Ashley Suh

Harry Li, Gabriel Appleby, Camelia Daniela Brumar et al.

This study presents insights from interviews with nineteen Knowledge Graph (KG) practitioners who work in both enterprise and academic settings on a wide variety of use cases. Through this study, we identify critical challenges experienced by KG practitioners when creating, exploring, and analyzing KGs that could be alleviated through visualization design. Our findings reveal three major personas among KG practitioners - KG Builders, Analysts, and Consumers - each of whom have their own distinct expertise and needs. We discover that KG Builders would benefit from schema enforcers, while KG Analysts need customizable query builders that provide interim query results. For KG Consumers, we identify a lack of efficacy for node-link diagrams, and the need for tailored domain-specific visualizations to promote KG adoption and comprehension. Lastly, we find that implementing KGs effectively in practice requires both technical and social solutions that are not addressed with current tools, technologies, and collaborative workflows. From the analysis of our interviews, we distill several visualization research directions to improve KG usability, including knowledge cards that balance digestibility and discoverability, timeline views to track temporal changes, interfaces that support organic discovery, and semantic explanations for AI and machine learning predictions.

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.

Ashley Suh, Gabriel Appleby, Erik W. Anderson et al.

Presenting a predictive model's performance is a communication bottleneck that threatens collaborations between data scientists and subject matter experts. Accuracy and error metrics alone fail to tell the whole story of a model - its risks, strengths, and limitations - making it difficult for subject matter experts to feel confident in their decision to use a model. As a result, models may fail in unexpected ways or go entirely unused, as subject matter experts disregard poorly presented models in favor of familiar, yet arguably substandard methods. In this paper, we describe an iterative study conducted with both subject matter experts and data scientists to understand the gaps in communication between these two groups. We find that, while the two groups share common goals of understanding the data and predictions of the model, friction can stem from unfamiliar terms, metrics, and visualizations - limiting the transfer of knowledge to SMEs and discouraging clarifying questions being asked during presentations. Based on our findings, we derive a set of communication guidelines that use visualization as a common medium for communicating the strengths and weaknesses of a model. We provide a demonstration of our guidelines in a regression modeling scenario and elicit feedback on their use from subject matter experts. From our demonstration, subject matter experts were more comfortable discussing a model's performance, more aware of the trade-offs for the presented model, and better equipped to assess the model's risks - ultimately informing and contextualizing the model's use beyond text and numbers.

Ashley Suh, Harry Li, Caitlin Kenney et al.

We share observations and challenges from an ongoing effort to implement Explainable AI (XAI) in a domain-specific workflow for cybersecurity analysts. Specifically, we briefly describe a preliminary case study on the use of XAI for source code classification, where accurate assessment and timeliness are paramount. We find that the outputs of state-of-the-art saliency explanation techniques (e.g., SHAP or LIME) are lost in translation when interpreted by people with little AI expertise, despite these techniques being marketed for non-technical users. Moreover, we find that popular XAI techniques offer fewer insights for real-time human-AI workflows when they are post hoc and too localized in their explanations. Instead, we observe that cyber analysts need higher-level, easy-to-digest explanations that can offer as little disruption as possible to their workflows. We outline unaddressed gaps in practical and effective XAI, then touch on how emerging technologies like Large Language Models (LLMs) could mitigate these existing obstacles.

Harry Li, Gabriel Appleby, Kenneth Alperin et al.

High-stakes domains like cyber operations need responsible and trustworthy AI methods. While large language models (LLMs) are becoming increasingly popular in these domains, they still suffer from hallucinations. This research paper provides learning outcomes from a case study with LinkQ, an open-source natural language interface that was developed to combat hallucinations by forcing an LLM to query a knowledge graph (KG) for ground-truth data during question-answering (QA). We conduct a quantitative evaluation of LinkQ using a well-known KGQA dataset, showing that the system outperforms GPT-4 but still struggles with certain question categories - suggesting that alternative query construction strategies will need to be investigated in future LLM querying systems. We discuss a qualitative study of LinkQ with two domain experts using a real-world cybersecurity KG, outlining these experts' feedback, suggestions, perceived limitations, and future opportunities for systems like LinkQ.

Ashley Suh, Isabelle Hurley, Nora Smith et al.

This late-breaking work presents a large-scale analysis of explainable AI (XAI) literature to evaluate claims of human explainability. We collaborated with a professional librarian to identify 18,254 papers containing keywords related to explainability and interpretability. Of these, we find that only 253 papers included terms suggesting human involvement in evaluating an XAI technique, and just 128 of those conducted some form of a human study. In other words, fewer than 1% of XAI papers (0.7%) provide empirical evidence of human explainability when compared to the broader body of XAI literature. Our findings underscore a critical gap between claims of human explainability and evidence-based validation, raising concerns about the rigor of XAI research. We call for increased emphasis on human evaluations in XAI studies and provide our literature search methodology to enable both reproducibility and further investigation into this widespread issue.

