Unterschiede
Hier werden die Unterschiede zwischen zwei Versionen angezeigt.
Nächste Überarbeitung | Vorhergehende ÜberarbeitungLetzte ÜberarbeitungBeide Seiten der Revision | ||
lehre:ws18:fsm_18ws:group_g:2019-01-31_a_research_of_researches [31.01.2019 13:21] – Erstellt mit dem Formular lehre:ws18:fsm_18ws:group_g scc64279 | lehre:ws18:fsm_18ws:group_g:2019-01-31_a_research_of_researches [31.01.2019 13:57] – content scc64279 | ||
---|---|---|---|
Zeile 7: | Zeile 7: | ||
tags_ : blog, AR, publications, | tags_ : blog, AR, publications, | ||
---- | ---- | ||
+ | |||
+ | Hello everyone! | ||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | In this blog article we would give an update about the progress of our state-of-the-art AR paper analysis. Within the last weeks we were busy creating a plan for selecting, and retrieving, sorting and analyzing state-of-the-art papers in the area of AR. Our methodology follows proposals from the literature that we have slightly adapted to conform to our requirements. | ||
+ | The goal of the paper analysis is to analyse and collect, which AR technologies were used in state-of-the-art AR papers and especially how these applications were evaluated, so that we could indicate the frequency of the used methods, identify gaps and trends and compare them with results from previous work. | ||
+ | |||
+ | We already defined our selection criteria in the blog article [[lehre: | ||
+ | |||
+ | Regarding the time interval for our publication analysis we finally decided us for the years 2015 to 2017, succeeding the work of Dey, Billinghurst, | ||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | ===== Paper acquisition ===== | ||
+ | |||
+ | After defining our paper selection criteria we continued our research with the acquisition of the publications and the creation of a corpus. | ||
+ | Based on that, we decided to collect papers based on a set of keywords entered in the search engine of the publishers’ websites. To be able to compare our methodology with approaches from the literature, we decided to directly take over the keywords from Duenser, Grasset, & Billinghurst (2008), which were also used by other surveys in the field of AR (Dey et al. , 2016). They are listed in the following: | ||
+ | |||
+ | * " | ||
+ | * " | ||
+ | * " | ||
+ | * " | ||
+ | * " | ||
+ | * " | ||
+ | * " | ||
+ | * " | ||
+ | * " | ||
+ | * " | ||
+ | * " | ||
+ | * " | ||
+ | |||
+ | As the focus of Duenser, Grasset, & Billinghurst (2008) lied primarily on user evaluations, | ||
+ | * " | ||
+ | * " | ||
+ | * " | ||
+ | * " | ||
+ | * " | ||
+ | * " | ||
+ | * " | ||
+ | * " | ||
+ | * " | ||
+ | * " | ||
+ | |||
+ | For the retrieval of the publications we used the search engine on the websites of[[https:// | ||
+ | |||
+ | Based on this approach we found approximately 360 papers related to AR, where approximately 170 could be excluded, as they did not correspond to our paper definition or were not accessible for us, resulting in approximately 170 papers left for our analysis. During the analysis some papers will also be identified as false positives, i.e. they are not related with the topic of AR, although they met the keyword criteria. | ||
+ | |||
+ | ===== Paper classification table ===== | ||
+ | |||
+ | {{ : | ||
+ | |||
+ | After the literature review creation process from Brocke et al. (2009) (cf. blog xy) we are currently in Phase IV, as we began to analyse the papers we found during our search process. | ||
+ | Following this approach we created a paper classification table and used the so-called concept matrix from Webster and Watson (2002) as a reference, and adapted it slightly. In this table we divided the analyzed topics into multiple subtopics (cf. list below). There each paper was added with its metadata, e.g. title or bibliography, | ||
+ | |||
+ | A paper is represented by one row, containing the following information as columns, if available: | ||
+ | |||
+ | * Common (Metadata of a paper) | ||
+ | * Full text accessible: If a paper is available in full text or not and therefore, if it can be included in our analysis | ||
+ | * Proceeding: Name of conference | ||
+ | * Year: Year of publication | ||
+ | * Paper based on our definition?: | ||
+ | * Title: Title of publication | ||
+ | * Survey: bibliography | ||
+ | |||
+ | * Research Matter (general overview over content of publication) | ||
+ | * System research/ | ||
+ | * Reason and description of content: description of the decision from the previous column and short summary of the publication’s content | ||
+ | * Name of presented application or method | ||
+ | |||
+ | * Classification: | ||
+ | * Classification: | ||
+ | * Classification: | ||
+ | * Classification: | ||
+ | |||
+ | * Classification: | ||
+ | * Evaluation conducted?: if an evaluation was conducted in the publication | ||
+ | * Goal and description of evaluation | ||
+ | * Preliminary study conducted?: if a pilot or preliminary study was conducted in the publication | ||
+ | * Goal of preliminary study? | ||
+ | * Layer 1: based on Duenser, Grasset und Billinghurst (2008) (cf. blog article [[lehre: | ||
+ | * Layer 2: based on Duenser, Grasset und Billinghurst (2008) (cf. blog article [[lehre: | ||
+ | * Layer 3: based on Duenser, Grasset und Billinghurst (2008) (cf. blog article [[lehre: | ||
+ | * Experiment procedure: structure of evaluation, e.g. training session, tasks, post-questionnaire | ||
+ | * Amount of tasks and subtasks | ||
+ | * Number of Participants | ||
+ | * Participants’ metadata: age (median), gender, profession | ||
+ | * Duration of experiment | ||
+ | * Experiment design & group size: within-subject or between-subject design | ||
+ | * Field study or labor study: if the study took place in the labor or outside the labor | ||
+ | |||
+ | * Guidelines: Lessons Learned | ||
+ | * Issues of evaluation methods: observed problems, e.g. missing of some classification categories (e.g. for input devices like game controllers) or a vague description of participants | ||
+ | * Other | ||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | {{: | ||
+ | {{: | ||
+ | {{: | ||
+ | |||
+ | We divided the amount of papers between us three, resulting in approximately 56 papers for each of us to analyse. Our deadline for this analysis is targeted on February 7th and the finalisation of the analysis’ results on February 15th. The best approach for analysing the results will arise during our paper analysis. | ||
+ | |||
+ | That was all for today. See you next time! | ||
+ | |||
+ | ==== References ==== | ||
+ | Brocke, Jan vom; Simons, Alexander; Niehaves, Bjoern; Niehaves, Bjorn; Reimer, Kai; Plattfaut, Ralf; and Cleven, Anne, | ||
+ | " | ||
+ | SEARCH PROCESS" | ||
+ | http:// | ||
+ | |||
+ | Dey, A., Billinghurst, | ||
+ | |||
+ | Duenser, A., Grasset, R., & Billinghurst, | ||
+ | |||
+ | Webster, J., & Watson, R. T. (2002). Guest Editorial: | ||
+ | |||