Tatiana von Landesberger

Stefan Zellmann, Milan Jaros, Andrea Paris et al.

We present Streami, an extensible GPU-accelerated library for the computation of field lines in fluid flows on high-performance computers. Streami acts as a thin layer used for both post-hoc or in-situ analysis and can interface with existing MPI applications. We discuss Streami's application programming interface, key design decisions that led to Streami's high performance and extensibility, as well as extensions to support different fluid flow field representations. We also present a sample application for rapid prototyping and interactive seed point placement. Streami is released under a permissive open-source software license.

Daniel Braun, Kerstin Ebell, Vera Schemann et al.

This paper presents a novel color scheme designed to address the challenge of visualizing data series with large value ranges, where scale transformation provides limited support. We focus on meteorological data, where the presence of large value ranges is common. We apply our approach to meteorological scatterplots, as one of the most common plots used in this domain area. Our approach leverages the numerical representation of mantissa and exponent of the values to guide the design of novel "nested" color schemes, able to emphasize differences between magnitudes. Our user study evaluates the new designs, the state of the art color scales and representative color schemes used in the analysis of meteorological data: ColorCrafter, Viridis, and Rainbow. We assess accuracy, time and confidence in the context of discrimination (comparison) and interpretation (reading) tasks. Our proposed color scheme significantly outperforms the others in interpretation tasks, while showing comparable performances in discrimination tasks.

Daniel Braun, Ashley Suh, Remco Chang et al.

We investigate the ability of individuals to visually validate statistical models in terms of their fit to the data. While visual model estimation has been studied extensively, visual model validation remains under-investigated. It is unknown how well people are able to visually validate models, and how their performance compares to visual and computational estimation. As a starting point, we conducted a study across two populations (crowdsourced and volunteers). Participants had to both visually estimate (i.e, draw) and visually validate (i.e., accept or reject) the frequently studied model of averages. Across both populations, the level of accuracy of the models that were considered valid was lower than the accuracy of the estimated models. We find that participants' validation and estimation were unbiased. Moreover, their natural critical point between accepting and rejecting a given mean value is close to the boundary of its 95% confidence interval, indicating that the visually perceived confidence interval corresponds to a common statistical standard. Our work contributes to the understanding of visual model validation and opens new research opportunities.

Ingo Wald, Serkan Demirci, Alper Sahistan et al.

We present RaFI, a CUDA and MPI based software framework that simplifies the task of building GPU-enabled data-parallel software where rays or similar work items need to migrate between different GPUs. RaFI provides a simple interface for CUDA kernels to forward such work items to other GPUs, while under the hood managing all the CUDA and MPI related work required to make this happen. We describe RaFI's motivation and implementation, and show its potential in several example applications.

Daniel Braun, Rita Borgo, Max Sondag et al.

We introduce two novel visualization designs to support practitioners in performing identification and discrimination tasks on large value ranges (i.e., several orders of magnitude) in time-series data: (1) The order of magnitude horizon graph, which extends the classic horizon graph; and (2) the order of magnitude line chart, which adapts the log-line chart. These new visualization designs visualize large value ranges by explicitly splitting the mantissa m and exponent e of a value v = m * 10e . We evaluate our novel designs against the most relevant state-of-the-art visualizations in an empirical user study. It focuses on four main tasks commonly employed in the analysis of time-series and large value ranges visualization: identification, discrimination, estimation, and trend detection. For each task we analyse error, confidence, and response time. The new order of magnitude horizon graph performs better or equal to all other designs in identification, discrimination, and estimation tasks. Only for trend detection tasks, the more traditional horizon graphs reported better performance. Our results are domain-independent, only requiring time-series data with large value ranges.

Daniel Braun, Remco Chang, Michael Gleicher et al.

Visual validation of regression models in scatterplots is a common practice for assessing model quality, yet its efficacy remains unquantified. We conducted two empirical experiments to investigate individuals' ability to visually validate linear regression models (linear trends) and to examine the impact of common visualization designs on validation quality. The first experiment showed that the level of accuracy for visual estimation of slope (i.e., fitting a line to data) is higher than for visual validation of slope (i.e., accepting a shown line). Notably, we found bias toward slopes that are "too steep" in both cases. This lead to novel insights that participants naturally assessed regression with orthogonal distances between the points and the line (i.e., ODR regression) rather than the common vertical distances (OLS regression). In the second experiment, we investigated whether incorporating common designs for regression visualization (error lines, bounding boxes, and confidence intervals) would improve visual validation. Even though error lines reduced validation bias, results failed to show the desired improvements in accuracy for any design. Overall, our findings suggest caution in using visual model validation for linear trends in scatterplots.

Max Sondag, Christofer Meinecke, Dennis Collaris et al.

Random forests are a machine learning method used to automatically classify datasets and consist of a multitude of decision trees. While these random forests often have higher performance and generalize better than a single decision tree, they are also harder to interpret. This paper presents a visualization method and system to increase interpretability of random forests. We cluster similar trees which enables users to interpret how the model performs in general without needing to analyze each individual decision tree in detail, or interpret an oversimplified summary of the full forest. To meaningfully cluster the decision trees, we introduce a new distance metric that takes into account both the decision rules as well as the predictions of a pair of decision trees. We also propose two new visualization methods that visualize both clustered and individual decision trees: (1) The Feature Plot, which visualizes the topological position of features in the decision trees, and (2) the Rule Plot, which visualizes the decision rules of the decision trees. We demonstrate the efficacy of our approach through a case study on the "Glass" dataset, which is a relatively complex standard machine learning dataset, as well as a small user study.

Kathrin Ballweg, Margit Pohl, Günter Wallner et al.

While visual comparison of directed acyclic graphs (DAGs) is commonly encountered in various disciplines (e.g., finance, biology), knowledge about humans' perception of graph similarity is currently quite limited. By graph similarity perception we mean how humans perceive commonalities and differences in graphs and herewith come to a similarity judgment. As a step toward filling this gap the study reported in this paper strives to identify factors which influence the similarity perception of DAGs. In particular, we conducted a card-sorting study employing a qualitative and quantitative analysis approach to identify 1) groups of DAGs that are perceived as similar by the participants and 2) the reasons behind their choice of groups. Our results suggest that similarity is mainly influenced by the number of levels, the number of nodes on a level, and the overall shape of the graph.