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

Ajay Surendernath

dblp:74/11181 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
1ranked-venue papers
1as first author
0since 2021 · last 2012
—ORCID · none

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

Graphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 1 · 1 first-authorHuman-computer interaction and ubiquitous computing · 1 · 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.

Computer graphics and multimedia
1 paper
Virtual and augmented reality · 100%
Human-computer interaction and pervasive computing
1 paper
Collaborative and social computing · 77% Usability and user experience research · 23%

Topics — the 3 heaviest of 4, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Virtual and augmented reality › virtual environment
immersive virtual environments
0.112012
Mixing real and virtual conferencing: Lessons learned · VR 2012
Virtual and augmented reality › virtual environment
networked virtual environment
0.112012
Mixing real and virtual conferencing: Lessons learned · VR 2012
Usability and user experience research
user experience evaluation
0.012012
Mixing real and virtual conferencing: Lessons learned · VR 2012

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

survey · 0.3participant observation · 0.3interviews · 0.3
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2012 Mixing real and virtual conferencing: Lessons learned
abstract
This paper describes a conference which linked several remote sites via a virtual environment so that the virtual audience could follow the presentations and interact with real presenters. The aim was to assess the feasibility of linking distributed virtual audiences to an ongoing conference event. Various types of data about the conference were gathered, such as participant observations, interviews and a survey of the audience, and analyzed. The main finding is that a number of `low tech' improvements could be made that could greatly enhance this type of virtual conferencing. A related finding is that the visual fidelity of the environment and of the avatars plays a lesser role than other factors such as audio quality. Given the paucity of research on how virtual conferencing can substitute for travel, plus the urgency of this topic for environmental reasons, a number of suggestions are made for the implementation of remote virtual conference participation.
Ajay Surendernath, Geetika Sharma, Ralph Schroeder, Basant Kumar Pandey
VR1