EDBT 2026 Demo / reviewers in the wild / expert
Sezen Akman
dblp:239/7953
· DBLP profile ↗
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
0since 2021 · last 2019
—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 |
Immersive interaction · 67% Haptics and multimodal interaction · 33% |
Topics — the 3 heaviest of 3, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Immersive interaction
presence and immersion |
0.4 | 1 | 2019 | Detecting Visuo-Haptic Mismatches in Virtual Reality using the Prediction Error Negativity of Event-Related Brain Potentials · CHI 2019 |
Immersive interaction
virtual reality |
0.4 | 1 | 2019 | Detecting Visuo-Haptic Mismatches in Virtual Reality using the Prediction Error Negativity of Event-Related Brain Potentials · CHI 2019 |
Haptics and multimodal interaction › multisensory interaction
visuo-haptic interaction |
0.4 | 1 | 2019 | Detecting Visuo-Haptic Mismatches in Virtual Reality using the Prediction Error Negativity of Event-Related Brain Potentials · CHI 2019 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
prediction error negativity · 0.4event-related brain potentials · 0.4electroencephalography · 0.4
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019 | Detecting Visuo-Haptic Mismatches in Virtual Reality using the Prediction Error Negativity of Event-Related Brain PotentialsabstractDesigning immersion is the key challenge in virtual reality; this challenge has driven advancements in displays, rendering and recently, haptics. To increase our sense of physical immersion, for instance, vibrotactile gloves render the sense of touching, while electrical muscle stimulation (EMS) renders forces. Unfortunately, the established metric to assess the effectiveness of haptic devices relies on the user's subjective interpretation of unspecific, yet standardized, questions. Lukas Gehrke, Sezen Akman, Pedro Lopes 0001, Albert Chen 0004, Avinash Kumar Singh, Hsiang-Ting Chen, Chin-Teng Lin, Klaus Gramann |
CHI | 2 |