supporting visual queries

1

Supporting visual queriesOn medium-sized node-link diagrams

Colin WareRobert bobrow

이 준 우

2

Agenda

0. Abstract1. Introduction2. Experiment 1

3. Experiment 2

4. Conclusion

A. Condition

B. Result From Experiment 1

C. Discussion From Experiment 1

A. Condition

B. Result From Experiment 1

C. Discussion From Experiment 1

33

Abstract

3

Abstract

4

Abstract

Abstract

4

For reason of clarity, typical node-link dia-gram statically displayed on paper or com-puter screen contains fewer than 30 nodes

Many problems would benefit if far more complex information could be dia-grammed

However,

Suggest, a subset of a larger diagram is highlighted by using set into motion when a node is selected with mouse

so,

Two Experimental evaluation

1. With 4 highlighting techniques : static, motion, static+motion, none2. Distinction, showing two subsets of a larger network

55

Introduction

5

Introduc-tion

6

Introduction : Graph Example

6

Introduc-tion

Graph representing all of the employee`s e-mail traffic in large company

The problem is this many nodes and links be-tween them cannot be legibly in static diagram

77

Introduction : Interactive technique

7

Introduc-tionThe problem of obtaining information

from a visual display such as a graph

Interactive technique for improving the graphical de-sign

- cognitively constructing- executing a series of visual queries

Visual search can be supported by means of interactive tech-nique

as in Constellation of MEGraph(Motion enhanced graph)

MEGraph : clicking on a node causes a breath-first search and set a subset that specified topological radius is highlighted by being set into motion

888

Introduction : Oscillatory motion

8

Introduc-tionPreviously, in an empirical evaluation of ME-

Graph, Giving a subgraph an oscillatory mo-tion should be very effective way of highlight-ing information

There are two criticisms1. Graph have quite small nodes2. And did not take the time of interaction

1. A pre-attentive visual cue2. Supports conjunction search (coupling of visual cues)

How-ever,

Motion enhancement is more effective than static highlight-ing

The goal of 2nd experimentTwo subgraphs of larger graph

99

Experiment 1

9

Experiment 1

10

Experiment 1

10

Experiment 1

Effectiveness of motion highlighting with medium-sized graphs

Goal : to find the relative values of motion high-lighting and static highlighting on graphs with vari-ous size of nodes

Highlighting : breadth-first search around a selected node and visually searching for red

nodes

1111

Task

11

Experiment 1Task

1. In the highlighting condition the subject had to

move the mouse over the node2. Click on it

3. Visually search the highlighted subset to find out

if there was a red node

4. Pressed one of two keys on the keyboard the ‘M’ key for yes and ‘N’ key for no

1313

Conditions and trial blocks

13

Experiment 1Conditions

Trial blocks4 graph size : 32, 100, 320,1000, 3200 nodes

(1) No highlighting(2) Static highlighting(3) Motion highlighting(4) Static and motion highlighting combined

So, graph size gave 20 conditions

Experiment was run as a within-subject design

SubjectsThe 13 subjects were mostly undergraduate students

141414

Procedure

14

Experiment 1

Subject were given a practice session in each condi-tion

New graph generate and make a series of six responses(3 with yes, 3 with no)

Entire process was repeated three times

This was repeated until they had seen all graph sizes underthat highlighting method

And given blocks of trials with each of the other highlighting condition

15151515

Results from experiment 1

15

Experiment 1

Result of error rate

All of the interactive highlighting condi-tions resulted in much lower error rate

Motion and static cue (2.7%)Static cue (3.9%)Motion cue (3.9%)No highlighting condition (34.7%)

Target was present (13.6%)Target was absent (9.1%)

1616161616


16

Experiment 1


Highlighting method : (F(3,4640)=366.0, p<0.0001)Graph size : (F(1,4640)=13.8, p<0.0001)

Three-way ANOVA factorGraph sizeHighlighting methodTarget present vs target absent

Target present vs target absent : (F(1,4640)=2.29, p<0.0001)Tukey HSD test : Two groups

No highlighting condition vs the others

171717171717


17

Experiment 1

Result of response time

Longest response time in 3200 nodes

Little variation in response times for first four graph size

High error rate also had faster responses

Time increase was less in the no high-lighting condition

Due to subject gave up early on the difficult condition

181818

Discussion of experiment 1

18

Experiment 1

Main practical result is

Unexpected result

Make medium-sized diagrams accessible to queries about node

In no highlightingsmallest graph would be not usable in application

The shorter response times for the no highlighting were not expectedFailed to confirm

Motion highlighting can be more effectiveSo,

Rather then replace static highlightingMotion highlighting can be an additional highlighting tech-nique

19

Experiment 2

1919

Experiment 2

20

Experiment 2

20

Experiment 2

Supporting visual queries with

The problem of distinctly highlighting two sub-graphs of a larger graph

two highlighted sub-graphs

Because it require a visual conjunction search

Hypothesis : having static highlighting on one subset and motion highlighting on the other would be most effec-tive way

212121

Experiment 2

Conditions

Summary of conditions for experiment 2

All conditions had two sub-graphs highlighted

In half trials, the two subset had 2 or 3 nodes in com-mon, in half they were dis-joint

Graphs always had 1000 nodes

22222222

Experiment 2

Conditions : example

Vertical burst motion(For subgraph A)

Horizontal motion(For subgraph B)

23

Experiment 2

2323

Task and Subjects

Task1. Large graph containing two highlighted subsets

was presented on the subject

Subjects

The 12 subjects were a combination of graduate and undergraduate student

2. If there were common nodes between two sub-sets(yes response) press right mouse key

2. If there were no common nodes between two sub-sets(no response) press left mouse key

2424

Experiment 2

2424

Procedure

Subject were given a practice session in all 8 condi-tionAnd with overlap and without overlap

Conditions were given in a different random order

20 trials presented in each condition

In half the trials the two subgraphs had nodes in common; in half didn`t

All of the conditions were given, take a rest for a few minute and repeated 2nd trial

252525

Experiment 2

2525



Use of static highlighting for one subset and motion cues for the other resulted in dramatically reduced error rate (2.6% vs 22.5%)

Much higher error rate with condition c7, there were far fewer yes responses than no re-sponses

26262626

Experiment 2

2626


Result of response timeAll condition used static high-lighting for one subset and mo-tion cues for the other were in the group with the shortest re-sponse time (mean 1.16s)

Response times were longer for condition where there were higher error rate

Tukey HSD test (c1,c2,c3,c4) < c8 < (c5,c6,c7,c8)mean 1.16s 3.48s 4.15s

2727272727

Experiment 2

2727

Discussion of experiment 2

The results strongly support the idea that the con-junction of motion and non-motion cues

Can be rapidly searched visually

Failed to find pairs of motions that supported rapid visual searches

Clearly perceive nodes that belong to both sub-set If one is highlighted using motion

and the other is highlighted using static cues

28

Conclusion

28

Conclusion

2929

Conclusion

29

Conclusion

3030

Thank you

supporting visual queries

Documents