시각화 초심자에게 시각적 비교를 돕는 정보 시각화 기술의 디자인

학위논문(박사)--서울대학교 대학원 :공과대학 컴퓨터공학부,2020. 2. 서진욱.The visual comparison is one of the fundamental tasks in information visualization (InfoVis) that enables people to organize, evaluate, and combine information fragmented in visualizations. For example, people perform visual comparison tasks to compare data over time, from different sources, or with different analytic models. While the InfoVis community has focused on understanding the effectiveness of different visualization designs for supporting visual comparison tasks, it is still unclear how to design effective comparative visualizations due to several limitations: (1) Empirical findings and practical implications from those studies are fragmented, and (2) we lack user studies that directly investigated the effectiveness of different visualization designs for visual comparison. In this dissertation, we present the results of three studies to build our knowledge on how to support effective visual comparison to InfoVis novices⁠—general people who are not familiar with visual representations and visual data exploration process. Identifying the major stages in the visualization construction process where novices confront challenges with visual comparison tasks, we explored two high-level comparison tasks with actual users: comparing visual mapping (encoding barrier) and comparing information (interpretation barrier) in visualizations. First, we conducted a systematical literature review on research papers (N = 104) that focused on supporting visual comparison tasks to gather and organize the practical insights that researchers gained in the wild. From this study, we offered implications for designing comparative visualizations, such as actionable guidelines, as well as the lucid categorization of comparative designs which can help researchers explore the design space. In the second study, we performed a qualitative user study (N = 24) to investigate how novices compare and understand visual mapping suggested in a visual-encoding recommendation interface. Based on the study, we present novices' main challenges in using visual encoding recommendations and design implications as remedies. In the third study, we conducted a design study in the area on bioinformatics to design and implement a visual analytics tool, XCluSim, that helps users to compare multiple clustering results. Case studies with a bioinformatician showed that our system enables analysts to easily evaluate the quality of a large number of clustering results. Based on the results of three studies in this dissertation, we suggest a future research agenda, such as designing recommendations for visual comparison and distinguishing InfoVis novices from experts.시각적 비교는 정보 시각화를 이용한 핵심적인 데이터 분석 과정 중 하나로써, 분산되어 있는 정보들을 사람들이 서로 정리, 평가, 병합할 수 있도록 돕는다. 예를 들어, 사람들은 시간의 흐름에 따른 데이터의 변화를 보거나, 서로 다른 출처의 데이터를 비교하거나, 같은 데이터를 여러 분석 모델들을 이용해 평가하기 위해 시각적 비교 과업을 흔히 수행하게 된다. 효과적인 시각화 디자인을 위한 여러 연구가 정보 시각화 분야에서 이루어지고 있는 반면, 어떤 디자인을 통해 효과적으로 시각적 비교를 지원할 수 있는지에 대한 이해는 다음의 제약들로 인해 아직까지 불분명하다. (1) 경험적 통찰들과 실용적 설계 지침들이 파편화되어 있으며 (2) 비교 시각화를 지원하는 방법을 이해하기 위한 사용자 실험의 수가 여전히 제한적이다. 본 논문에서는 시각화 초심자들에게 효과적으로 시각적 비교를 지원하기 위한 정보 시각화 디자인 방법을 더 깊이 이해하기 위해서 일련의 세 연구를 진행하고 이에 대한 결과를 제시한다. 특별히, 시각화 초심자들이 시각적 비교를 할 때 어려움을 경험할 수 있는 두 주요 시각화 단계를 확인함으로써, 본 연구에서는 시각적 인코딩 비교 (인코딩 장벽) 및 정보 비교 (해석 장벽) 과업들에 초점을 맞춘다. 첫째, 비교 시각화 디자인을 제시한 문헌들(N = 104)을 체계적으로 조사 및 분석함으로써 시각화 연구자들이 사용자 실험과 시각화 설계 과정을 통해 얻은 실용적 통찰들을 정리하였다. 