Visibility perception and dynamic viewsheds for topographic maps and models

We compare the effectiveness of 2D maps and 3D terrain models for visibility tasks and demonstrate how interactive dynamic viewsheds can improve performance for both types of terrain representations. In general, the two-dimensional nature of classic topographic maps limits their legibility and can make complex yet typical cartographic tasks like determining the visibility between locations difficult. Both 3D physical models and interactive techniques like dynamic viewsheds have the potential to improve viewers' understanding of topography, but their impact has not been deeply explored. We evaluate the effectiveness of 2D maps, 3D models, and interactive viewsheds for both simple and complex visibility tasks. Our results demonstrate the benefits of the dynamic viewshed technique and highlight opportunities for additional tactile interactions. Based on these findings we present guidelines for improving the design and usability of future topographic maps and models.

[1]  Tobias Isenberg,et al.  Lightweight Relief Shearing for Enhanced Terrain Perception on Interactive Maps , 2015, CHI.

[2]  Dawn Youngblood,et al.  Cartographic Relief Presentation , 2010 .

[3]  Hiroshi Ishii,et al.  Illuminating clay: a 3-D tangible interface for landscape analysis , 2002, CHI.

[4]  Pierre Dragicevic,et al.  Running an HCI experiment in multiple parallel universes , 2014, CHI Extended Abstracts.

[5]  Y Wang,et al.  Bringing Clay and Sand into Digital Design — Continuous Tangible user Interfaces , 2004 .

[6]  Mercer Jennifer Ann,et al.  PUBLICATION manual of the American Psychological Association. , 1952, Psychological bulletin.

[7]  E. Imhof.  Cartographic Relief Presentation , 1982 .

[8]  Hiroshi Ishii,et al.  Relief: a scalable actuated shape display , 2010, TEI '10.

[9]  Kate E Decleene,et al.  Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association , 2011 .

[10]  Pierre Dragicevic,et al.  Evaluating the efficiency of physical visualizations , 2013, CHI.

[11]  Russell S. Harmon,et al.  TanGeoMS: Tangible Geospatial Modeling System , 2010, IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics.

[12]  Bernhard Jenny,et al.  The development and rationale of cross-blended hypsometric tints , 2011 .

[13]  Ehud Sharlin,et al.  On tangible user interfaces, humans and spatiality , 2004, Personal and Ubiquitous Computing.

[14]  Vaclav Petras,et al.  Tangible Modeling with Open Source GIS , 2015, Springer International Publishing.

[15]  Richard J. Phillips,et al.  Some Objective Tests of the Legibility of Relief Maps , 1975 .

[16]  T. C. Nicholas Graham,et al.  TerraGuide: Design and Evaluation of a Multi-Surface Environment for Terrain Visibility Analysis , 2015, CHI.

[17]  Patrick Baudisch,et al.  Touch input on curved surfaces , 2011, CHI.

[18]  Hiroshi Ishii,et al.  Emerging frameworks for tangible user interfaces , 2000, IBM Syst. J..

[19]  Margaret Wilson,et al.  Six views of embodied cognition , 2002, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[20]  Neville J. Schofield,et al.  Position Location on Topographical Maps: Effects of Task Factors, Training, and Strategies , 1994 .

[21]  Paul Dean Adshead Harvey,et al.  The History of Topographical Maps: Symbols, Pictures and Surveys , 1980 .

[22]  Patrick Reuter,et al.  GeoTUI: a tangible user interface for geoscience , 2008, TEI.

[23]  Manfred Buchroithner.  True-3D in Cartography: Autostereoscopic and Solid Visualisation of Geodata , 2012 .

[24]  WatsonBenjamin,et al.  On tangible user interfaces, humans and spatiality , 2004 .

[25]  G. Cumming.  The New Statistics: Why and How , 2013 .

[26]  Christian Haeberling,et al.  3D Map Presentation – A Systematic Evaluation of Important Graphic Aspects , 2002 .

[27]  Richard J. Phillips,et al.  An experimental investigation of layer tints for relief maps in school atlases , 1982 .