Interaction Techniques for Selecting and Manipulating Subgraphs in Network Visualizations
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
We present a novel and extensible set of interaction techniques for manipulating visualizations of networks by selecting subgraphs and then applying various commands to modify their layout or graphical properties. Our techniques integrate traditional rectangle and lasso selection, and also support selecting a node's neighbourhood by dragging out its radius (in edges) using a novel kind of radial menu. Commands for translation, rotation, scaling, or modifying graphical properties (such as opacity) and layout patterns can be performed by using a hotbox (a transiently popped-up, semi-transparent set of widgets) that has been extended in novel ways to integrate specification of commands with 1D or 2D arguments. Our techniques require only one mouse button and one keyboard key, and are designed for fast, gestural, in-place interaction. We present the design and integration of these interaction techniques, and illustrate their use in interactive graph visualization. Our techniques are implemented in NAViGaTOR, a software package for visualizing and analyzing biological networks. An initial usability study is also reported.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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