Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Ida Bagus Kerthyayana Manuaba
dblp:42/9964 · also Ida Manuaba
· DBLP profile ↗
1ranked-venue papers
1as first author
0since 2021 · last 2011
0000-0001-8880-254XORCID · reported
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 1 · 1 first-authorSystems, architecture and hardware · 1 · 1 first-author
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% Human-robot interaction · 50% | |
| Computer graphics and multimedia
1 paper |
Virtual and augmented reality · 100% |
Topics — the 2 heaviest of 3, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Human-robot interaction
teleoperation |
0.1 | 1 | 2011 | Comparison between two mixed reality environments as a teleoperation interface · ICRA 2011 |
Virtual and augmented reality
situation awareness |
0.0 | 1 | 2011 | Comparison between two mixed reality environments as a teleoperation interface · ICRA 2011 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
user study · 0.2mixed reality · 0.2
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2011 | Comparison between two mixed reality environments as a teleoperation interfaceabstractAn important aspect of teleoperation is situational awareness through visualization. The actual operation and control of a remote machine must be supported by an interface which provides enough information through visualization from a remote location to complete a task. This can be achieved with a Mixed Reality (MR) environment. The concept is to combine information from the real world and a virtual world. An experiment was conducted to assess the differences between two platforms and to determine interface features required to maximize operator performance and satisfaction. The result indicates that both mixed reality environments tested were suitable for teleoperation where sufficient information to perform the task could be modeled in the virtual world. However, one of the environments turned out to be superior where the task required information in the video but not modeled in the virtual environment. The preferred environment provided overlays on the video that were updated live as the model was manipulated where the other environment updated video overlays on completion of the manipulation. Ida Bagus Kerthyayana Manuaba, Ken Taylor, Tom Gedeon |
ICRA | 1 |