Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Fangzhi Yan
dblp:374/9469
· DBLP profile ↗
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
1since 2021 · last 2024
0009-0007-9634-8368ORCID · reported
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Human-computer interaction and ubiquitous computing · 1 · 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 |
Immersive interaction · 87% Collaborative and social computing · 13% |
Topics — the 2 heaviest of 3, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Immersive interaction › virtual reality › cybersickness
VR sickness |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Exploring Experience Gaps Between Active and Passive Users During Multi-user Locomotion in VR · CHI 2024 |
Collaborative and social computing
multi-user virtual environments |
0.2 | 1 | 2024 | Exploring Experience Gaps Between Active and Passive Users During Multi-user Locomotion in VR · CHI 2024 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
user study · 0.8psychological measurement · 0.8physiological measurement · 0.8
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | Exploring Experience Gaps Between Active and Passive Users During Multi-user Locomotion in VRabstractMulti-user locomotion in VR has grown increasingly common, posing numerous challenges. A key factor contributing to these challenges is the gaps in experience between active and passive users during co-locomotion. Yet, there remains a limited understanding of how and to what extent these experiential gaps manifest in diverse multi-user co-locomotion scenarios. This paper systematically explores the gaps in physiological and psychological experience indicators between active and passive users across various locomotion situations. Such situations include when active users walk, fly by joystick, or teleport, and passive users stand still or look around. We also assess the impact of factors such as sub-locomotion type, speed/teleport-interval, motion sickness susceptibility, etc. Accordingly, we delineate acceptability disparities between active and passive users, offering insights into leveraging notable experimental findings to mitigate discomfort during co-locomotion through avoidance or intervention. Tianren Luo, Fenglin Lu, Jiafu Lv, Xiaohui Tan, Chang Liu 0163, Fangzhi Yan, Jin Huang 0009, Chun Yu, Teng Han, Feng Tian 0001 |
CHI | 6 |