Toward automatic comparison of visualization techniques: Application to graph visualization
October 21, 2019 Β· Declared Dead Β· π Visual Informatics
"No code URL or promise found in abstract"
Evidence collected by the PWNC Scanner
Authors
L. Giovannangeli, R. Bourqui, R. Giot, D. Auber
arXiv ID
1910.09477
Category
cs.HC: Human-Computer Interaction
Cross-listed
cs.LG
Citations
26
Venue
Visual Informatics
Last Checked
4 months ago
Abstract
Many end-user evaluations of data visualization techniques have been run during the last decades. Their results are cornerstones to build efficient visualization systems. However, designing such an evaluation is always complex and time-consuming and may end in a lack of statistical evidence and reproducibility. We believe that modern and efficient computer vision techniques, such as deep convolutional neural networks (CNNs), may help visualization researchers to build and/or adjust their evaluation hypothesis. The basis of our idea is to train machine learning models on several visualization techniques to solve a specific task. Our assumption is that it is possible to compare the efficiency of visualization techniques based on the performance of their corresponding model. As current machine learning models are not able to strictly reflect human capabilities, including their imperfections, such results should be interpreted with caution. However, we think that using machine learning-based pre-evaluation, as a pre-process of standard user evaluations, should help researchers to perform a more exhaustive study of their design space. Thus, it should improve their final user evaluation by providing it better test cases. In this paper, we present the results of two experiments we have conducted to assess how correlated the performance of users and computer vision techniques can be. That study compares two mainstream graph visualization techniques: node-link (\NL) and adjacency-matrix (\MD) diagrams. Using two well-known deep convolutional neural networks, we partially reproduced user evaluations from Ghoniem \textit{et al.} and from Okoe \textit{et al.}. These experiments showed that some user evaluation results can be reproduced automatically.
Community Contributions
Found the code? Know the venue? Think something is wrong? Let us know!
π Similar Papers
In the same crypt β Human-Computer Interaction
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Improving fairness in machine learning systems: What do industry practitioners need?
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Identifying Stable Patterns over Time for Emotion Recognition from EEG
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Questioning the AI: Informing Design Practices for Explainable AI User Experiences
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Deep Learning for Sensor-based Human Activity Recognition: Overview, Challenges and Opportunities
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Educational data mining and learning analytics: An updated survey
Died the same way β π» Ghosted
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Federated Learning: Strategies for Improving Communication Efficiency
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
In-Datacenter Performance Analysis of a Tensor Processing Unit
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Deep Convolutional Neural Networks for Computer-Aided Detection: CNN Architectures, Dataset Characteristics and Transfer Learning
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted