Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Joseph March
dblp:334/7525 · also Joseph G. March
· DBLP profile ↗
2ranked-venue papers
1as first author
2since 2021 · last 2024
0000-0002-1194-6622ORCID · corroborated
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Graphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 2 · 1 first-author · 2 since 2021Human-computer interaction and ubiquitous computing · 2 · 1 first-author · 2 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.
| Computer graphics and multimedia
2 papers |
Virtual and augmented reality · 78% Computational photography and imaging · 22% | |
| Human-computer interaction and pervasive computing
1 paper |
Wearable and physiological sensing · 100% |
Topics — the 5 heaviest of 6, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Wearable and physiological sensing
eye tracking |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Tracking Eye Position and Gaze Direction in Near-Eye Volumetric Displays · ISMAR 2024 |
Computational photography and imaging › depth of field
depth-of-field rendering |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | Impact of correct and simulated focus cues on perceived realism · SIGGRAPH Asia 2022 |
Virtual and augmented reality
depth perception |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | Impact of correct and simulated focus cues on perceived realism · SIGGRAPH Asia 2022 |
Virtual and augmented reality › depth perception
focus cues |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | Impact of correct and simulated focus cues on perceived realism · SIGGRAPH Asia 2022 |
Virtual and augmented reality
visual realism |
0.2 | 1 | 2022 | Impact of correct and simulated focus cues on perceived realism · SIGGRAPH Asia 2022 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
pupil and corneal reflection tracking · 1.5NIR camera imaging · 1.5eye models · 0.8eye model · 0.8stereo image presentation · 0.6
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | Tracking Eye Position and Gaze Direction in Near-Eye Volumetric DisplaysabstractNear-eye volumetric displays, showing multiple focal planes, require knowledge of the accurate position of the nodal point of the eye to correctly render a 3D scene. This is because pixels seen through multiple planes must be accurately aligned with the eye’s visual axis to ensure consistency across focal planes. While most eye-tracking methods focus on determining a gaze position within a designated target space, this work aims to track both the eye position and the corresponding gaze direction expressed in coordinates relative to the physical location of the volumetric display planes. To achieve this, we rely on a near-infra-red (NIR) camera image of the pupil and corneal reflections (glints). The existing eye model is used to establish the relationship between the pupil and glint positions in a NIR image and the eye position and rotation in a 3D space. We address the key challenge of robust tracking of the glints in a system that introduces multiple reflections. We also demonstrate that the system reduces the need for recalibration on subsequent uses. Our experiments on a multiple-focal plane display demonstrate that the method can maintain an accurate projection point for volumetric displays. Marek Wernikowski, Joseph March, Radoslaw Mantiuk, Ali Özgür Yöntem, Rafal Mantiuk |
ISMAR | 2 |
| 2022 | Impact of correct and simulated focus cues on perceived realismabstractThe natural accommodation of the human eye to different distances results in focus cues, which contribute to depth perception and appearance. Since focus cues are very difficult to reproduce in an electronic display, it is desirable to know how much they contribute to realistic image appearance. In this work we quantify the potential benefit of focus cues in terms of increased realism compared to regular stereo image presentation. As a secondary goal, we evaluate whether three depth-of-field rendering techniques, which reproduce defocus blur at three different degrees of accuracy, can reintroduce the benefits of focus cues. Our findings confirm the importance of focus cues for realistic image appearance, and also show that they cannot easily be substituted by depth-of-field rendering. Joseph March, Anantha Krishnan, Simon J. Watt, Marek Wernikowski, Hongyun Gao 0001, Ali Özgür Yöntem, Rafal Mantiuk |
SIGGRAPH Asia | 1 |