Podium: Ranking Data Using Mixed-Initiative Visual Analytics

People often rank and order data points as a vital part of making decisions. Multi-attribute ranking systems are a common tool used to make these data-driven decisions. Such systems often take the form of a table-based visualization in which users assign weights to the attributes representing the quantifiable importance of each attribute to a decision, which the system then uses to compute a ranking of the data. However, these systems assume that users are able to quantify their conceptual understanding of how important particular attributes are to a decision. This is not always easy or even possible for users to do. Rather, people often have a more holistic understanding of the data. They form opinions that data point A is better than data point B but do not necessarily know which attributes are important. To address these challenges, we present a visual analytic application to help people rank multi-variate data points. We developed a prototype system, Podium, that allows users to drag rows in the table to rank order data points based on their perception of the relative value of the data. Podium then infers a weighting model using Ranking SVM that satisfies the user's data preferences as closely as possible. Whereas past systems help users understand the relationships between data points based on changes to attribute weights, our approach helps users to understand the attributes that might inform their understanding of the data. We present two usage scenarios to describe some of the potential uses of our proposed technique: (1) understanding which attributes contribute to a user's subjective preferences for data, and (2) deconstructing attributes of importance for existing rankings. Our proposed approach makes powerful machine learning techniques more usable to those who may not have expertise in these areas.

[1]  Yoram Singer,et al.  An Efficient Boosting Algorithm for Combining Preferences by , 2013 .

[2]  Nan Cao,et al.  Adaptive Contextualization: Combating Bias During High-Dimensional Visualization and Data Selection , 2016, IUI.

[3]  Ramana Rao,et al.  The table lens: merging graphical and symbolic representations in an interactive focus + context visualization for tabular information , 1994, CHI '94.

[4]  William Ribarsky,et al.  Recovering Reasoning Processes from User Interactions , 2009, IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications.

[5]  Hanspeter Pfister,et al.  LineUp: Visual Analysis of Multi-Attribute Rankings , 2013, IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics.

[6]  Stuart K. Card,et al.  The cost structure of sensemaking , 1993, INTERCHI.

[7]  Tong Zhang,et al.  Subset Ranking Using Regression , 2006, COLT.

[8]  Yoav Freund,et al.  A decision-theoretic generalization of on-line learning and an application to boosting , 1995, EuroCOLT.

[9]  Joost Broekens,et al.  Chapter 3 Object-Centered Interactive Multi-Dimensional Scaling : Ask the Expert , 2006 .

[10]  William Ribarsky,et al.  Building and Applying a Human Cognition Model for Visual Analytics , 2009, Inf. Vis..

[11]  Eduardo E. Veas,et al.  Rank As You Go: User-Driven Exploration of Search Results , 2016, IUI.

[12]  Chris North,et al.  Information Visualization , 2008, Lecture Notes in Computer Science.

[13]  Daniel A. Keim,et al.  Human-centered machine learning through interactive visualization , 2016 .

[14]  Wei Chen,et al.  RankExplorer: Visualization of Ranking Changes in Large Time Series Data , 2012, IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics.

[15]  Alex Endert,et al.  Warning, Bias May Occur: A Proposed Approach to Detecting Cognitive Bias in Interactive Visual Analytics , 2017, 2017 IEEE Conference on Visual Analytics Science and Technology (VAST).

[16]  Chris North,et al.  Observation-level interaction with statistical models for visual analytics , 2011, 2011 IEEE Conference on Visual Analytics Science and Technology (VAST).

[17]  James J. Thomas,et al.  Defining Insight for Visual Analytics , 2009, IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications.

[18]  Tie-Yan Liu,et al.  Learning to rank: from pairwise approach to listwise approach , 2007, ICML '07.

[19]  Eric Horvitz,et al.  Principles of mixed-initiative user interfaces , 1999, CHI '99.

[20]  Pierre Dragicevic,et al.  The Attraction Effect in Information Visualization , 2017, IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics.

[21]  Gregory N. Hullender,et al.  Learning to rank using gradient descent , 2005, ICML.

[22]  Alex Endert,et al.  Four Perspectives on Human Bias in Visual Analytics , 2018, Cognitive Biases in Visualizations.

[23]  Thorsten Joachims,et al.  Optimizing search engines using clickthrough data , 2002, KDD.

[24]  Tao Qin,et al.  FRank: a ranking method with fidelity loss , 2007, SIGIR.

[25]  Chris North,et al.  Analytic provenance: process+interaction+insight , 2011, CHI Extended Abstracts.

[26]  Rong Jin,et al.  Rank-based distance metric learning: An application to image retrieval , 2008, 2008 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition.

[27]  Tie-Yan Liu,et al.  Adapting ranking SVM to document retrieval , 2006, SIGIR.

[28]  Alex Endert,et al.  AxiSketcher: Interactive Nonlinear Axis Mapping of Visualizations through User Drawings , 2017, IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics.

[29]  Gert R. G. Lanckriet,et al.  Metric Learning to Rank , 2010, ICML.

[30]  Elizabeth G. Hetzler,et al.  Analysis experiences using information visualization , 2004, IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications.

[31]  Tie-Yan Liu,et al.  Learning to rank for information retrieval , 2009, SIGIR.

[32]  C. Hwang,et al.  TOPSIS for MODM , 1994 .

[33]  Alex Endert,et al.  Characterizing Provenance in Visualization and Data Analysis: An Organizational Framework of Provenance Types and Purposes , 2016, IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics.

[34]  William Ribarsky,et al.  Recovering Reasoning Process From User Interactions , 2009 .

[35]  Russ Burtner,et al.  Mixed-initiative visual analytics using task-driven recommendations , 2015, 2015 IEEE Conference on Visual Analytics Science and Technology (VAST).

[36]  David Maxwell Chickering,et al.  Here or there: preference judgments for relevance , 2008 .

[37]  Giuseppe Carenini,et al.  ValueCharts: analyzing linear models expressing preferences and evaluations , 2004, AVI.

[38]  Daniel A. Keim,et al.  Visual Comparison of Orderings and Rankings , 2013, EuroVA@EuroVis.

[39]  Alex Endert,et al.  Finding Waldo: Learning about Users from their Interactions , 2014, IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics.

[40]  Daniel A. Keim,et al.  Visual Analytics: Definition, Process, and Challenges , 2008, Information Visualization.

[41]  Alex Endert,et al.  Visualization by Demonstration: An Interaction Paradigm for Visual Data Exploration , 2017, IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics.

[42]  Charles Perin,et al.  Investigating the Direct Manipulation of Ranking Tables for Time Navigation , 2015, CHI.

[43]  David Maxwell Chickering,et al.  Here or There , 2008, ECIR.

[44]  Carla E. Brodley,et al.  Dis-function: Learning distance functions interactively , 2012, 2012 IEEE Conference on Visual Analytics Science and Technology (VAST).

[45]  B. L. William Wong,et al.  Sensemaking in Visual Analytics: Processes and Challenges , 2010, EuroVAST@EuroVis.

[46]  James R. Eagan,et al.  Low-level components of analytic activity in information visualization , 2005, IEEE Symposium on Information Visualization, 2005. INFOVIS 2005..

[47]  Stelios H. Zanakis,et al.  Multi-attribute decision making: A simulation comparison of select methods , 1998, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[48]  Alex Endert,et al.  InterAxis: Steering Scatterplot Axes via Observation-Level Interaction , 2016, IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics.

[49]  Alex Endert,et al.  The State of the Art in Integrating Machine Learning into Visual Analytics , 2017, Comput. Graph. Forum.