Bar Graph - Explore the Science & Experts | ideXlab

Scan Science and Technology

Contact Leading Edge Experts & Companies

Bar Graph

The Experts below are selected from a list of 282 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform

Margaret Hamilton – 1st expert on this subject based on the ideXlab platform

  • SuSoftPro: Sustainability Profiling for Software
    2018 IEEE 26th International Requirements Engineering Conference (RE), 2018
    Co-Authors: Ahmed D. Alharthi, Maria Spichkova, Margaret Hamilton

    Abstract:

    The paper presents a SuSoftPro tool for requirement engineers to analyse the requirements’ impacts on system sustainability. To perform the analysis of system sustainability, the tool provides quantitative questionnaires for rating high-level requirements within sustainability dimensions via a Fuzzy Rating Scale method. Stakeholders’ responses are analysed by applying Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution. The tool presents sustainability as a five-star rating label, a visualisation of the degree for sustainability dimensions, and a Bar Graph that illustrates the sustainability level.

Jianping Wang – 2nd expert on this subject based on the ideXlab platform

  • research of doa estimation based on single mems vector hydrophone
    Sensors, 2009
    Co-Authors: Wendong Zhang, Ling Gang Guan, Guojun Zhang, Kai Rui Zhang, Jianping Wang

    Abstract:

    The MEMS vector hydrophone is a novel acoustic sensor with a “four-beam- cilia” structure. Based on the MEMS vector hydrophone with this structure, the paper studies the method of estimated direction of arrival (DOA). According to various research papers, many algorithms can be applied to vector hydrophones. The beam-forming approach and Bar Graph approach are described in detail. Laboratory tests by means of the a standing-wave tube are performed to validate the theoretical results. Both the theoretical analysis and the results of tests prove that the proposed MEMS vector hydrophone possesses the desired directional function.

James L. Szalma – 3rd expert on this subject based on the ideXlab platform

  • Workload and stress in vigilance: the impact of display format and task type.
    American Journal of Psychology, 2020
    Co-Authors: James L. Szalma

    Abstract:

    : Signal salience was manipulated using configural and object displays to examine their effects on the performance, workload, and stress of vigilance. Improving performance and reducing the workload and stress of vigilance are crucial concerns. Signal salience improves performance and reduces stress, but to date there have been no salience manipulations using configural displays in a vigilance task. Two task types (individual variable monitoring and midpoint identification) and 3 display formats (Bar Graph-different baselines, Bar Graph-common baseline, and a polygon Graph display) were examined. Configural displays improved performance in the midpoint identification task but not in the individual variable monitoring task. Workload depended on the form of display features (Bar Graph vs. polygon). Stress increased across all conditions, but task and display format did not affect stress. The midpoint identification task was associated with more emotion-focused and avoidant coping. Increasing signal salience in a vigilance task using configural displays with emergent features or physical contours can improve performance and reduce the decrement. These displays may not reduce the stress of vigilance or encourage task-focused coping. Therefore, there may be hidden costs to vigilance performance even when highly salient configural displays are used.

  • Workload and Stress of Configural Displays in Vigilance Tasks
    Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, 2002
    Co-Authors: James L. Szalma

    Abstract:

    The workload and stress associated with corrfigural displays in two vigilance tasks were investigated. Two kinds of configural displays were employed: A Bar Graph display and an object display. A non-configural Bar Graph display served as a control group. Relative to the non-configural display, both configural displays improved performance in a task requiring integration of information, but were not significantly different from the control group in a task requiring focused attention to display elements. The object display reduced workload in both tasks, but the Bar Graph configural display did not. Results showed a complex pattern of association/dissociation of workload with performance. Self reports of stress revealed that the tasks were stressful but that configural displays did not reduce the stress of either task.