MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3209638721 · doi:10.1109/iv53921.2021.00016

ContourDiff: Revealing Differential Trends in Spatiotemporal Data

2021· article· en· W3209638721 on OpenAlexafffund
Zonayed Ahmed, Michael Beyene, Debajyoti Mondal, Chanchal K. Roy, Christopher Dutchyn, Kevin A. Schneider

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicData Visualization and Analytics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsVisualizationComputer scienceContour lineDifferential (mechanical device)Domain (mathematical analysis)Data visualizationData miningOverlayField (mathematics)Noise (video)Change detectionPattern recognition (psychology)Artificial intelligenceCartographyGeographyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Changes in spatiotemporal data may often go unnoticed due to their inherent noise and low variability (e.g., geological processes over years). Commonly used approaches such as side-by-side contour plots and spaghetti plots do not provide a clear idea about the temporal changes in such data. We propose ContourDiff, a vector-based visualization over contour plots to visualize the trends of change across spatial regions and temporal domain. Our approach first aggregates for each location, its value differences from the neighboring points over the temporal domain, and then creates a vector field representing the prominent changes. Finally, it overlays the vectors along the contour paths, revealing differential trends that the contour lines experienced over time. We evaluated our visualization using real-life datasets, consisting of millions of data points, where the visualizations were generated in less than a minute in a single-threaded execution. Our experimental results reveal that ContourDiff can reliably visualize the differential trends, and provide a new way to explore the change pattern in spatiotemporal data.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.965
Threshold uncertainty score0.444

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.081
GPT teacher head0.356
Teacher spread0.275 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicData Visualization and AnalyticsFrench-language works237,207