FEDER 2014-2020 Délibération CP/2017- OCT/06.02) and private companies (Immersive Factory and Report One).

For the purpose of Open Access, a CC-BY public copyright license has been applied by the authors to the present document and will be applied to all subsequent versions up to the Author Accepted Manuscript arising from this submission.

<figure><img src="image_9.png" /></figure>

## References

* Nada Aouadi, Philippe Pernelle, Chokri Ben Amar, and Thibault Carron. MDA Approach for Reusability in Serious Game and E-learning Design. In Dickson K.W. Chiu, Ivana
Marenzi, Umberto Nanni, Marc Spaniol, and Marco Temperini, editors, *Advances in Web-Based Learning - ICWL 2016*, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 206–212. Springer International Publishing, 2016. ISBN 978-3-319-47440-3. . Place: Cham.

Frederick Benaben, Louis Faugere, Benoit Montreuil, Matthieu Lauras, Nafe Moradkhani, Thibaut Cerabona, Juanqiong Gou, and Wenxin Mu. Instability is the norm! A physics-based theory to navigate among risks and opportunities. *Enterprise Information Systems*, pages 1–28, January 2021. ISSN 1751-7575, 1751-7583. URL https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/17517575.2021.1878391.

Frederick Benaben, Audrey Fertier, Thibaut Cerabona, Nafe Moradkhani, Matthieu Lauras, and Benoit Montreuil. Decision Support in uncertain contexts: Physics of Decision and Virtual Reality. page p. 54. University of Nebraska Omaha University of Nebraska Omaha ; ISCRAM, May 2023. URL https://imt-mines-albi.hal.science/hal-04118953.

Anjum Zameer Bhat, Imran Ahmed, Lakshmi Kameswari, and Mohammed Samiullah Khan. A Game Based Innovative teaching and learning environment to enhance progression and performance of students. *SHS Web of Conferences*, 156:01001, 2023. ISSN 2261-2424. URL https://www.shs-conferences.org/articles/shsconf/abs/2023/05/shsconf_ict12023_01001/shsconf_ict12023_01001.html.

Neysa Brown, Wendy Darby, and Helen Coronel. An Escape Room as a Simulation Teaching Strategy. *Clinical Simulation in Nursing*, 30:1–6, May 2019. ISSN 1876-1399. URL https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1876139918302615.

Daniel W. Carruth. Virtual reality for education and workforce training. In *2017 15th International Conference on Emerging eLearning Technologies and Applications (ICETA)*, pages 1–6. IEEE, October 2017. ISBN 978-1-5386-3296-3. URL http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/8102472/. Place: Stary Smokovec.

Fernando Cassola, Daniel Mendes, Manuel Pinto, Leonel Morgado, Sara Costa, Luis Anjos, David Marques, Filipe Rosa, Ana Maia, Helga Tavares, Antonio Coelho, and Hugo Paredes. Design and Evaluation of a Choreography-Based Virtual Reality Authoring Tool for Experiential Learning in Industrial Training. *IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON LEARNING TECHNOLOGIES*, 15(5):526–539, October 2022. ISSN 1939-1382. .

Hugo Coelho, Miguel Melo, José Martins, and Maximino Bessa. Collaborative immersive authoring tool for real-time creation of multisensory VR experiences. *Multimedia Tools and Applications*, 78(14):19473–19493, July 2019. ISSN 1380-7501, 1573-7721. URL http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11042-019-7309-x.

Jean-Benoît Culié, Stéphane Sanchez, and David Panzoli. Effortlessly populating immersive training simulations with background characters. In *Proceedings of the XR Salento International Conference on eXtended Reality*, 2023. Place: Lecce, Italy.

John Dudley, Lulu Yin, Vanja Garaj, and Per Ola Kristensson. Inclusive Immersion: a review of efforts to improve accessibility in virtual reality, augmented reality and the metaverse. *Virtual Reality*, 27(4):2989–3020, December 2023. ISSN 1434-9957. URL https://doi.org/10.1007/s10055-023-00850-8.

