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

Robert Book

dblp:51/6497 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
0since 2021 · last 1999
—ORCID · none

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

Human-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.

Human-computer interaction and pervasive computing
1 paper
Interaction techniques and input · 87% Wearable and physiological sensing · 13%

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

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Interaction techniques and input › text entry
mobile touch typing
0.011999
Non-Keyboard QWERTY Touch Typing: A Portable Input Interface for The Mobile User · CHI 1999
Interaction techniques and input
text entry
0.011999
Non-Keyboard QWERTY Touch Typing: A Portable Input Interface for The Mobile User · CHI 1999

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

language model · 0.0
YearPublicationVenuePosition
1999 Non-Keyboard QWERTY Touch Typing: A Portable Input Interface for The Mobile User
abstract
Using traditional mobile input devices results in decreased effectiveness and efficiency. To improve usability issues a portable Non-Keyboard QWERTY touch-typing paradigm that supports the mobile touch-typing user is presented and investigated. It requires negligible training time. Pressure sensors strapped to the fingertips of gloves detect which finger is depressed. A language model based on lexical and syntactic knowledge transforms the depressed finger stroke sequence into real words and sentences. Different mobile input QWERTY paradigms (miniaturised, floating and Non-Keyboard) have been compared with full-size QWERTY. Among the mobile input paradigms, the Non-Keyboard fared significantly better, both regarding character error rate and subjective ratings.
Mikael Goldstein, Robert Book, Gunilla Alsiö, Silvia Tessa
CHI2