Validating graph drawing aesthetics

  • Helen C. Purchase
  • Robert F. Cohen
  • Murray James
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 1027)

Abstract

Designers of graph drawing algorithms and systems claim to illuminate application data by producing layouts that optimize measurable aesthetic qualities. Examples of these aesthetics include symmetry (where possible, a symmetrical view of the graph should be displayed), minimize edge crossings (the number of edge crossings in the display should be minimized), and minimize bends (the total number of bends in polyline edges should be minimized).

The aim of this paper is to describe our work to validate these claims by performing empirical studies of human understanding of graphs drawn using various layout aesthetics. This work is important since it helps indicate to algorithm and system designers what are the aesthetic qualities most important to aid understanding, and consequently to build more effective systems.

References

  1. 1.
    C. Batini, L. Furlani, and E. Nardelli. What is a good diagram? a pragmatic approach. In Proc. 4th Int. Conf. on the Entity Relationship Approach, 1985.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    S. Bhanji, H.C. Purchase, R.F. Cohen, and M. James. Validating graph drawing aesthetics: A pilot study. Technical Report 336, University of Queensland Department of Computer Science, 1995.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    C. Ding and P. Mateti. A framework for the automated drawing of data structure diagrams. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, SE-16(5):543–557, 1990.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    P. Eades. A heuristic for graph drawing. Congressus Numerantium, 42:149–160, 1984.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    D. Ferrari and L. Mezzalira. On drawing a graph with the minimum number of crossings. Technical Report 69-11, Istituto di Elettrotecnica ed Elettronica, Politecnico di Milano, 1969.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    R. Gottsdanker. Experimenting in Psychology. Prentice-Hall, 1978.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    R. Lipton, S. North, and J. Sandberg. A method for drawing graphs. In Proc. ACM Symp. on Computational Geometry, pages 153–160, 1985.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    G.L. Lohse, K. Biolsi, N. Walker, and H.H. Rueter. A classification of visual representations. Communications of the ACM, 37(12):36–49, December 1994.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    S. Siegel. Nonparametric Statistics for the Behavioral Sciences. McGraw-Hill, 1956.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    R. Tamassia. On embedding a graph in the grid with the minimum number of bends. SIAM J. Computing, 16(3):421–444, 1987.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    H. Trickey. Drag: A graph drawing system. In Proc. Int. Conf. on Electronic Publishing, pages 171–182. Cambridge University Press, 1988.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    C. Ware, D. Hui, and G. Franck. Visualizing object oriented software in three dimensions. In CASCON 1993 Proceedings, 1993.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  • Helen C. Purchase
    • 1
  • Robert F. Cohen
    • 2
  • Murray James
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceUniversity of QueenslandSt. LuciaAustralia
  2. 2.Department of Computer ScienceUniversity of NewcastleCallaghanAustralia

Personalised recommendations