Alexis Evain, Aurelie Conges, and Frederick Benaben. Management of crisis exercises in virtual reality. In *2021 IEEE Conference on Virtual Reality and 3D User Interfaces Abstracts and Workshops (VRW)*, pages 6–13. IEEE, 2021. ISBN 978-1-66544-057-8. URL https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/9419153/.

Alexis Evain, Audrey Fertier, Shane Halse, Jessica Kropczynski, David Panzoli, Frederick Benaben, and Robin Batard. A Framework for virtual training in a crisis context and a focus on the animation component: the gamemaster workshop. In *HICSS 2023 - 56th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences*, January 2023. URL https://imt-mines-albi.hal.science/hal-04008019. Place: Hawaii, United States.

Garry Falloon. Using simulations to teach young students science concepts: An Experiential Learning theoretical analysis. *Computers & Education*, 135:138–159, 2019.

Jonas Freiknecht and Wolfgang Effelsberg. A survey on the procedural generation of virtual worlds. *Multimodal Technologies and Interaction*, 1(4):27, 2017.

Juho Hamari, Jonna Koivisto, and Harri Sarsa. Does gamification work? – a literature review
of empirical studies on gamification. In *2014 47th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences*, pages 3025–3034. IEEE, 2014. ISBN 978-1-4799-2504-9. URL http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/6758978/.

Robin Horst, Ralf Dorner, Ramtin Naraghi-Taghi-Off, and Linda Rau. Bite-Sized Virtual Reality Learning Applications: A Pattern-Based Immersive Authoring Environment. *JUCS - Journal of Universal Computer Science*, 26(8):947–971, 2020. ISSN 0948-695X. URL https://doi.org/10.3897/jucs.2020.051.

Anastasios Karakostas, Anastasios Maronidis, Dimitrios Ververidis, Efstathios Nikolaidis, Anastasios Papazoglou Chalikias, Spiros Nikolopoulos, and Ioannis Kompatsiaris. Enhancing Virtual Learning Spaces: The Impact of the Gaming Analytics. In *Santi Caballé and Jordi Conesa, editors, Software Data Engineering for Network eLearning Environments*, volume 11, pages 115–137. Springer International Publishing, Cham, 2018. ISBN 978-3-319-68317-1 978-3-319-68318-8. URL http://link.springer.com/10.1007/978-3-319-68318-8_6.

D. A. Kolb. *Experiential Learning: experience as the source of learning and development*. Prentice-Hall, New Jersey, 1984.

Enricoandrea Laviola, Michele Gattullo, Vito Modesto Manghisi, Michele Fiorentino, and Antonio Emmanuele Uva. Minimal AR: visual asset optimization for the authoring of augmented reality work instructions in manufacturing. *The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology*, 119(3):1769–1784, March 2022. ISSN 0268-3768, 1433-3015. URL https://link.springer.com/10.1007/s00170-021-08449-6.

Ryan Lohre, Aaron J. Bois, George S. Athwal, Danny P. Goel, and on behalf of the Canadian Shoulder and Elbow Society (CSES). Improved Complex Skill Acquisition by Immersive Virtual Reality Training: A Randomized Controlled Trial. *Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery*, 102(6):e26, March 2020. ISSN 0021-9355, 1535-1386. URL https://journals.lww.com/10.2106/JBJS.19.00982.

Roman Luks and Fotis Liarokapis. Investigating motion sickness techniques for immersive virtual environments. In *Proceedings of the 12th ACM International Conference on PErvasive Technologies Related to Assistive Environments*, PETRA '19, pages 280–288. Association for Computing Machinery, June 2019. ISBN 978-1-4503-6232-0. URL https://doi.org/10.1145/3316782.3321535. Place: New York, NY, USA.

Martez Mott, John Tang, Shaun Kane, Edward Cutrell, and Meredith Ringel Morris. "I just went into it assuming that I wouldn't be able to have the full experience": Understanding the Accessibility of Virtual Reality for People with Limited Mobility. In *Proceedings of the 22nd International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility*, ASSETS '20, pages 1–13. Association for Computing Machinery, October 2020. ISBN 978-1-4503-7103-2. URL https://doi.org/10.1145/3373625.3416998. Place: New York, NY, USA.

