Advertisement

Automated Layout of Small Lattices Using Layer Diagrams

  • Richard Cole
  • Jon Ducrou
  • Peter Eklund
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 3874)

Abstract

Good quality concept lattice drawings are required to effectively communicate logical structure in Formal Concept Analysis. Data analysis frameworks such as the Toscana System use manually arranged concept lattices to avoid the problem of automatically producing high quality lattices. This limits Toscana systems to a finite number of concept lattices that have been prepared a priori. To extend the use of formal concept analysis, automated techniques are required that can produce high quality concept lattice drawings on demand. This paper proposes and evaluates an adaption of layer diagrams to improve automated lattice drawing.

Keywords

Distributive Lattice Concept Lattice Small Lattice Formal Context Formal Concept Analysis 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Wille, R.: Lattices in Data Analysis: How to draw them with a computer. Technical Report 1067, University of Darmstadt (1987)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Vogt, F., Wille, R.: TOSCANA - a graphical tool for analyzing and exploring data. In: Tamassia, R., Tollis, I.G. (eds.) GD 1994. LNCS, vol. 894, pp. 226–233. Springer, Heidelberg (1995)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Becker, P., Hereth, J., Stumme, G.: ToscanaJ - an open source tool for qualitative data analysis. In: Advances in Formal Concept Analysis for Knowledge Discovery in Databases, FCAKDD 2002, pp. 1–2 (2002)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Freese, R.: Automated lattice drawing. In: Eklund, P. (ed.) ICFCA 2004. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 2961, pp. 112–127. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ganter, B.: Conflict Avoidance in Additive Order Diagrams. Journal of Universal Computer Science 10(8), 955–966 (2004)MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Cole, R., Eklund, P., Stumme, G.: CEM — a program for visualization and discovery in email. In: Zighed, D.A., Komorowski, J., Żytkow, J.M. (eds.) PKDD 2000. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 1910, pp. 367–374. Springer, Heidelberg (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Cole, R., Becker, P.: Navigation spaces for the analysis of software structure. In: Ganter, B., Godin, R. (eds.) ICFCA 2005. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 3403, pp. 113–128. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ducrou, J., Eklund, P.W.: Combining spatial and lattice-based information landscapes. In: Ganter, B., Godin, R. (eds.) ICFCA 2005. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 3403, pp. 64–78. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ducrou, J., Wormuth, B., Eklund, P.: D-SIFT: A dynamic simple intuitive FCA tool. In: Conceptual Structures: Common Semantics for Sharing Knowledge: Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Conceptual Structures. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 2595, pp. 295–306. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Battista, G., Eades, P., