vislink revealing relationships
play

VisLink: Revealing Relationships Amongst Visualizations C HRISTOPHER - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

VisLink: Revealing Relationships Amongst Visualizations C HRISTOPHER C OLLINS & & S HEELAGH C ARPENDALE ccollins@cs.utoronto.ca, sheelagh@ucalgary.ca IEEE Information Visualization 2007 (Collins, 2007) (Heer, 2006 [prefuse]) &


  1. VisLink: Revealing Relationships Amongst Visualizations C HRISTOPHER C OLLINS & & S HEELAGH C ARPENDALE ccollins@cs.utoronto.ca, sheelagh@ucalgary.ca IEEE Information Visualization 2007

  2. (Collins, 2007)

  3. (Heer, 2006 [prefuse]) & (Fry, 2004)

  4. Unde derst standing anding Mu Mult ltip iple le Rela lati tions ons  What is the relationship…  across different views of the same data?  across different relations in the same dataset?  across multiple relations and datasets?

  5. VisLink

  6. VisLink Overview  Any number of 2D visualizations, each on its own plane in 3D space  Adjacent planes connected by bundled edges  Shortcuts and constrained widgets aid usability  Enables powerful inter-visualization queries

  7. Formalizing Multiple Relations Visualizations Dataset Relation Visualization Conference Attendee Data Node-link social Professor / Student network graph Formalism for Multiple Relationship Visualization Comparison

  8. Formalizing Multiple Relations Visualizations Dataset Relation Visualization D A Formalism for Multiple Relationship Visualization Comparison

  9. Formalizing Multiple Relations Visualizations Dataset Relation Visualization R A D ( ) D A A Formalism for Multiple Relationship Visualization Comparison

  10. Formalizing Multiple Relations Visualizations Dataset Relation Visualization Vis  R A D ( ) R ( D ) D A A A A A Formalism for Multiple Relationship Visualization Comparison

  11. Formalizing Multiple Relations Visualizations Relation ( ) R A D A Dataset Visualization Vis  R ( D ) D A A A A Formalism for Multiple Relationship Visualization Comparison

  12. Formalizing Multiple Relations Visualizations Relation ( ) R A D A Dataset Visualization Relation Vis  R ( D ) D R B D ( ) A A A A A Formalism for Multiple Relationship Visualization Comparison

  13. Formalizing Multiple Relations Visualizations Visualization Relation Vis  R ( D ) A A A ( ) R A D A Visualization Dataset Vis  R ( D ) B A A Relation D R B D ( ) A A Formalism for Multiple Relationship Visualization Comparison

  14. Formalizing Multiple Relations Visualizations Visualization Relation Vis  R ( D ) A A A ( ) R A D A Visualization Dataset Vis  R ( D ) B A A Relation D R B D ( ) A A Visualization Vis  ( ) R D C B A Formalism for Multiple Relationship Visualization Comparison

  15. Multiple Relation Visualizations Individual Visualizations Coordinated Views Compound Graphs Semantic Substrates VisLink Formalism for Multiple Relationship Visualization Comparison

  16. Individual Visualizations  Any datasets, relations, and visualizations  Manually compare  e.g. different charts in Excel Formalism for Multiple Relationship Visualization Comparison

  17. Coordinated Views Formalism for Multiple Relationship Visualization Comparison

  18. Coordinated Views Vis  ( ) R D A A A Formalism for Multiple Relationship Visualization Comparison

  19. Coordinated Views Vis  Vis  ( ) ( ) R D R D A A A A B A Formalism for Multiple Relationship Visualization Comparison

  20. Coordinated Views Vis  Vis  ( ) ( ) R D R D A A A A B A  Any datasets, relations, and visualizations  Interactive highlighting  e.g., Snap-Together Visualization (North & Shneiderman, 2000) Formalism for Multiple Relationship Visualization Comparison

  21. Compound Graphs Formalism for Multiple Relationship Visualization Comparison

  22. Compound Graphs Vis  R ( D ) A A A Formalism for Multiple Relationship Visualization Comparison

  23. Compound Graphs   Vis R ( D ) R ( D ) A A A B A Formalism for Multiple Relationship Visualization Comparison

  24. Compound Graphs Vis  R , R ( D ) A A B A  Secondary relation has no sp spatial l rights ts  e.g., Overlays on Treemaps (Fekete et al., 2003) , ArcTrees Use of the powerful spatial dimension (Neumann et al., 2005), Hierarchical Edge Bundles (Holten, 2006) to encode data relationships. Formalism for Multiple Relationship Visualization Comparison

