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

Wei-An Teng

dblp:329/5752 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
1ranked-venue papers
1as first author
1since 2021 · last 2025
0009-0006-1556-8071ORCID · reported

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

Graphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 1 · 1 first-author · 1 since 2021

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
1 paper
Usability and user experience research · 100%
Computer graphics and multimedia
1 paper
Virtual and augmented reality · 100%

Topics — the 4 heaviest of 4, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Virtual and augmented reality
augmented reality display
0.912025
Comparison of User Performance and Experience Between Light Field and Conventional AR Glasses · IEEE Trans. Vis. Comput. Graph. 2025
Usability and user experience research
user performance
0.912025
Comparison of User Performance and Experience Between Light Field and Conventional AR Glasses · IEEE Trans. Vis. Comput. Graph. 2025
Usability and user experience research › visual perception › visual attention
visual search task
0.912025
Comparison of User Performance and Experience Between Light Field and Conventional AR Glasses · IEEE Trans. Vis. Comput. Graph. 2025
Usability and user experience research › visual perception
vergence-accommodation conflict
0.312025
Comparison of User Performance and Experience Between Light Field and Conventional AR Glasses · IEEE Trans. Vis. Comput. Graph. 2025

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

serial visual search task · 1.7controlled experiment · 1.7
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2025 Comparison of User Performance and Experience Between Light Field and Conventional AR Glasses
abstract
Light field AR glasses can provide better visual comfort than conventional AR glasses; however, studies on user performance comparison between them are notably scarce. In this article, we present a systematic method employing a serial visual search task without confounding factors to quantify and compare the user performance and experience between these two types of AR glasses at two different viewing distances, 30 cm and 60 cm, and in two modes, purely virtual VR mode and virtual-real integration AR mode. The results show that the light field AR glasses led to a significantly faster reaction speed and higher accuracy than the conventional AR glasses at 30 cm in the AR mode. The participant feedback also shows that the former led to better virtual-real integration. User performance and experience of the light field AR glasses remained consistent across different viewing distances. Although the conventional AR glasses had a better search efficiency than the light field AR glasses at 60 cm in both AR and VR modes, it had more negative feedback from the participants. Overall, the design of this experiment successfully allows us to quantify the effect of VAC and underscores the strength of the evaluation method.
Wei-An Teng, Su-Ling Yeh, Homer H. Chen
IEEE Trans. Vis. Comput. Graph.1