이 문헌조사를 기반으로 비교 시각화 설계에 대한 지침들을 정립하고, 비교 시각화를 위한 디자인 공간을 더 깊이 이해하고 탐색하는 데 도움을 줄 수 있는 시각화 분류 및 예시들을 제공한다. 둘째, 초심자들이 시각화 추천 인터페이스에서 어떻게 새로운 시각적 인코딩들을 서로 비교하고 사용하는지에 대한 이해를 돕기 위해 사용자 실험(N = 24)을 수행하였다. 이 실험의 결과를 기반으로, 초심자들의 주요 어려움들과 이들을 해결하기 위한 디자인 지침들을 제시한다. 셋째, 생명정보학자가 시각적으로 다수 개의 클러스터링 결과들을 비교 및 분석할 수 있도록 도와주는 시각화 시스템, XCluSim을 디자인하고 구현하는 디자인 스터디를 수행하였다. 사례 연구를 통해 실제로 생명정보학자가 XCluSim을 이용하여 많은 클러스터링 결과들을 쉽게 비교 및 평가할 수 있다는 것을 보였다. 마지막으로, 이 세 연구 결과들을 기반으로 비교 시각화 분야에서 유망한 향후 연구들을 제시한다.CHAPTER 1. Introduction 1 1.1 Background and Motivation 1 1.2 Research Questions and Approaches 4 1.2.1 Revisiting Comparative Layouts: Design Space, Guidelines, and Future Directions 5 1.2.2 Understanding How InfoVis Novices Compare Visual Encoding Recommendation 6 1.2.3 Designing XCluSim: a Visual Analytics System for Comparing Multiple Clustering Results 7 1.3 Dissertation Outline 8 CHAPTER 2. Related Work 9 2.1 Visual Comparison Tasks 9 2.2 Visualization Designs for Comparison 10 2.2.1 Gleicher et al.s Comparative Layout 11 2.3 Understanding InfoVis Novices 12 2.4 Visualization Recommendation Interfaces 13 2.5 Comparative Visualizations for Cluster Analysis 14 CHAPTER 3. Comparative Layouts Revisited: Design Space, Guidelines, and Future Directions 19 3.1 Introduction 19 3.2 Literature Review 21 3.2.1 Method 22 3.3 Comparative Layouts in The Wild 23 3.3.1 Classifying Comparison Tasks in User Studies 25 3.3.2 Same LayoutIs Called Differently 26 3.3.3 Lucid Classification of Comparative Layouts 28 3.3.4 Advantages and Concerns of Using Each Layout 30 3.3.5 Trade-offs between Comparative Layouts 36 3.3.6 Approaches to Overcome the Concerns 38 3.3.7 Comparative Layout Explorer 42 3.4 Discussion 42 3.4.1 Guidelines for Comparative Layouts 44 3.4.2 Promising Directions for Future Research 48 3.5 Summary 49 CHAPTER 4. Understanding How InfoVis Novices Compare Visual Encoding Recommendation 51 4.1 Motivation 51 4.2 Interface 53 4.2.1 Visualization Goals 53 4.2.2 Recommendations 54 4.2.3 Representation Methods for Recommendations 54 4.2.4 Interface 58 4.2.5 Pilot Study 61 4.3 User Study 62 4.3.1 Participants 62 4.3.2 Interface 62 4.3.3 Tasks and Datasets 65 4.3.4 Procedure. 65 4.4 Findings 68 4.4.1 Poor Design Decisions 68 4.4.2 Role of Preview, Animated Transition, and Text 69 4.4.3 Challenges For Understanding Recommendations 70 4.4.4 Learning By Doing 71 4.4.5 Effects of Recommendation Order 71 4.4.6 Personal Criteria for Selecting Recommendations 72 4.5 Discussion 73 4.5.1 Design Implications 73 4.5.2 Limitations and FutureWork 75 4.6 Summary 77 CHAPTER 5. Designing XCluSim: a Visual Analytics System for Comparing Multiple Clustering Results 78 5.1 Motivation 78 5.2 Task Analysis and Design Goals 79 5.3 XCluSim 80 5.3.1 Color Encoding of Clusters Using Tree Colors 82 5.3.2 Overview of All Clustering Results 83 5.3.3 Visualization for Comparing Selected Clustering Results 86 5.3.4 Visualization for Individual Clustering Results 92 5.3.5 Implementation 100 5.4 CaseStudy 100 5.4.1 Elucidating the Role of Ferroxidase in Cryptococcus Neoformans Var. Grubii H99 (CaseStudy 1) 100 5.4.2 Finding a Clustering Result that Clearly Represents Biological Relations (CaseStudy 2) 103 5.5 Discussion 106 5.5.1 Limitations and FutureWork 108 5.6 Summary 108 CHAPTER 6. Future Research Agenda 110 6.0.1 Recommendation for Visual Comparison 110 6.0.2 Understanding the Perception of Subtle Difference 111 6.0.3 Distinguishing InfoVis Novices from Experts 112 CHAPTER 7. Conclusion. 113 Abstract (Korean) 129 Acknowledgments (Korean) 131Docto

