Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page
Demo Data from VLDB 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert

Jiaxiang Du

dblp:240/0981 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
0since 2021 · last 2019
—ORCID · unresolved

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Graphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 1Human-computer interaction and ubiquitous computing · 1

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Computer graphics and multimedia
1 paper
Visualization and visual analytics · 100%
Human-computer interaction and pervasive computing
1 paper
Interaction techniques and input · 100%

Topics — the 2 heaviest of 3, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Visualization and visual analytics › information visualization › eye tracking visualization
gaze visualization		 0.412019
Head Pointer or Eye Gaze: Which Helps More in MR Remote Collaboration? · VR 2019
Interaction techniques and input › input modality
eye gaze		 0.112019
Head Pointer or Eye Gaze: Which Helps More in MR Remote Collaboration? · VR 2019

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

user study · 0.8
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2019 Head Pointer or Eye Gaze: Which Helps More in MR Remote Collaboration?
abstract
This paper investigates how two different unique gaze visualizations (the head pointer(HP), eye gaze(EG)) affect table-size physical tasks in Mixed Reality (MR) remote collaboration. We developed a remote collaborative MR Platform which supports sharing of the remote expert's HP and EG. The prototype was evaluated with a user study comparing two conditions: sharing HP and EG with respect to their effectiveness in the performance and quality of cooperation. There was a statistically significant difference between two conditions on the performance time, and HP is a good proxy for EG in remote collaboration.
Peng Wang 0083, Shusheng Zhang, Xiaoliang Bai, Mark Billinghurst, Weiping He, Shuxia Wang, Jiaxiang Du, Yongxing Chen
 VR8