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

Jason Wither

dblp:50/6575 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
10ranked-venue papers
7as first author
0since 2021 · last 2013
—ORCID · none

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

Graphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 9 · 6 first-authorHuman-computer interaction and ubiquitous computing · 7 · 5 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
4 papers
Immersive interaction · 55% Interaction techniques and input · 36% Ubiquitous computing and smart environments · 6%
Computer graphics and multimedia
4 papers
Virtual and augmented reality · 44% Image and video processing · 20% Geometric modeling and processing · 20%

Topics — the 10 heaviest of 17, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Image and video processing › feature detection
marker detection
0.112011
Mobile Augmented Reality at the Hollywood Walk of Fame · VR 2011
Virtual and augmented reality › augmented reality
mobile augmented reality
0.112011
Mobile Augmented Reality at the Hollywood Walk of Fame · VR 2011
Immersive interaction
augmented reality interaction
0.112011
Comparing spatial understanding between touch-based and AR-style interaction · ISMAR 2011
Interaction techniques and input
touch interaction
0.112011
Comparing spatial understanding between touch-based and AR-style interaction · ISMAR 2011
Geometric modeling and processing
3d reconstruction
0.112008
Fast annotation and modeling with a single-point laser range finder · ISMAR 2008
Virtual and augmented reality
mixed reality
0.112008
Envisor: Online Environment Map Construction for Mixed Reality · VR 2008
Immersive interaction › augmented reality
wearable augmented reality
0.112008
Fast annotation and modeling with a single-point laser range finder · ISMAR 2008
Immersive interaction › augmented reality
augmented reality display
0.112007
Evaluating Display Types for AR Selection and Annotation · ISMAR 2007
Immersive interaction › augmented reality
mobile augmented reality
0.112006
Using aerial photographs for improved mobile AR annotation · ISMAR 2006
Interaction techniques and input
annotation
0.012008
Fast annotation and modeling with a single-point laser range finder · ISMAR 2008