Juan A. Muñoz-Cristóbal, Vanesa Gallego-Lema, Higinio F. Arribas-Cubero, Alejandra Martínez-Monés, and Juan I. Asensio-Pérez. Using virtual learning environments in bricolage mode for orchestrating learning situations across physical and virtual spaces. *Computers & Education*, 109:233–252, June 2017. ISSN 03601315. URL https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0360131517300520.

Aniket Nagle, Domen Novak, Peter Wolf, and Robert Riener. The effect of different difficulty adaptation strategies on enjoyment and performance in a serious game for memory training. In *2014 IEEE 3rd International Conference on Serious Games and Applications for Health (SeGAH)*, pages 1–8, May 2014.

C. Palmer, B. Roullier, M. Aamir, F. McQuade, Leonardo Stella, A. Anjum, and U. Diala. Digital Twinning remote laboratories for online practical learning. *PRODUCTION AND MANUFACTURING RESEARCH-AN OPEN ACCESS JOURNAL*, 10(1):519–545, December 2022.

Jan L. Plass, Bruce D. Homer, and Charles K. Kinzer. Foundations of Game-Based Learning. *Educational Psychologist*, 50(4):258–283, October 2015. ISSN 0046-1520, 1532-6985. URL http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00461520.2015.1122533.

Luis P. Prieto, Martina Holenko Dlab, Israel Gutiérrez, Mahmoud Abdulwahed, and Walid
Balid. Orchestrating technology enhanced learning: a literature review and a conceptual framework. *International Journal of Technology Enhanced Learning*, 3(6):583–598, January 2011. ISSN 1753-5255. URL https://www.inderscienceonline.com/doi/abs/10.1504/IJTEL.2011.045449.

José Eduardo Santos, Miguel Nunes, Marcelo Pires, José Rocha, Nuno Sousa, Telmo Adão, Luís Gonzaga Magalhães, Cristiano Jesus, Rui Sousa, Rui Lima, Andreia Reis, and Eliana Oliveira. Generic XR game-based approach for industrial training. In *2022 International Conference on Graphics and Interaction (ICGI)*, pages 1–8, November 2022. URL https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/9990346.

Richard Skarbez, Frederick P. Brooks, and Mary C. Whitton. Immersion and Coherence: Research Agenda and Early Results. *IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics*, 27(10):3839–3850, October 2021. ISSN 1941-0506. URL https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/bjop.12305.

Mel Slater. Immersion and the illusion of presence in virtual reality. *British Journal of Psychology*, 109(3):431–433, August 2018. ISSN 00071269. URL https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1007/s10055-009-0113-6.

Shana Smith and Emily Ericson. Using immersive game-based virtual reality to teach fire-safety skills to children. *Virtual Reality*, 13(2):87–99, June 2009. ISSN 1434-9957. URL https://doi.org/10.1007/s10055-009-0113-6.

Joe Thomas. Force field analysis: A new way to evaluate your strategy. *Long Range Planning*, 18(6):54–59, December 1985. ISSN 0024-6301. URL https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0024630185900640.

Ina Wechsung and Katrien De Moor. Quality of Experience Versus User Experience. In Sebastian Möller and Alexander Raake, editors, *Quality of Experience: Advanced Concepts, Applications and Methods*, T-Labs Series in Telecommunication Services, pages 35–54. Springer International Publishing, Cham, 2014. ISBN 978-3-319-02681-7. URL https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-02681-7_3.

Alemayehu Wubale, Dagnachew Kebede, and Alemayehu Belay. Effects of Game-Based Training Approach on Physical Abilities in Male Youth Volleyball Players. *Pamukkale Journal of Sport Sciences*, 14(2):206–219, August 2023. ISSN 1309-0356. URL https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/psbd/issue/79579/1256057.