A systematic method for surveying data visualizations and a resulting genomic epidemiology visualization typology: GEViT
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Motivation: Data visualization is an important tool for exploring and communicating findings from genomic and healthcare datasets. Yet, without a systematic way of organizing and describing the design space of data visualizations, researchers may not be aware of the breadth of possible visualization design choices or how to distinguish between good and bad options. Results: We have developed a method that systematically surveys data visualizations using the analysis of both text and images. Our method supports the construction of a visualization design space that is explorable along two axes: why the visualization was created and how it was constructed. We applied our method to a corpus of scientific research articles from infectious disease genomic epidemiology and derived a Genomic Epidemiology Visualization Typology (GEViT) that describes how visualizations were created from a series of chart types, combinations, and enhancements. We have also implemented an online gallery that allows others to explore our resulting design space of visualizations. Our results have important implications for visualization design and for researchers intending to develop or use data visualization tools. Finally, the method that we introduce is extensible to constructing visualizations design spaces across other research areas. Availability: Our browsable gallery is available at http://gevit.net and all project code can be found at https://github.com/amcrisan/gevitAnalysisRelease
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 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 | 0.010 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".