EDBT 2026 Demo / reviewers in the wild / expert
Leander Hacker
dblp:401/6015
· DBLP profile ↗
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
1since 2021 · last 2025
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 1 · 1 since 2021Systems, architecture and hardware · 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 · 50% Interaction techniques and input · 50% |
Topics — the 2 heaviest of 2, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Interaction techniques and input › input device
controller-based interaction |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Optimizing Robot Programming: Mixed Reality Gripper Control · ICRA 2025 |
Immersive interaction › mixed reality
mixed reality robot programming |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Optimizing Robot Programming: Mixed Reality Gripper Control · ICRA 2025 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
within-subjects study · 0.93d-printed gripper attachment · 0.9
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | Optimizing Robot Programming: Mixed Reality Gripper ControlabstractConventional robot programming methods are complex and time-consuming for users. In recent years, alternative approaches such as mixed reality have been explored to address these challenges and optimize robot programming. While the findings of the mixed reality robot programming methods are convincing, most existing methods rely on gesture interaction for robot programming. Since controller-based interactions have proven to be more reliable, this paper examines three controller-based programming methods within a mixed reality scenario: 1) Classical Jogging, where the user positions the robot's end effector using the controller's thumbsticks, 2) Direct Control, where the controller's position and orientation directly corresponds to the end effector's, and 3) Gripper Control, where the controller is enhanced with a 3D-printed gripper attachment to grasp and release objects. A within-subjects study$(n = 30)$was conducted to compare these methods. The findings indicate that the Gripper Control condition outperforms the others in terms of task completion time, user experience, mental demand, and task performance, while also being the preferred method. Therefore, it demonstrates promising potential as an effective and efficient approach for future robot programming. Video available at https://youtu.be/83kWr8zUFIQ. Maximilian Rettinger, Leander Hacker, Philipp Wolters, Gerhard Rigoll |
ICRA | 2 |