A08 | Learning and Explaining Dimensionality Reduction through Visualization

Prof. Michael Sedlmair, University of Stuttgart
Email | Website

Michael Sedlmair

Prof. Daniel A. Keim, University of Konstanz
Email | Website

Daniel A. Keim

René Cutura, University of Stuttgart – Email | Website

Dr. Quynh Quang Ngo, University of Stuttgart – Email | Website

Katrin Angerbauer, University of Stuttgart – Email | Website

In recent years, machine learning has gained much attention for its ability to model complex human tasks, such as driving cars or composing music. In visualization research, there is currently a large effort to investigate how visualization can support machine learning research and practice.

In this project, we will take the reversed perspective and investigate how machine learning can support visualization research and practice. In particular, we will leverage machine learning to build and evaluate a new generation of models for visual perception and design.

Visualizing data is a process that involves many delicate design choices: How should the data be aggregated? Which visual encoding should be used? And how should it be parametrized?

In oder to make good design choices, many alternatives to aggregate and represent the data need to be evaluated. To make the work with the data more effective and easier, the project pursues several goals.

Goals

Novel models for visual perception and design decisions.

A new user-oriented research methodology.

Evaluating and characterizing the methodology.

Fig.1: Illustration of the proposed learning-based methology using class seperation as an example. This novel user-oriented testing methodology will help us in bridging quantitative and qualitative methodes.

Fig. 2: A typical perceptual task that could be modeled using our methodology is class seperation scatterplots.

Publications

  1. M. M. Hamza, E. Ullah, A. Baggag, H. Bensmail, M. Sedlmair, and M. Aupetit, “ClustML: A measure of cluster pattern complexity in scatterplots learnt from human-labeled groupings,” Information Visualization, vol. 23, Art. no. 2, 2024, doi: 10.1177/14738716231220536.
  2. L. Xiao et al., “A Systematic Review of Ability-diverse Collaboration through Ability-based Lens in HCI,” in Proceedings of the CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, New York, NY, USA: ACM, 2024, pp. 1–21. doi: 10.1145/3613904.3641930.
  3. M. Jenadeleh et al., “An Image Quality Dataset with Triplet Comparisons for Multi-dimensional Scaling.” IEEE, pp. 278–281, 2024. doi: 10.1109/qomex61742.2024.10598258.
  4. K. Angerbauer et al., “Is it Part of Me? Exploring Experiences of Inclusive Avatar Use For Visible and Invisible Disabilities in Social VR,” in The 26th International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility, New York, NY, USA: ACM, 2024, pp. 1–15. doi: 10.1145/3663548.3675601.
  5. N. Doerr, K. Angerbauer, M. Reinelt, and M. Sedlmair, “Bees, Birds and Butterflies: Investigating the Influence of Distractors on Visual Attention Guidance Techniques,” in Extended Abstracts of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, in CHI EA ’23. New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery, 2023. doi: 10.1145/3544549.3585816.
  6. R. Bauer et al., “Visual Ensemble Analysis of Fluid Flow in Porous Media across Simulation Codes and Experiment,” Transport in Porous Media, 2023, doi: 10.1007/s11242-023-02019-y#citeas.
  7. T. Ge et al., “Optimally Ordered Orthogonal Neighbor Joining Trees for Hierarchical Cluster Analysis,” IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, pp. 1–13, 2023, [Online]. Available: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/10147241
  8. K.-T. Chen et al., “Reading Strategies for Graph Visualizations That Wrap Around in Torus Topology,” in Proceedings of the 2023 Symposium on Eye Tracking Research and Applications, in ETRA ’23. New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery, 2023. doi: 10.1145/3588015.3589841.
  9. C. Morariu, A. Bibal, R. Cutura, B. Frénay, and M. Sedlmair, “Predicting User Preferences of Dimensionality Reduction Embedding Quality,” IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, vol. 29, Art. no. 1, 2023, [Online]. Available: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/9904619
  10. F. Heyen, Q. Q. Ngo, and M. Sedlmair, “Visual Overviews for Sheet Music Structure,” in Proceedings of the 24th International Society for Music Information Retrieval Conference (ISMIR) 2023, ISMIR, Dec. 2023, pp. 692–699. doi: 10.5281/zenodo.10265383.
  11. P. Fleck, A. Sousa Calepso, S. Hubenschmid, M. Sedlmair, and D. Schmalstieg, “RagRug: A Toolkit for Situated Analytics,” IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, 2022, [Online]. Available: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35254986/
  12. Q. Q. Ngo, F. L. Dennig, D. A. Keim, and M. Sedlmair, “Machine Learning Meets Visualization – Experiences and Lessons Learned,” it - Information Technology, vol. 64, pp. 169–180, 2022, doi: 10.1515/itit-2022-0034.
  13. K. Angerbauer and M. Sedlmair, “Toward Inclusion and Accessibility in Visualization Research: Speculations on Challenges, Solution Strategies, and Calls for Action (Position Paper),” in 2022 IEEE Evaluation and Beyond - Methodological Approaches for Visualization (BELIV), Oct. 2022, pp. 20–27. [Online]. Available: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/9978448
  14. M. Abdelaal, N. D. Schiele, K. Angerbauer, K. Kurzhals, M. Sedlmair, and D. Weiskopf, “Supplemental Materials for: Comparative Evaluation of Bipartite, Node-Link, and Matrix-Based Network Representations.” DaRUS, 2022. [Online]. Available: https://darus.uni-stuttgart.de/citation?persistentId=doi:10.18419/darus-3100
  15. S. Dosdall, K. Angerbauer, L. Merino, M. Sedlmair, and D. Weiskopf, “Toward In-Situ Authoring of Situated Visualization with Chorded Keyboards,” in 15th International Symposium on Visual Information Communication and Interaction, VINCI 2022, Chur, Switzerland, August 16-18, 2022, M. Burch, G. Wallner, and D. Limberger, Eds., ACM, Aug. 2022, pp. 1–5. doi: 10.1145/3554944.3554970.
  16. G. Richer, A. Pister, M. Abdelaal, J.-D. Fekete, M. Sedlmair, and D. Weiskopf, “Scalability in Visualization,” IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, pp. 1–15, 2022.
  17. K. Angerbauer et al., “Accessibility for Color Vision Deficiencies: Challenges and Findings of a Large Scale Study on Paper Figures,” in Proceedings of the 2022 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, in CHI ’22. New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery, 2022. doi: 10.1145/3491102.3502133.
  18. M. Abdelaal, N. D. Schiele, K. Angerbauer, K. Kurzhals, M. Sedlmair, and D. Weiskopf, “Comparative Evaluation of Bipartite, Node-Link, and Matrix-Based Network Representations,” IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, pp. 1–11, 2022.
  19. G. Tkachev, R. Cutura, M. Sedlmair, S. Frey, and T. Ertl, “Metaphorical Visualization: Mapping Data to Familiar Concepts,” in CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems Extended Abstracts, ACM, Apr. 2022, pp. 1–10. doi: 10.1145/3491101.3516393.
  20. K. Klein, M. Sedlmair, and F. Schreiber, “Immersive Analytics: An Overview,” it - Information Technology, vol. 64, pp. 155–168, 2022, doi: 10.1515/itit-2022-0037.
  21. R. Cutura, C. Morariu, Z. Cheng, Y. Wang, D. Weiskopf, and M. Sedlmair, “Hagrid — Gridify Scatterplots with Hilbert and Gosper Curves,” in The 14th International Symposium on Visual Information Communication and Interaction, in VINCI 2021. New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery, 2021, p. 1:1—1:8. doi: 10.1145/3481549.3481569.
  22. G. J. Rijken et al., “Illegible Semantics: Exploring the Design Space of Metal Logos,” in IEEE VIS alt.VIS Workshop, 2021. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/2109.01688
  23. M. Kraus et al., “Immersive Analytics with Abstract 3D Visualizations: A Survey,” Computer Graphics Forum, 2021, doi: 10.1111/cgf.14430.
  24. N. Grossmann, J. Bernard, M. Sedlmair, and M. Waldner, “Does the Layout Really Matter? A Study on Visual Model Accuracy Estimation,” in IEEE Visualization Conference (VIS, Short Paper), 2021, pp. 61–65. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/2110.07188
  25. M. M. Abbas, E. Ullah, A. Baggag, H. Bensmail, M. Sedlmair, and M. Aupetit, “ClustRank: A Visual Quality Measure Trained on Perceptual Data for Sorting Scatterplots by Cluster Patterns,” 2021. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2106.00599.pdf
  26. R. Cutura, K. Angerbauer, F. Heyen, N. Hube, and M. Sedlmair, “DaRt: Generative Art using Dimensionality Reduction Algorithms,” in 2021 IEEE VIS Arts Program (VISAP), IEEE, 2021, pp. 59–72. [Online]. Available: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/9622987
  27. C. Morariu, A. Bibal, R. Cutura, B. Frénay, and M. Sedlmair, “DumbleDR: Predicting User Preferences of Dimensionality Reduction Projection Quality,” 2021. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/2105.09275
  28. K. Lu et al., “Palettailor: Discriminable Colorization for Categorical Data,” IEEE Transactions on Visualization & Computer Graphics, vol. 27, Art. no. 2, Feb. 2021, [Online]. Available: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/9222351
  29. C. Krauter, J. Vogelsang, A. Sousa Calepso, K. Angerbauer, and M. Sedlmair, “Don’t Catch It: An Interactive Virtual-Reality Environment to Learn About COVID-19 Measures Using Gamification Elements,” in Mensch und Computer, ACM, 2021, pp. 593–596. doi: 10.1145/3473856.3474031.
  30. M. Kraus, K. Klein, J. Fuchs, D. A. Keim, F. Schreiber, and M. Sedlmair, “The Value of Immersive Visualization,” IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications (CG&A), vol. 41, Art. no. 4, 2021, doi: 10.1109/MCG.2021.3075258.
  31. J. Bernard, M. Hutter, M. Zeppelzauer, M. Sedlmair, and T. Munzner, “ProSeCo: Visual analysis of class separation measures and dataset characteristics,” Computers & Graphics, vol. 96, pp. 48–60, 2021, [Online]. Available: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0097849321000406
  32. C. Bu et al., “SineStream: Improving the Readability of Streamgraphs by Minimizing Sine Illusion Effects,” IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, vol. 27, Art. no. 2, 2021, [Online]. Available: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/9222035
  33. J. Bernard, M. Hutter, M. Sedlmair, M. Zeppelzauer, and T. Munzner, “A Taxonomy of Property Measures to Unify Active Learning and Human-centered Approaches to Data Labeling,” ACM Transactions on Interactive Intelligent Systems (TiiS), vol. 11, pp. 1–42, 2021, doi: 10.1145/3439333.
  34. N. Pathmanathan et al., “Eye vs. Head: Comparing Gaze Methods for Interaction in Augmented Reality,” in Proceedings of the Symposium on Eye Tracking Research & Applications (ETRA), ACM, 2020, pp. 50:1–50:5. doi: 10.1145/3379156.3391829.
  35. S. Öney et al., “Evaluation of Gaze Depth Estimation from Eye Tracking in Augmented Reality,” in Proceedings of the Symposium on Eye Tracking Research & Applications-Short Paper (ETRA-SP), ACM, 2020, pp. 49:1–49:5. doi: 10.1145/3379156.3391835.
  36. M. Kraus et al., “Assessing 2D and 3D Heatmaps for Comparative Analysis: An Empirical Study,” in Proceedings of the CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 2020, pp. 546:1–546:14. doi: 10.1145/3313831.3376675.
  37. J. Bernard, M. Hutter, M. Zeppelzauer, M. Sedlmair, and T. Munzner, “SepEx: Visual Analysis of Class Separation Measures,” in Proceedings of the International Workshop on Visual Analytics (EuroVA), C. Turkay and K. Vrotsou, Eds., The Eurographics Association, 2020, pp. 1–5. doi: 10.2312/eurova.20201079.
  38. A. Streichert, K. Angerbauer, M. Schwarzl, and M. Sedlmair, “Comparing Input Modalities for Shape Drawing Tasks,” in Proceedings of the Symposium on Eye Tracking Research & Applications-Short Papers (ETRA-SP), in ETRA ’20 Short Papers. ACM, 2020, pp. 1–5. doi: 10.1145/3379156.3391830.
  39. L. Merino, M. Schwarzl, M. Kraus, M. Sedlmair, D. Schmalstieg, and D. Weiskopf, “Evaluating Mixed and Augmented Reality: A Systematic Literature Review (2009 – 2019),” in IEEE International Symposium on Mixed and Augmented Reality (ISMAR), 2020. [Online]. Available: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/abstract/document/9284762
  40. P. Balestrucci et al., “Pipelines Bent, Pipelines Broken: Interdisciplinary Self-Reflection on the Impact of COVID-19 on Current and Future Research (Position Paper),” in 2020 IEEE Workshop on Evaluation and Beyond-Methodological Approaches to Visualization (BELIV), IEEE, 2020, pp. 11–18. [Online]. Available: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/abstract/document/9307759
  41. F. Heyen et al., “ClaVis: An Interactive Visual Comparison System for Classifiers,” in Proceedings of the International Conference on Advanced Visual Interfaces (AVI), in AVI ’20. New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery, 2020, pp. 9:1–9:9. doi: 10.1145/3399715.3399814.
  42. M. Kraus et al., “A Comparative Study of Orientation Support Tools in Virtual Reality Environments with Virtual Teleportation,” in 2020 IEEE International Symposium on Mixed and Augmented Reality (ISMAR), 2020, pp. 227–238. [Online]. Available: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/abstract/document/9284697
  43. L. Merino et al., “Toward Agile Situated Visualization: An Exploratory User Study,” in Proceedings of the CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems-Extended Abstracts (CHI-EA), 2020, pp. LBW087:1–LBW087:7. doi: 10.1145/3334480.3383017.
  44. K. Kurzhals, F. Göbel, K. Angerbauer, M. Sedlmair, and M. Raubal, “A View on the Viewer: Gaze-Adaptive Captions for Videos,” in Proceedings of the CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 2020, pp. 139:1–139:12. doi: 10.1145/3313831.3376266.
  45. Y. Wang et al., “Improving the Robustness of Scagnostics,” IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, vol. 26, Art. no. 1, 2019, [Online]. Available: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/8807247
  46. M. Aupetit, M. Sedlmair, M. M. Abbas, A. Baggag, and H. Bensmail, “Toward Perception-based Evaluation of Clustering Techniques for Visual Analytics,” in Proceedings of the IEEE Visualization Conference (VIS), IEEE, 2019, pp. 141–145. [Online]. Available: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/8933620
  47. T. Torsney-Weir, S. Afroozeh, M. Sedlmair, and T. Möller, “Risk Fixers and Sweet Spotters: a Study of the Different Approaches to Using Visual Sensitivity Analysis in an Investment Scenario,” in Proceedings of the Eurographics Conference on Visualization (EuroVis), J. Johansson, F. Sadlo, and T. Schreck, Eds., Eurographics Association, 2018, pp. 119–123. doi: 10.5555/3290776.3290801.
  48. Y. Wang et al., “A Perception-driven Approach to Supervised Dimensionality Reduction for Visualization,” IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, vol. 24, Art. no. 5, 2018, [Online]. Available: https://www.computer.org/csdl/journal/tg/2018/05/07920403/13rRUEgs2M7
  49. A. C. Valdez, M. Ziefle, and M. Sedlmair, “Priming and Anchoring Effects in Visualization,” IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, vol. 24, Art. no. 1, 2018, [Online]. Available: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/8022891
  50. M. Aupetit and M. Sedlmair, “SepMe: 2002 New Visual Separation Measures.,” in Proceedings of the IEEE Pacific Visualization Symposium (PacificVis), C. Hansen, I. Viola, and X. Yuan, Eds., IEEE, 2016, pp. 1–8. [Online]. Available: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/abstract/document/7465244
  51. M. Sedlmair and M. Aupetit, “Data-driven Evaluation of Visual Quality Measures,” Computer Graphics Forum, vol. 34, Art. no. 3, 2015, doi: 10.5555/2858877.2858899.

Project Group A

Models and Measures

A01 | Uncertainty Quantification and Analysis
A03 | Quantification of Visual Explainability
A07 | Visual Attention Modeling
A08 | Learning and Explaining Dimensionality Reduction
A09 | Scalability and Complexity in Immersive Analytics

 

Completed

A02 | Quantifying Visual Computing Systems
A04 | Quantitative Models for Visual Abstraction
A05 | Visual Quality Assessment
A06 | Computational Photography

 

Project Group B

Adaptive Algorithms

B01 | Adaptive Self-Consistent Visualization
B04 | Motion Estimation
B06 | Adaptive Algorithms for Graph Views and View Transitions

 

Completed

B02 | Adaptive Network Visualization
B05 | Large Scale Variational 3D Reconstruction
B07 | Computational Uncertainty Quantification

 

Project Group C

Interaction

C01 | Evaluating Mixed Reality Experiences
C05 | Human-Machine Interaction with Adaptive Multisensory Systems
C06 | User-Adaptive Mixed Reality
C07 | Optimization for Dynamic XR User Interfaces

 

Completed

C02 | Physiologically Based Interaction
C03 | Immersive Virtual Environments
C04 | Mobile Visualization and Interaction
Quantifying interactions with adaptable multisensory systems

 

Project Group D

Applications

D02 | Visual Analytics in Linguistics
D04 | Immersive Analytics for the Life Sciences
D05 | Visual Computing for ERP-based Brain Activity

 

Completed

D01 | Modeling of 3D Virtual Cities
D03 | Exploration and Analysis of Provenance Data

 

Central Services

INF | Collaboration Infrastructure
Ö | Public Relations

FOR SCIENTISTS

Projects
People
Publications
Graduate School
Equal Opportunity

FOR PUPILS

BOGY
Events for the Public

PRESS AND MEDIA

Press releases
Images

SOCIAL MEDIA

© SFB-TRR 161 | Quantitative Methods for Visual Computing | 2019.