Matching Application Requirements with Dynamic Graph Visualization Profiles

Mapping a dynamic graph dataset to an inappropriate visualization leads to a degradation of visualization performance at some task. To tap the full potential of existing dynamic graph visualization techniques, we propose a methodology for matching application requirements with dynamic graph visualization profiles. We target at supporting experts choosing the right visualization technique. Our methodology describes both the application requirements and the visualization techniques as profiles covering important aesthetic criteria for visualizing dynamic graphs. Characteristics of the graph and task are used to derive the application profile. The probably most appropriate visualization technique is the one whose profile matches best the required application profile. We compile exemplary visualization profiles for representatives of dynamic graph visualization approaches and demonstrate the methodology in a case study.

[1]  Michael Burch,et al.  TimeRadarTrees: Visualizing Dynamic Compound Digraphs , 2008, Comput. Graph. Forum.

[2]  Michael Burch,et al.  Rapid Serial Visual Presentation in dynamic graph visualization , 2012, 2012 IEEE Symposium on Visual Languages and Human-Centric Computing (VL/HCC).

[3]  Ayellet Tal,et al.  Online Dynamic Graph Drawing , 2008, IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics.

[4]  Christoph Schlieder,et al.  Pixel-Oriented Visualization of Change in Social Networks , 2010, 2010 International Conference on Advances in Social Networks Analysis and Mining.

[5]  Michael Zeiller,et al.  A decision matrix for choosing the proper visualization technique in knowledge visualization , 2008 .

[6]  Stephan Diehl,et al.  Graphs, They Are Changing , 2002, GD.

[7]  Hikmet Senay,et al.  A knowledge-based system for visualization design , 1994, IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications.

[8]  Ulrik Brandes,et al.  Asymmetric Relations in Longitudinal Social Networks , 2011, IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics.

[9]  Kozo Sugiyama,et al.  Layout Adjustment and the Mental Map , 1995, J. Vis. Lang. Comput..

[10]  Clayton Lewis,et al.  A problem-oriented classification of visualization techniques , 1990, Proceedings of the First IEEE Conference on Visualization: Visualization `90.

[11]  Robert F. Cohen,et al.  Validating Graph Drawing Aesthetics , 1995, GD.

[12]  Michael Burch,et al.  Towards an Aesthetic Dimensions Framework for Dynamic Graph Visualisations , 2009, 2009 13th International Conference Information Visualisation.

[13]  Amy Ashurst Gooch,et al.  The Aesthetics of Graph Visualization , 2007, CAe.

[14]  Helen C. Purchase,et al.  Which Aesthetic has the Greatest Effect on Human Understanding? , 1997, GD.

[15]  Jock D. Mackinlay,et al.  Automating the design of graphical presentations of relational information , 1986, TOGS.

[16]  Ben Shneiderman,et al.  The eyes have it: a task by data type taxonomy for information visualizations , 1996, Proceedings 1996 IEEE Symposium on Visual Languages.

[17]  Michael Burch,et al.  Parallel Edge Splatting for Scalable Dynamic Graph Visualization , 2011, IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics.

[18]  Jean-Daniel Fekete,et al.  Task taxonomy for graph visualization , 2006, BELIV '06.

[19]  Philippe Castagliola,et al.  A Comparison of the Readability of Graphs Using Node-Link and Matrix-Based Representations , 2004 .

[20]  Alan F. Blackwell,et al.  Cognitive Dimensions of Information Artefacts: a tutorial , 1998 .

[21]  Michael Burch,et al.  Visualizing the Evolution of Compound Digraphs with TimeArcTrees , 2009, Comput. Graph. Forum.

[22]  Ben Shneiderman,et al.  A Task Taxonomy for Network Evolution Analysis , 2014, IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics.