BZPEERReading, trust and collaboration for research
Menu

Discover

GraphFollow connections around a paper, topic or saved view.

Workspaces

HomePick up where your research flow left off.InboxHandle requests, replies and notifications from one place.CollectionsCurate reading lists, evidence sets and shareable dossiers.ResearchSee your private provenance graph, trail and imports.CollaborationMove from discovery into focused discussion rooms.PublishDraft, preview and publish full-text research articles.

Network

ExpertsFind specialists worth following or asking for help.CommunitiesJoin research circles organized around shared work.PartnersSee external organizations active around the same topics.

Opportunities

ListingsBrowse roles, calls and collaborations with clearer fit signals.

Account

Log inReturn to your reading and collaboration workspace.Create accountStart saving work, following people and joining teams.
Log inCreate account

Researcher profile

Moritz Berger

Moritz Berger contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate
MethodologyHuman-Computer InteractionSoftware Engineering

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 19 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
5works
0followers
3topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

5 published item(s)

preprint2022arXiv

How Do Drivers Self-Regulate their Secondary Task Engagements? The Effect of Driving Automation on Touchscreen Interactions and Glance Behavior

With ever-improving driver assistance systems and large touchscreens becoming the main in-vehicle interface, drivers are more tempted than ever to engage in distracting non-driving-related tasks. However, little research exists on how driving automation affects drivers' self-regulation when interacting with center stack touchscreens. To investigate this, we employ multilevel models on a real-world driving dataset consisting of 10,139 sequences. Our results show significant differences in drivers' interaction and glance behavior in response to varying levels of driving automation, vehicle speed, and road curvature. During partially automated driving, drivers are not only more likely to engage in secondary touchscreen tasks, but their mean glance duration toward the touchscreen also increases by 12% (Level 1) and 20% (Level 2) compared to manual driving. We further show that the effect of driving automation on drivers' self-regulation is larger than that of vehicle speed and road curvature. The derived knowledge can facilitate the safety evaluation of infotainment systems and the development of context-aware driver monitoring systems.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Assessing the Calibration of Subdistribution Hazard Models in Discrete Time

The generalization performance of a risk prediction model can be evaluated by its calibration, which measures the agreement between predicted and observed outcomes on external validation data. Here, methods for assessing the calibration of discrete time-to-event models in the presence of competing risks are proposed. The methods are designed for the class of discrete subdistribution hazard models, which directly relate the cumulative incidence function of one event of interest to a set of covariates. Simulation studies show that the methods are strong tools for calibration assessment even in scenarios with a high censoring rate and/or a large number of discrete time points. The proposed approaches are illustrated by an analysis of nosocomial pneumonia.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Non Proportional Odds Models are Widely Dispensable -- Sparser Modeling based on Parametric and Additive Location-Shift Approaches

The potential of location-shift models to find adequate models between the proportional odds model and the non-proportional odds model is investigated. It is demonstrated that these models are very useful in ordinal modeling. While proportional odds models are often too simple, non proportional odds models are typically unnecessary complicated and seem widely dispensable. The class of location-shift models is also extended to allow for smooth effects. The additive location-shift model contains two functions for each explanatory variable, one for the location and one for dispersion. It is much sparser than hard-to-handle additive models with category-specific covariate functions but more flexible than common vector generalized additive models.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Transition Models for Count Data: a Flexible Alternative to Fixed Distribution Models

A flexible semiparametric class of models is introduced that offers an alternative to classical regression models for count data as the Poisson and negative binomial model, as well as to more general models accounting for excess zeros that are also based on fixed distributional assumptions. The model allows that the data itself determine the distribution of the response variable, but, in its basic form, uses a parametric term that specifies the effect of explanatory variables. In addition, an extended version is considered, in which the effects of covariates are specified nonparametrically. The proposed model and traditional models are compared by utilizing several real data applications.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Views on Quality Requirements in Academia and Practice: Commonalities, Differences, and Context-Dependent Grey Areas

Context: Quality requirements (QRs) are a topic of constant discussions both in industry and academia. Debates entwine around the definition of quality requirements, the way how to handle them, or their importance for project success. While many academic endeavors contribute to the body of knowledge about QRs, practitioners may have different views. In fact, we still lack a consistent body of knowledge on QRs since much of the discussion around this topic is still dominated by observations that are strongly context-dependent. This holds for both academic and practitioners' views. Our assumption is that, in consequence, those views may differ. Objective: We report on a study to better understand the extent to which available research statements on quality requirements, as found in exemplary peer-reviewed and frequently cited publications, are reflected in the perception of practitioners. Our goal is to analyze differences, commonalities, and context-dependent grey areas in the views of academics and practitioners to allow a discussion on potential misconceptions (on either sides) and opportunities for future research. Method: We conducted a survey with 109 practitioners to assess whether they agree with research statements about QRs reflected in the literature. Based on a statistical model, we evaluate the impact of a set of context factors to the perception of research statements. Results: Our results show that a majority of the statements is well respected by practitioners; however, not all of them. When examining the different groups and backgrounds of respondents, we noticed interesting deviations of perceptions within different groups that may lead to new research questions. Conclusions: Our results help identifying prevalent context-dependent differences about how academics and practitioners view QRs and pinpointing statements where further research might be useful.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access