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

comparative user study · 0.2texture diffusion · 0.2laser range finder · 0.2image processing · 0.2gyroscope/compass tracking · 0.2cubemap projection · 0.2geometric detection · 0.1feature alignment · 0.1
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2013 Moving beyond the map: automated landmark based pedestrian guidance using street level panoramas
abstract
In the past people have used very different forms of directions depending on how those directions were acquired. If a person is giving another person directions in a familiar area, he will frequently use landmarks to describe the route [10]. If the person gets the route from a personal navigation system though, it will be displayed on a map and make use of street names for the directions.
Jason Wither, Carmen E. Au, Raymond Rischpater, Radek Grzeszczuk
Mobile HCI1
2011 Comparing spatial understanding between touch-based and AR-style interaction
abstract
There are currently two primary ways of viewing location specific information in-situ on hand-held mobile device screens: using a see-through augmented reality interface and using a touch-based interface with panoramas. The two approaches use fundamentally different interaction metaphors: an AR-style of interacting where the user holds up the device and physically moves it to change views of the world, and a touch-based technique where panorama navigation is independent of the physical world. We have investigated how this difference in interaction technique impacts a user's spatial understanding of the mixed reality world. Our study found that AR-style interaction provided better spatial understanding overall, while touch-based interaction changed the experience to have more similar characteristics to interaction in a separate virtual environment.
Jason Wither, Sean White, Ronald T. Azuma
ISMAR1
2011 Mobile Augmented Reality at the Hollywood Walk of Fame
abstract
This work introduces techniques to facilitate large-scale Augmented Reality (AR) experiences in unprepared outdoor environments. We develop a shape-based object detection framework that works with limited texture and can robustly handle extreme illumination and occlusion issues. The contribution of this work is a purely geometric approach for detecting marker-like objects under difficult and realistic outdoor conditions. We demonstrate these techniques for mobile AR experiences by detecting and tracking star-shaped pentagrams embedded in the Hollywood Walk of Fame at 30Hz on a Nokia N900 phone.
Thommen Korah, Jason Wither, Yun-Ta Tsai, Ronald T. Azuma
VR2
2011 Indirect augmented reality
Jason Wither, Yun-Ta Tsai, Ronald T. Azuma
Comput. Graph.1
2009 All around the map: Online spherical panorama construction
Stephen DiVerdi, Jason Wither, Tobias Höllerer
Comput. Graph.2
2009 Annotation in outdoor augmented reality
Jason Wither, Stephen DiVerdi, Tobias Höllerer
Comput. Graph.1
2008 Fast annotation and modeling with a single-point laser range finder
abstract
This paper presents methodology for integrating a small, single-point laser range finder into a wearable augmented reality system. We first present a way of creating object-aligned annotations with very little user effort. Second, we describe techniques to segment and pop-up foreground objects. Finally, we introduce a method using the laser range finder to incrementally build 3D panoramas from a fixed observerpsilas location. To build a 3D panorama semi-automatically, we track the systempsilas orientation and use the sparse range data acquired as the user looks around in conjunction with real-time image processing to construct geometry around the userpsilas position. Using full 3D panoramic geometry, it is possible for new virtual objects to be placed in the scene with proper lighting and occlusion by real world objects, which increases the expressivity of the AR experience.
Jason Wither, Christopher Coffin, Jonathan Ventura, Tobias Höllerer
ISMAR1
2008 Envisor: Online Environment Map Construction for Mixed Reality
abstract
One of the main goals of anywhere augmentation is the development of automatic algorithms for scene acquisition in augmented reality systems. In this paper, we present Envisor, a system for online construction of environment maps in new locations. To accomplish this, Envisor uses vision-based frame to frame and landmark orientation tracking for long-term, drift-free registration. For additional robustness, a gyroscope/compass orientation unit can optionally be used for hybrid tracking. The tracked video is then projected into a cubemap frame by frame. Feedback is presented to the user to help avoid gaps in the cubemap, while any remaining gaps are filled by texture diffusion. The resulting environment map can be used for a variety of applications, including shading of virtual geometry and remote presence.
Stephen DiVerdi, Jason Wither, Tobias Höllerer
VR2
2007 Evaluating Display Types for AR Selection and Annotation
abstract
This paper evaluates different display devices for selection or annotation tasks in augmented reality (AR). We compare three different display types - a head mounted display and two hand held displays. The first hand held display is configured as a magic lens where the user sees the augmented space directly behind the display. The second hand held display is configured to be used at waist level (as one would commonly hold a tablet computer) but the view is still of the scene in front of the user. Making a selection or annotation in AR requires two distinct tasks by the user. First, the user must find the real (or virtual) object they want to mark. Second, the user must move a cursor to the object's location. We test and compare our three representative displays with respect to both tasks. We found that using a hand held display in the magic lens configuration was faster for cursor movement than either of the other two displays. There was no significant difference among the displays regarding the amount of time it took users to search for either physical or virtual objects.
Jason Wither, Stephen DiVerdi, Tobias Höllerer
ISMAR1
2006 Using aerial photographs for improved mobile AR annotation
abstract
We present a mobile augmented reality system for outdoor annotation of the real world. To reduce user burden, we use aerial photographs in addition to the wearable system's usual data sources (position, orientation, camera and user input). This allows the user to accurately annotate 3D features with only a few simple interactions from a single position by aligning features in both their first-person viewpoint and in the aerial view. We examine three types of aerial photograph features - corners, edges, and regions - that are suitable for a wide variety of useful mobile augmented reality applications, and are easily visible on aerial photographs. By using aerial photographs in combination with wearable augmented reality, we are able to achieve much higher accuracy 3D annotation positions than was previously possible from a single user location.
Jason Wither, Stephen DiVerdi, Tobias Höllerer
ISMAR1