Ashley Suh, Kenneth Alperin, Harry Li et al.

This position paper highlights a growing trend in Explainable AI (XAI) research where Large Language Models (LLMs) are used to translate outputs from explainability techniques, like feature-attribution weights, into a natural language explanation. While this approach may improve accessibility or readability for users, recent findings suggest that translating into human-like explanations does not necessarily enhance user understanding and may instead lead to overreliance on AI systems. When LLMs summarize XAI outputs without surfacing model limitations, uncertainties, or inconsistencies, they risk reinforcing the illusion of interpretability rather than fostering meaningful transparency. We argue that - instead of merely translating XAI outputs - LLMs should serve as constructive agitators, or devil's advocates, whose role is to actively interrogate AI explanations by presenting alternative interpretations, potential biases, training data limitations, and cases where the model's reasoning may break down. In this role, LLMs can facilitate users in engaging critically with AI systems and generated explanations, with the potential to reduce overreliance caused by misinterpreted or specious explanations.

Harry Li, Gabriel Appleby, Kenneth Alperin et al.

Knowledge graphs (KGs) are powerful data structures, but exploring them effectively remains difficult for even expert users. Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used to address this gap, yet little is known empirically about how their usage with KGs shapes user trust, exploration strategies, or downstream decision-making - raising key design challenges for LLM-based KG visual analysis systems. To study these effects, we developed LinkQ, a KG exploration system that converts natural language questions into structured queries with an LLM. We collaborated with KG experts to design five visual mechanisms that help users assess the accuracy of both KG queries and LLM responses: an LLM-KG state diagram that illustrates which stage of the exploration pipeline LinkQ is in, a query editor displaying the generated query paired with an LLM explanation, an entity-relation ID table showing extracted KG entities and relations with semantic descriptions, a query structure graph that depicts the path traversed in the KG, and an interactive graph visualization of query results. From a qualitative evaluation with 14 practitioners, we found that users - even KG experts - tended to overtrust LinkQ's outputs due to its "helpful" visualizations, even when the LLM was incorrect. Users exhibited distinct workflows depending on their prior familiarity with KGs and LLMs, challenging the assumption that these systems are one-size-fits-all - despite often being designed as if they are. Our findings highlight the risks of false trust in LLM-assisted data analysis tools and the need for further investigation into the role of visualization as a mitigation technique.

Harry Li, Gabriel Appleby, Ashley Suh

We present LinkQ, a system that leverages a large language model (LLM) to facilitate knowledge graph (KG) query construction through natural language question-answering. Traditional approaches often require detailed knowledge of a graph querying language, limiting the ability for users -- even experts -- to acquire valuable insights from KGs. LinkQ simplifies this process by implementing a multistep protocol in which the LLM interprets a user's question, then systematically converts it into a well-formed query. LinkQ helps users iteratively refine any open-ended questions into precise ones, supporting both targeted and exploratory analysis. Further, LinkQ guards against the LLM hallucinating outputs by ensuring users' questions are only ever answered from ground truth KG data. We demonstrate the efficacy of LinkQ through a qualitative study with five KG practitioners. Our results indicate that practitioners find LinkQ effective for KG question-answering, and desire future LLM-assisted exploratory data analysis systems.

Mateus Espadoto, Gabriel Appleby, Ashley Suh et al.

Projection techniques are often used to visualize high-dimensional data, allowing users to better understand the overall structure of multi-dimensional spaces on a 2D screen. Although many such methods exist, comparably little work has been done on generalizable methods of inverse-projection -- the process of mapping the projected points, or more generally, the projection space back to the original high-dimensional space. In this paper we present NNInv, a deep learning technique with the ability to approximate the inverse of any projection or mapping. NNInv learns to reconstruct high-dimensional data from any arbitrary point on a 2D projection space, giving users the ability to interact with the learned high-dimensional representation in a visual analytics system. We provide an analysis of the parameter space of NNInv, and offer guidance in selecting these parameters. We extend validation of the effectiveness of NNInv through a series of quantitative and qualitative analyses. We then demonstrate the method's utility by applying it to three visualization tasks: interactive instance interpolation, classifier agreement, and gradient visualization.

Paul Rosen, Ashley Suh, Christopher Salgado et al.

Line charts are commonly used to visualize a series of data values. When the data are noisy, smoothing is applied to make the signal more apparent. Conventional methods used to smooth line charts, e.g., using subsampling or filters, such as median, Gaussian, or low-pass, each optimize for different properties of the data. The properties generally do not include retaining peaks (i.e., local minima and maxima) in the data, which is an important feature for certain visual analytics tasks. We present TopoLines, a method for smoothing line charts using techniques from Topological Data Analysis. The design goal of TopoLines is to maintain prominent peaks in the data while minimizing any residual error. We evaluate TopoLines for 2 visual analytics tasks by comparing to 5 popular line smoothing methods with data from 4 application domains.