DataGarden: Formalizing Personal Sketches into Structured Visualization Templates
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
Sketching is a common practice among visualization designers and serves an approachable entry to data visualization for non-experts. However, moving from a sketch to a full fledged data visualization often requires throwing away the original sketch and recreating it from scratch. Our goal is to formalize these sketches, enabling them to support iteration and systematic data mapping through a visual-first templating workflow. In this workflow, authors sketch a representative visualization and structure it into an expressive template for an envisioned or partial dataset, capturing implicit style as well as explicit data mappings. To demonstrate our proposed workflow, we implement DataGarden and evaluate it through a reproduction and a freeform study. We investigate how DataGarden supports personal expression and delve into the variety of visualizations that authors can produce with it, identifying cases that demonstrate the limitations of our approach and discussing avenues for future work.
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 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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