Search arXiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2610.08700

reVISit-XR: Bringing Extended Reality into Embeddable, Trackable, and Replayable Visualization Studies

Shano Liang·Max Chen·Lane Harrison
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Extended reality (XR) is increasingly a setting for empirical visualization research, where study-relevant state is distributed across headset and controller pose, scene configuration, selections, spatial layouts, and AR anchors. Existing XR tools support parts of the workflow, such as scene authoring, interaction, or session analysis, yet seldom treat an XR stimulus as a reusable component of a complete study lifecycle. We present reVISit-XR, an extension of reVISit that makes customizable WebXR stimuli embeddable, trackable, and replayable within empirical visualization studies. reVISit-XR sequences XR scenes alongside standard study components, collects reactive task responses, captures scene-authored semantic state together with generic XR traces, and rehydrates participant sessions for later desktop and headset analysis. Organized as a reusable stimulus build package and a study integration package, it lets XR stimuli act as first-class study components. We demonstrate its scope and feasibility through seven integrated, reusable examples and a deployed study, and discuss its current capabilities and future extensions.

Explore related subjects

cs.HC

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Shano Liang, Max Chen, Lane Harrison. 2026-10-06. reVISit-XR: Bringing Extended Reality into Embeddable, Trackable, and Replayable Visualization Studies. https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.08700

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Trends in EHR Satisfaction and Interoperability Among Family Physicians: A Five-Year Analysis of the ABFM Continuous Certification Questionnaire, 2022-2026

Objective: To assess trends in family physicians' (FPs) electronic health record (EHR) satisfaction and their experience of interoperability across organizations. Materials and Methods: Serial cross-sectional analysis of five waves of the American Board of Family Medicine's Continuous Certification Questionnaire (2022-26). Adjusted logistic regression compared odds of being very satisfied across 11 EHRs; Cochran-Armitage tests assessed vendor trends. Ease of using outside information was analyzed separately for same- and different-vendor sources. Results: Across 36,785 FPs, adjusted odds of being very satisfied relative to Epic ranged from 0.91 (95% CI, 0.74-1.11) for Elation Health to 0.17 (95% CI, 0.15-0.20) for Oracle Health/Cerner. Only Epic's users became significantly more satisfied (Benjamini-Hochberg adjusted P < .001), widening the vendor satisfaction gap. Within comparable periods, ease of using different-vendor information did not improve; fewer than 13% rated it very easy. Epic's interoperability advantage reversed by exchange type: non-Epic users had less than half the odds of Epic users of rating same-vendor interoperability very easy (adjusted OR, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.38-0.44) but 1.54 times the odds for different-vendor interoperability (95% CI, 1.35-1.75). Discussion: Rising national exchange volume has not yielded easier use of outside information. Epic's advantage is confined to its own network, so market concentration may shift, rather than solve, the different-vendor problem. Conclusion: The ABFM data are already informing EHR policy but also have utility for the EHR marketplace. While EHR satisfaction has known implications for burden and burnout, poor interoperability is a quality and safety threat that may be compounded by artificial intelligence.

cs.HC↗
arXiv2026

Before Bringing It Up: When and How AI Companions Should Use Memory

Memory can sustain AI companionship, yet even accurate recollection can be inappropriate to use. Two rounds of formative interviews with 14 users (n = 6 exploratory, n = 8 memory-focused) motivate asking what a companion should consider before using past information. Eight themes inform Reconsider, a single-call procedure with five checks and four handling modes, evaluated on 80 scenarios across five models over 400 blinded within-model pairs. Two LLM judges favored Reconsider by net margins of +15 and +23 percentage points, with bootstrap intervals excluding zero for three of five models but not for GPT or Claude. Evaluator analysis linked judge scoring differences to model family, and a preliminary matched-guidance control isolating memory-specific content gave positive margins. We contribute an interview-grounded design framework for memory use and an evaluation that scrutinizes its own evaluators.

cs.HC↗
arXiv2026

Intent Graph: Navigating the Analytical Reasoning Space for Exploratory Data Analysis

Exploratory data analysis (EDA) is rarely open-ended in practice: analysts work from high-level domain questions toward the concrete analyses that can answer them, prioritizing directions with domain knowledge and prior hypotheses. Large language models (LLMs) can supply such knowledge, but their responses are unstructured, leaving analysts no way to see what has been explored, what is missing, or why one direction was chosen over another. We present DAG-EDA, a system that lets analysts and an LLM co-navigate the space of possible analyses through two linked structures. An intent graph, governed by a grammar of analytical intent, decomposes an ambiguous natural-language question into progressively concrete analysis tasks, keeping alternative framings open and letting analysts branch, backtrack, and compare paths. A multi-layered knowledge graph externalizes the LLM's domain knowledge, linking domain concepts to the dataset variables that can measure them, so analysts can inspect and contest how their question is grounded in the data. Both graphs are constructed from only the dataset and the analyst's question, and the analyses the analyst reaches are rendered as interactive dashboards. We illustrate the system through a usage scenario and describe a user study design for examining whether the system scaffold analysts' reasoning and navigation.

cs.HC↗