Custom Visualization without Real Programming

Information Visualization tools have simplified visualization development. Some tools help simple users construct standard visualizations; others help programmers develop custom visualizations. This thesis contributes to the field of Information Visualization and End-User Development. The first contribution of the thesis is a taxonomy for Information Visualization development tools. Existing taxonomies for Information Visualization are helpful, but none of them can properly categorize visualization tools from a user development perspective. The categorization of 20 Information Visualization tools proves the applicability of this taxonomy, and the result showed that there are no Drag-and-Drop tools that allow end-user developers as well as programmers to create custom visualizations. The results can be used by the End-User Development and the Information Visualization community to identify future avenues of research. The second contribution is a new visualization development approach, the Drag-Drop-Set-View-Interact approach provided by the visualization too

Bottom-up vs. top-down : trade-offs in efficiency, understanding, freedom and creativity with InfoVis tools

The emergence of tools that support fast-and-easy visualization creation by non-experts has made the benefits of InfoVis widely accessible. Key features of these tools include attribute-level operations, automated mappings, and visualization templates. However, these features shield people from lower-level visualization design steps, such as the specific mapping of data points to visuals. In contrast, recent research promotes constructive visualization where individual data units and visuals are directly manipulated. We present a qualitative study comparing people's visualization processes using two visualization tools: one promoting a top-down approach to visualization construction (Tableau Desktop) and one implementing a bottom-up constructive visualization approach (iVoLVER). Our results show how the two approaches influence: 1) the visualization process, 2) decisions on the visualization design, 3) the feeling of control and authorship, and 4) the willingness to explore alternative designs. We discuss the complex trade-offs between the two approaches and outline considerations for designing better visualization tools.Postprin

Visualizing the scientific information nowadays: the problems and challenges

In recent years, a comparably fresh research field — information visualization has become commonly available for the researchers of all specialties. Information or knowledge maps play a role of interface for the analysis and intensive study of scientific community and knowledge domains development. The popularity of visualization techniques and interdisciplinary framework has resulted in many problems that have not been solved since the field had emerged. The article introduces the instrumental problems and challenges in this field. Exposing the functions information visualization allows to understand the difficulties and barriers within the whole visualizing process. A particular example of insight into the Polish science map is considered in the context of a new knowledge

Toward a Heuristic Model for Evaluating the Complexity of Computer Security Visualization Interface

Computer security visualization has gained much attention in the research community in the past few years. However, the advancement in security visualization research has been hampered by the lack of standardization in visualization design, centralized datasets, and evaluation methods. We propose a new heuristic model for evaluating the complexity of computer security visualizations. This complexity evaluation method is designed to evaluate the efficiency of performing visual search in security visualizations in terms of measuring critical memory capacity load needed to perform such tasks. Our method is based on research in cognitive psychology along with characteristics found in a majority of the security visualizations. The main goal for developing this complexity evaluation method is to guide computer security visualization design and compare different visualization designs. Finally, we compare several well known computer security visualization systems. The proposed method has the potential to be extended to other areas of information visualization

MyBrush: Brushing and Linking with Personal Agency

We extend the popular brushing and linking technique by incorporating personal agency in the interaction. We map existing research related to brushing and linking into a design space that deconstructs the interaction technique into three components: source (what is being brushed), link (the expression of relationship between source and target), and target (what is revealed as related to the source). Using this design space, we created MyBrush, a unified interface that offers personal agency over brushing and linking by giving people the flexibility to configure the source, link, and target of multiple brushes. The results of three focus groups demonstrate that people with different backgrounds leveraged personal agency in different ways, including performing complex tasks and showing links explicitly. We reflect on these results, paving the way for future research on the role of personal agency in information visualization

Saliency Prediction in the Data Visualization Design Process

L'abstract è presente nell'allegato / the abstract is in the attachmen

Thinking interactively with visualization

Interaction is becoming an integral part of using visualization for analysis. When interaction is tightly and appropriately coupled with visualization, it can transform the visualization from display- ing static imagery to assisting comprehensive analysis of data at all scales. In this relationship, a deeper understanding of the role of interaction, its effects, and how visualization relates to interaction is necessary for designing systems in which the two components complement each other. This thesis approaches interaction in visualization from three different perspectives. First, it considers the cost of maintaining interaction in manipulating visualization of large datasets. Namely, large datasets often require a simplification process for the visualization to maintain interactivity, and this thesis examines how simplification affects the resulting visualization. Secondly, example interactive visual analytical systems are presented to demonstrate how interactivity could be applied in visualization. Specifically, four fully developed systems for four distinct problem domains are discussed to determine the common role of interactivity in these visualizations that make the systems successful. Lastly, this thesis presents evidence that interactions are important for analytical tasks using visualizations. Interaction logs of financial analysts using a visualization were collected, coded, and examined to determine the amount of analysis strategies contained within the interaction logs. The finding supports the benefits of high interactivity in analytical tasks when using a visualization. The example visualizations used to support these three perspectives are diverse in their goals and features. However, they all share similar design guidelines and visualization principles. Based on their characteristics, this thesis groups these visualizations into urban visualization, visual analytical systems, and interaction capturing and discusses them separately in terms of lessons learned and future directions