Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
David W. Mizell
dblp:34/3047
· DBLP profile ↗
2ranked-venue papers
1as first author
0since 2021 · last 2006
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 1 · 1 first-authorGraphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 1Human-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.
| Computer graphics and multimedia
1 paper |
Virtual and augmented reality · 100% | |
| Software engineering, system software, and programming languages
1 paper |
Concurrent programming · 93% Program verification · 7% |
Topics — the 6 heaviest of 7, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Virtual and augmented reality
human factors |
0.1 | 1 | 2006 | How Do We Solve Human Factors for VR and AR Applications? · VR 2006 |
Concurrent programming
concurrency semantics |
0.0 | 1 | 1978 | Verification and Design Aspects of "True" Concurrency · POPL 1978 |
Concurrent programming › synchronization
path expressions |
0.0 | 1 | 1978 | Verification and Design Aspects of "True" Concurrency · POPL 1978 |
Concurrent programming
synchronization |
0.0 | 1 | 1978 | Verification and Design Aspects of "True" Concurrency · POPL 1978 |
Concurrent programming › concurrency semantics
true concurrency |
0.0 | 1 | 1978 | Verification and Design Aspects of "True" Concurrency · POPL 1978 |
Program verification
concurrent program verification |
0.0 | 1 | 1978 | Verification and Design Aspects of "True" Concurrency · POPL 1978 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
directed acyclic graph semantics · 0.0algebraic model · 0.0
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2006 | How Do We Solve Human Factors for VR and AR Applications?abstractVirtual reality (VR) and augmented reality (AR) systems are reaching sufficient maturity that some systems are being used on a regular basis by users and others are close to implementation. There are limitations, however, that have prevented many systems from being truly useful for users. An important limitation is the lack of understanding of human factors issues, such as human perceptual and cognitive limitations, that affect the potential utility of VR or AR systems. Mark A. Livingston, Stephen R. Ellis, David W. Mizell, John W. Ruffner, Mary C. Whitton |
VR | 3 |
| 1978 | Verification and Design Aspects of "True" ConcurrencyabstractMost abstract models of a set of parallel processes define a computation of the model to be a sequence. It is either a sequence of actions taken by the system [Lip] or a sequence of states of the system existing between actions [Kel, Lau, Ash]. Parallelsim is represented only by the fact that following a given action or state, the "next" action or state is not necessarily unique. That is, parallesim is represented by nondeterminism. A. W. Holt has called this representation approach "serializable concurrency" as opposed to "true concurrency" [Hol]. He, among others, has questioned the appropriateness of implying a total ordering between events that are only known to be partially ordered.In this paper, a definition of an algebraic model of a set of concurrently-executing sequential processes is presented. The "computations" of this model are directed acyclic graphs. The nodes of each computation graph represent computer operations and the edges represent the partial ordering of operations with respect to time.Examples demonstrate that these directed acyclic graphs aid in focusing a programmer/verifier's attention on the most important features of a computation. The model suggests the following verification paradigm: since systems often execute a certain sequence of actions to achieve a certain goal, verification procedures should identify these sequences, whether or not each is performed within a single process.A key notion in the abstract model is the treatment of synchronization mechanisms as full-fledged processes. A programming language syntax called "path programs" which is suggested by this notion is presented. Path programs are a generalization of the path expressions of Campbell and Habermann [CamHab]. The programming notation is based on the assumption that a processor can be dedicated to each shared data structure in the system. The duty of this processor is to control the synchronization of operations on the data structure. David W. Mizell |
POPL | 1 |