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. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Chungman Lim

dblp:320/7957 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
7ranked-venue papers
4as first author
7since 2021 · last 2026
0000-0002-7857-3322ORCID · verified

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

Human-computer interaction and ubiquitous computing · 7 · 4 first-author · 7 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
7 papers
Haptics and multimodal interaction · 60% Accessibility and assistive technology · 28% Human-AI interaction · 8%

Topics — the 10 heaviest of 13, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Accessibility and assistive technology
assistive technology for visual impairment
1.922026
I-VAMOS: Independent Voting with Accessible Multimodal Offline System for Visually Impaired Users · CHI 2026
I-Scratch: Independent Slide Creation With Auditory Comment and Haptic Interface for the Blind and Visually Impaired · CHI 2025
Accessibility and assistive technology › accessible interaction
accessible voting
1.012026
I-VAMOS: Independent Voting with Accessible Multimodal Offline System for Visually Impaired Users · CHI 2026
Haptics and multimodal interaction
multimodal interaction
1.012026
I-VAMOS: Independent Voting with Accessible Multimodal Offline System for Visually Impaired Users · CHI 2026
Haptics and multimodal interaction
auditory feedback
0.912025
I-Scratch: Independent Slide Creation With Auditory Comment and Haptic Interface for the Blind and Visually Impaired · CHI 2025
Human-AI interaction › conversational systems
conversational interface
0.912025
ChatHAP: A Chat-Based Haptic System for Designing Vibrations through Conversation · CHI 2025
Haptics and multimodal interaction › haptics
haptic design
0.912025
ChatHAP: A Chat-Based Haptic System for Designing Vibrations through Conversation · CHI 2025
Haptics and multimodal interaction › tactile perception
vibrotactile perception
0.712023
Can we crowdsource Tacton similarity perception and metaphor ratings? · CHI 2023
Haptics and multimodal interaction
haptic feedback
0.312025
ChatHAP: A Chat-Based Haptic System for Designing Vibrations through Conversation · CHI 2025
Haptics and multimodal interaction
haptic interface
0.312025
I-Scratch: Independent Slide Creation With Auditory Comment and Haptic Interface for the Blind and Visually Impaired · CHI 2025
Usability and user experience research › evaluation methodology
crowdsourced evaluation
0.212023
Can we crowdsource Tacton similarity perception and metaphor ratings? · CHI 2023

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

conversational interface · 0.9similarity ratings · 0.8discrimination thresholds · 0.8user study · 0.7spearman's rank correlation · 0.7one-dimensional convolution · 0.7neural coding · 0.7crowdsourcing · 0.7
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2026 I-VAMOS: Independent Voting with Accessible Multimodal Offline System for Visually Impaired Users
Gyeongdeok Kim, Chungman Lim, Gyungmin Jin, Gunhyuk Park
CHI2
2025 I-Scratch: Independent Slide Creation With Auditory Comment and Haptic Interface for the Blind and Visually Impaired
Gyeongdeok Kim, Chungman Lim, Gunhyuk Park
CHI2
2025 ChatHAP: A Chat-Based Haptic System for Designing Vibrations through Conversation
Chungman Lim, Kevin John, Gyungmin Jin, Hasti Seifi, Gunhyuk Park
CHI1
2025 Emotional and sensory ratings of vibration Tactons in the lab and crowdsourced settings
Chungman Lim, Gyeongdeok Kim, Yatiraj Shetty, Troy McDaniel, Hasti Seifi, Gunhyuk Park
Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud.1
2024 Designing Distinguishable Mid-Air Ultrasound Tactons with Temporal Parameters
abstract
Mid-air ultrasound technology offers new design opportunities for contactless tactile patterns (i.e., Tactons) in user applications. Yet, few guidelines exist for making ultrasound Tactons easy to distinguish for users. In this paper, we investigated the distinguishability of temporal parameters of ultrasound Tactons in five studies (n=72 participants). Study 1 established the discrimination thresholds for amplitude-modulated (AM) frequencies. In Studies 2–5, we investigated distinguishable ultrasound Tactons by creating four Tacton sets based on mechanical vibrations in the literature and collected similarity ratings for the ultrasound Tactons. We identified a subset of temporal parameters, such as rhythm and low envelope frequency, that could create distinguishable ultrasound Tactons. Also, a strong correlation (mean Spearman’s ρ =0.75) existed between similarity ratings for ultrasound Tactons and similarities of mechanical Tactons from the literature, suggesting vibrotactile designers can transfer their knowledge to ultrasound design. We present design guidelines and future directions for creating distinguishable mid-air ultrasound Tactons.
Chungman Lim, Gunhyuk Park, Hasti Seifi
CHI1
2023 Can we crowdsource Tacton similarity perception and metaphor ratings?
abstract
High-fidelity vibration actuators in recent mobile phones allow designers to crowdsource user evaluation of vibrotactile (VT) Tactons. Yet, little work has examined whether online crowdsourcing platforms can provide comparable results to lab studies. To address this question, we conducted two studies with iOS devices in the lab and crowdsourced settings. In Study I, 40 users provided pairwise similarity ratings for 12 VT Tactons that varied in their parameters (e.g., duration). In Study II, 40 new users rated pairwise similarities for 14 Tactons representing different metaphors (e.g., heartbeat). They also rated the Tactons’ match to the metaphors. In both studies, the resulting similarities and perceptual spaces strongly correlated in the lab and crowdsourced settings. Furthermore, 60% of the metaphor ratings were statistically equivalent in the two settings. We discuss the results and outline directions for future work on haptic crowdsourcing.
Dong-Jae Kwon, Ramzi Abou Chahine, Chungman Lim, Hasti Seifi, Gunhyuk Park
CHI3
2023 Can a Computer Tell Differences between Vibrations?: Physiology-Based Computational Model for Perceptual Dissimilarity Prediction
abstract
Perceptual dissimilarities, requiring high-cost user ratings, have contributed to designing well-distinguishable vibrations for associated meaning delivery. Appropriate metrics can reduce the cost, but known metrics in vibration similarity/dissimilarity could not predict them robustly. We propose a physiology-based model (PM) that predicts the perceptual dissimilarities of a given vibration set via two parallel processes: Neural Coding (NC), mimicking the neural signal transfer, and One-dimensional Convolution (OC), capturing rhythmic features. Eight parameters were trained using six datasets published in the literature to maximize Spearman’s Rank Correlation. We validated PM and six metrics of RMSE, DTW, Spectral/Temporal Matchings, ST-SIM, and SPQI in twelve datasets: six trained and six untrained datasets including measured accelerations. In all validations, PM’s predictions showed robust correlations with user data and similar structures in perceptual spaces. Other baseline metrics showed better fit in specific datasets, but none of them robustly showed correlations and similar perceptual spaces over twelve datasets.
Chungman Lim, Gunhyuk Park
CHI1