Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Lukas Maximilian Masopust
dblp:305/6632
· DBLP profile ↗
1ranked-venue papers
1as first author
1since 2021 · last 2021
—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-author · 1 since 2021Human-computer interaction and ubiquitous computing · 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 |
Wearable and physiological sensing · 44% Interaction techniques and input · 44% Usability and user experience research · 13% |
Topics — the 2 heaviest of 3, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Wearable and physiological sensing › eye tracking
gaze-based interaction |
0.5 | 1 | 2021 | A Comparison of the Fatigue Progression of Eye-Tracked and Motion-Controlled Interaction in Immersive Space · ISMAR 2021 |
Interaction techniques and input › post-WIMP interaction › embodied interaction
movement-based interaction |
0.5 | 1 | 2021 | A Comparison of the Fatigue Progression of Eye-Tracked and Motion-Controlled Interaction in Immersive Space · ISMAR 2021 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
user study · 0.5eye tracking · 0.5
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2021 | A Comparison of the Fatigue Progression of Eye-Tracked and Motion-Controlled Interaction in Immersive SpaceabstractEye-tracking enabled virtual reality (VR) headsets have recently become more widely available. This opens up opportunities to incorporate eye gaze interaction methods in VR applications. However, studies on the fatigue-induced performance fluctuations of these new input modalities are scarce and rarely provide a direct comparison with established interaction methods. We conduct a study to compare the selection-interaction performance between commonly used handheld motion control devices and emerging eye interaction technology in VR. We investigate each interaction’s unique fatigue progression pattern in study sessions with ten minutes of continuous engagement. The results support and extend previous findings regarding the progression of fatigue in eye-tracked interaction over prolonged periods. By directly comparing gaze-with motion-controlled interaction, we put the emerging eye-trackers into perspective with the state-of-the-art interaction method for immersive space. We then discuss potential implications for future extended reality (XR) interaction design based on our findings. Lukas Maximilian Masopust, David Bauer, Siyuan Yao, Kwan-Liu Ma |
ISMAR | 1 |