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

Marc Gacy

dblp:29/3198 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
2ranked-venue papers
1as first author
0since 2021 · last 2012
—ORCID · none

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

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 2 · 1 first-authorHuman-computer interaction and ubiquitous computing · 2 · 1 first-author

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.

Human-computer interaction and pervasive computing
2 papers
Human-robot interaction · 86% Usability and user experience research · 14%
Artificial intelligence
1 paper
Legged, aerial and field robots · 100%

Topics — the 5 heaviest of 6, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Human-robot interaction › multi-robot systems
multi-robot control
0.112006
Commonality of control paradigms for unmanned systems · HRI 2006
Human-robot interaction
operator workload
0.112006
Commonality of control paradigms for unmanned systems · HRI 2006
Usability and user experience research › user performance
operator performance
0.012012
Transfer from a simulation environment to a live robotic environment: are certain demographics better? · HRI 2012
Robotics › Legged, aerial and field robots › aerial robots
unmanned aerial vehicle
0.012006
Commonality of control paradigms for unmanned systems · HRI 2006
Robotics › Legged, aerial and field robots
unmanned ground vehicle
0.012006
Commonality of control paradigms for unmanned systems · HRI 2006

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

statistical analysis · 0.1demographic analysis · 0.1experiment · 0.1control paradigm design · 0.1
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2012 Transfer from a simulation environment to a live robotic environment: are certain demographics better?
abstract
The ability to remotely operate an unmanned vehicle while simultaneously looking for suspicious targets and then classifying those targets is not a trivial skill. This study looked at different training approaches to make better use of simulation as a first training step. When transferring to a live environment, the operators could be grouped into two categories according to whether they passed live training criteria or not. There were clear performance differences between these groups. The group that failed to pass criteria had poorer performance overall, more SA errors, and spent more time in training. Post-hoc analysis showed differences in the demographics between those who passed and those that did not. Male participants and younger participants were more likely to achieve criteria. There were no differences in gaming experience and perceived sense of direction.
Patricia L. McDermott, Alia Fisher, Thomas Carolan, Mark R. Gronowski, Marc Gacy, Michael Overstreet
HRI5
2006 Commonality of control paradigms for unmanned systems
abstract
One of the technical thrusts within the Robotics Collaborative Technology Alliance (CTA) from the Army Research Laboratory has been to design, build, and experiment with new concept control systems that will allow a single human to simultaneously control multiple unmanned ground and air vehicles. We have developed both vehicle mounted and dismounted controllers that all provide a similar look and feel, with relatively equivalent control capabilities. The similarity in capabilities includes not only support functions such as map management and reporting, but the actual planning, tasking and control of the unmanned systems including small unmanned ground vehicles (SUGV), larger unmanned ground vehicles (UGV) and unmanned air vehicles (UAV).
Marc Gacy, David Dahn
HRI1