  25. Semantic Substrates Formalism for Multiple Relationship Visualization Comparison

  26. Semantic Substrates D A Formalism for Multiple Relationship Visualization Comparison

  27. Semantic Substrates D A 1 D A Formalism for Multiple Relationship Visualization Comparison

  28. Semantic Substrates D A 1 D A 2 D A Formalism for Multiple Relationship Visualization Comparison

  29. Semantic Substrates D A 1 D A 2 D A … D A n Formalism for Multiple Relationship Visualization Comparison

  30. Semantic Substrates D D A A 1 2 Formalism for Multiple Relationship Visualization Comparison

  31. Semantic Substrates Vis  Vis  R ( D ) R ( D ) A A A A A A 1 2 Formalism for Multiple Relationship Visualization Comparison

  32. Semantic Substrates Vis  Vis  R ( D ) R ( D ) A A A A A A 1 2 Vis  ( ) R D A A A Formalism for Multiple Relationship Visualization Comparison

  33. Semantic Substrates  Single visualization, single relation  Semantically meaningful data subsets  Spatial rights for all relations (Shneiderman and Aris, 2006) Formalism for Multiple Relationship Visualization Comparison

  34. VisLink Formalism for Multiple Relationship Visualization Comparison

  35. VisLink Vis  R ( D ) A A A Formalism for Multiple Relationship Visualization Comparison

  36. VisLink Vis  Vis  R ( D ) R ( D ) A A A B B A Formalism for Multiple Relationship Visualization Comparison

  37. VisLink Vis  Vis  R ( D ) R ( D ) A A A B B A Vis  R ( D ) B A B Formalism for Multiple Relationship Visualization Comparison

  38. VisLink Vis  Vis  R ( D ) R ( D ) A A A B B A  Vis T ( R ( D ), R ( D ))  A B A A B A Formalism for Multiple Relationship Visualization Comparison

  39. VisLink  Vis T ( R ( D ), R ( D ))  A B A A B A  Visualize second order relations between visualizations  Across any datasets, relations, visualizations for which a relation can be defined  All component visualizations retain spatial rights Formalism for Multiple Relationship Visualization Comparison

  40. VisLink & Semantic Substrates Vis  Vis  Vis  Vis  R ( D ) ( ) R D R ( D ) R ( D ) A A A A A A B B A A A A 1 2  Vis T ( R ( D ), R ( D )) Vis   R ( D ) A B A A B A A A A Formalism for Multiple Relationship Visualization Comparison

  41. VisLink & Semantic Substrates Vis  Vis  Vis  Vis  R ( D ) ( ) R D R ( D ) R ( D ) A A A A A A B B A A A A 1 2  Vis T ( R ( D ), R ( D )) Vis   R ( D ) A B A A B A A A A  Single visualization technique  Semantic subsets of data provide added meaning Formalism for Multiple Relationship Visualization Comparison

  42. VisLink & Semantic Substrates Vis  Vis  Vis  Vis  R ( D ) ( ) R D R ( D ) R ( D ) A A A A A A B B A A A A 1 2  Vis T ( R ( D ), R ( D )) Vis   R ( D ) A B A A B A A A A  Any number of different relations and visualizations  Second order relations revealed in inter-plane edges Formalism for Multiple Relationship Visualization Comparison

  43. Equivalency & Extension Formalism for Multiple Relationship Visualization Comparison

  44. VisLink VisLink Visualization

  45. VisLink Case Study: Lexical Data ? WordNet IS-A hierarchy (R A ) Similarity clustering (R B ) using using radial tree (Vis A ) force-directed layout (Vis B ) VisLink Visualization

  46. Edge Detail  Bundled: one-to-many edges  Smooth: Chaiken corner cutting  Transparent: bundles more opaque  Directed: orange-to-green VisLink Visualization

  47. Interaction With Component Visualizations  Always equivalent to 2D:  Planes are virtual displays  Mouse events transformed and passed to underlying visualization  Equivalent to 2D viewing mode VisLink Visualization

  48. Interplane Edges VisLink Visualization

  49. Zoom VisLink Visualization

  50. Filter VisLink Visualization

  51. Constrained Widget Interaction VisLink Interaction

  52. 3D Navigation VisLink Interaction

  53. Spreading Activation  Nodes have a level of activation, indicated by transparency of orange node background  Full activation through:  Selecting a node on a plane  Node matches search query  Activation propagates through interplane edges, reflecting between planes with exponential drop-off  Enables inter-visualization queries  Edge transparency relative to source node activation Spreading Activation

  54. Inter-Plane Query Example 2: synonym sets 1: alphabetic clusters No alphabetic organization No synonym information Q: Synonyms in the alphabetic view? Spreading Activation

  55. Inter-Plane Query Example 1. Select a word on plane 1 2. Edges propagate to synonym sets on plane 2 3. Reflected edges propagate back, revealing synonyms in alphabetic clusters 1: similarity clusters 2: synonym sets Spreading Activation

Recommend


More recommend