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

Joseph March

dblp:334/7525 · also Joseph G. March · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
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

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Wearable and physiological sensing
eye tracking
0.812024
Tracking Eye Position and Gaze Direction in Near-Eye Volumetric Displays · ISMAR 2024
Computational photography and imaging › depth of field
depth-of-field rendering
0.612022
Impact of correct and simulated focus cues on perceived realism · SIGGRAPH Asia 2022
Virtual and augmented reality
depth perception
0.612022
Impact of correct and simulated focus cues on perceived realism · SIGGRAPH Asia 2022
Virtual and augmented reality › depth perception
focus cues
0.612022
Impact of correct and simulated focus cues on perceived realism · SIGGRAPH Asia 2022
Virtual and augmented reality
visual realism
0.212022
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
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2024 Tracking Eye Position and Gaze Direction in Near-Eye Volumetric Displays
abstract
Near-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
ISMAR2
2022 Impact of correct and simulated focus cues on perceived realism
abstract
The 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 Asia1