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.

Paul-Eric Dossou

dblp:76/7048 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
1since 2021 · last 2025
0000-0003-2052-0495ORCID · verified

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Graphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 1 · 1 since 2021Human-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 · 44% Usability and user experience research · 44% Interaction techniques and input · 13%

Topics — the 3 heaviest of 3, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Immersive interaction
augmented reality interaction
0.912025
Performance and ergonomics of automated versus manual validation for AR-supervised industrial operations · VR 2025
Usability and user experience research
technology acceptance
0.912025
Performance and ergonomics of automated versus manual validation for AR-supervised industrial operations · VR 2025
Interaction techniques and input
touch interaction
0.312025
Performance and ergonomics of automated versus manual validation for AR-supervised industrial operations · VR 2025

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

computer vision · 0.9WebXR · 0.9
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2025 Performance and ergonomics of automated versus manual validation for AR-supervised industrial operations
abstract
Augmented Reality has proven to be a viable solution compared to paper instructions for the supervision of maintenance procedures in industrial contexts to reduce error rates and increase overall performance. With the use of computer vision and cyber physical systems, the validation of specific tasks in AR-supervised environments can be automated to increase process quality even more. However, in the context of human-centered approaches such as industry 5.0, the impact of such methods on operator’s acceptability has yet to be estimated. Therefore, the paper presents a quantitative study on 24 participants to compare 4 modalities of validation of operational procedures. SCRAM, a web application based on WebXR, is developed for the supervision of maintenance operations to compare 2 types of devices: tablets and AR headsets. All scenarios are compared on an assembly use case based on performance criteria and subjective questionnaires such as NASATLX, System Usability Scale (SUS) and Technology Acceptance Model to measure acceptability. In the end, results mostly show significant differences in completion times, usability, and perceived ease of use of the SCRAM application regarding the choice of the device. On the other hand, the study does not highlight any significant difference between scenarios with automated validation of operations and scenarios with manual validation.
Gaspard Laouenan, Jean-Yves Didier, Paul-Eric Dossou
VR3