Edgelens: an interactive method for managing edge congestion in graphs
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An increasing number of tasks require people to explore, navigate and search extremely complex data sets visualized as graphs. Examples include electrical and telecommunication networks, Web structures, and airline routes. The problem is that graphs of these real world data sets have many interconnected nodes, ultimately leading to edge congestion: the density of edges is so great that they obscure nodes, individual edges, and even the visual information beneath the graph. To address this problem we developed an interactive technique called EdgeLens. An EdgeLens interactively curves graph edges away for a person's focus attention without changing the node positions. This opens up sufficient space to disambiguate node and edge relationships and to see underlying information while still preserving node layout. Initially two methods of creating this interaction were developed and compared in a user study. The results of this study were used in the selection of a basic approach and the subsequent development of the EdgeLens. We then improved the EdgeLens through use of transparency and colour and by allowing multiple lenses to appear on the graph.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it