EDBT 2026 Demo / reviewers in the wild / expert
Paul-Eric Dossou
dblp:76/7048
· DBLP profile ↗
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
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Immersive interaction
augmented reality interaction |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Performance and ergonomics of automated versus manual validation for AR-supervised industrial operations · VR 2025 |
Usability and user experience research
technology acceptance |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Performance and ergonomics of automated versus manual validation for AR-supervised industrial operations · VR 2025 |
Interaction techniques and input
touch interaction |
0.3 | 1 | 2025 | 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
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | Performance and ergonomics of automated versus manual validation for AR-supervised industrial operationsabstractAugmented 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 |
VR | 3 |