MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

ConnectedCharts: Explicit Visualization of Relationships between Data Graphics

2012· article· en· W2004038202 on OpenAlexafffund
Christophe Viau, Michael J. McGuffin

Bibliographic record

VenueComputer Graphics Forum · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicData Visualization and Analytics
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie Supérieure
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsBar chartComputer scienceGraphicsVisualizationParallel coordinatesVisual analyticsTupleInteractive visual analysisStatistical graphicsData visualizationAnalyticsData miningSimple (philosophy)Process (computing)Scatter plotComputer graphics (images)Programming languageMachine learningStatisticsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Multidimensional multivariate data can be visualized using many different well‐known charts, such as bar charts, stacked bar charts, grouped bar charts, scatterplots, or pivot tables, or also using more advanced high‐dimensional techniques such as scatterplot matrices (SPLOMs) or parallel coordinate plots (PCPs). These many techniques have different advantages, and users may wish to use several charts or data graphics to understand a dataset from different perspectives. We present ConnectedCharts, a technique for displaying relationships between multiple charts. ConnectedCharts allow for hybrid combinations of bar charts, scatterplots, and parallel coordinates, with curves drawn to show the conceptual links between charts. The charts can be thought of as coordinated views, where linking is achieved not only through interactive brushing, but also with explicitly drawn curves that connect corresponding data tuples or axes. We present a formal description of a design space of many simple charts, and also identify different kinds of connections that can be displayed between related charts. Our prototype implementation demonstrates how the connections between multiple charts can make relationships clearer and can serve to document the history of a user's analytical process, leading to potential applications in visual analytics and dashboard design.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.083

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0250.003

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.114
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.218 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations26
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueComputer Graphics ForumSame topicData Visualization and AnalyticsFrench-language works237,207