skip to main content
10.1145/3025453.3025866acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageschiConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article
Honorable Mention

GraphScape: A Model for Automated Reasoning about Visualization Similarity and Sequencing

Published:02 May 2017Publication History

ABSTRACT

We present GraphScape, a directed graph model of the vi- sualization design space that supports automated reasoning about visualization similarity and sequencing. Graph nodes represent grammar-based chart specifications and edges rep- resent edits that transform one chart to another. We weight edges with an estimated cost of the difficulty of interpreting a target visualization given a source visualization. We con- tribute (1) a method for deriving transition costs via a partial ordering of edit operations and the solution of a resulting lin- ear program, and (2) a global weighting term that rewards consistency across transition subsequences. In a controlled experiment, subjects rated visualization sequences covering a taxonomy of common transition types. In all but one case, GraphScape's highest-ranked suggestion aligns with subjects' top-rated sequences. Finally, we demonstrate applications of GraphScape to automatically sequence visualization presen- tations, elaborate transition paths between visualizations, and recommend design alternatives (e.g., to improve scalability while minimizing design changes).

Skip Supplemental Material Section

Supplemental Material

pn3125p.mp4

mp4

1.4 MB

p2628-kim.mp4

mp4

176.1 MB

References

  1. S. Agarwal, J. Wills, L. Cayton, G. Lickriet, D. Kriegman, and S. Belongie. 2007. Generalized Non-metric Multidimensional Scaling. JMLR W&P (AISTATS 2007) 2 (2007), 11--18.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. A. Anand and J. Talbot. 2016. Automatic Selection of Partitioning Variables for Small Multiple Displays. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 22, 1 (2016), 669--677. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. D. J. Barr, R. Levy, C. Scheepers, and H. J. Tily. 2013. Random Effects Structure for Confirmatory Hypothesis Testing: Keep it Maximal. Journal of Memory and Language 68, 3 (2013), 255--278. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  4. S. P. Callahan, J. Freire, E. Santos, C. E. Scheidegger, C. T. Silva, and H. T. Vo. 2006. Managing the Evolution of Dataflows with VisTrails. In Proc. 22nd International Conference on Data Engineering Workshops (ICDEW'06). IEEE. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. W. S. Cleveland and R. McGill. 1984. Graphical Perception: Theory, Experimentation, and Application to the Development of Graphical Methods. J. Amer. Statist. Assoc. 79 (1984), 531--554. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. T. H. Cormen, C. E. Leiserson, R. L. Rivest, and C. Stein. 2009. Introduction to Algorithms (3rd ed.). MIT Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Ç. Demiralp, M. S. Bernstein, and J. Heer. 2014. Learning Perceptual Kernels for Visualization Design. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 20, 12 (2014), 1933--1942. http: //idl.cs.washington.edu/papers/perceptual-kernels Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. J. Heer, J. Mackinlay, C. Stolte, and M. Agrawala. 2008. Graphical Histories for Visualization: Supporting Analysis, Communication, and Evaluation. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 14, 6 (2008), 1189--1196. http: //idl.cs.washington.edu/papers/graphical-histories Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. J. Heer and G. G. Robertson. 2007. Animated Transitions in Statistical Data Graphics. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 13, 6 (2007), 1240--1247. http: //idl.cs.washington.edu/papers/animated-transitions Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. J. Heer, F. B. Viégas, and M. Wattenberg. 2007. Voyagers and Voyeurs: Supporting Asynchronous Collaborative Information Visualization. In Proc. ACM Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI). ACM, 1029--1038. http://idl.cs.washington.edu/papers/senseus/ Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. J. Hullman, S. Drucker, N. H. Riche, B. Lee, D. Fisher, and E. Adar. 2013. A Deeper Understanding of Sequence in Narrative Visualization. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 19, 12 (2013), 2406--2415. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. T.J. Jankun-Kelly, K.-L. Ma, and M. Gertz. 2007. A Model and Framework for Visualization Exploration. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 13, 2 (2007), 357--369. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. K.-L. Ma. 1999. Image Graphs -- A Novel Approach to Visual Data Exploration. In Proc. IEEE Visualization. IEEE, 81--88.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. J. Mackinlay. 1986. Automating the Design of Graphical Presentations of Relational Information. ACM Transactions on Graphics 5, 2 (1986), 110--141. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. J. Mackinlay, P. Hanrahan, and C. Stolte. 2007. ShowMe: Automatic Presentation for Visual Analysis. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 13, 6 (2007), 1137--1144. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. A. Satyanarayan, D. Moritz, K. Wongsuphasawat, and J. Heer. 2017. Vega-Lite: A Grammar of Interactive Graphics. To appear in IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics (2017). http://idl.cs.washington.edu/papers/vega-liteGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. C. E. Scheidegger, H. T. Vo, D. Koop, J. Freire, and C. T. Silva. 2007. Querying and Creating Visualizations by Analogy. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 13, 6 (2007), 1560--1567. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. E. Segel and J. Heer. 2010. Narrative Visualization: Telling Stories with Data. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 16, 6 (2010), 1139--1148. http://idl.cs.washington.edu/papers/narrative Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. C. Stolte, D. Tang, and P. Hanrahan. 2002. Polaris: A System for Query, Analysis, and Visualization of Multidimensional Relational Databases. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 8, 1 (2002), 52--65. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. M. Vartak, S. Rahman, S. Madden, A. Parameswaran, and N. Polyzotis. 2015. SeeDB: Efficient Data-Driven Visualization Recommendations to Support Visual Analytics. Proceedings of the VLDB Endowment 8, 13 (2015), 2182--2193. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. H. Wickham. 2009. ggplot2: Elegant Graphics for Data Analysis. Springer.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. L. Wilkinson. 1999. The Grammar of Graphics. Springer. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  23. K. Wongsuphasawat, D. Moritz, A. Anand, J. Mackinlay, B. Howe, and J. Heer. 2016. Voyager: Exploratory Analysis via Faceted Browsing of Visualization Recommendations. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 22, 1 (2016), 649--658. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. GraphScape: A Model for Automated Reasoning about Visualization Similarity and Sequencing

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Conferences
      CHI '17: Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
      May 2017
      7138 pages
      ISBN:9781450346559
      DOI:10.1145/3025453

      Copyright © 2017 ACM

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 2 May 2017

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article

      Acceptance Rates

      CHI '17 Paper Acceptance Rate600of2,400submissions,25%Overall Acceptance Rate6,199of26,314submissions,24%

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader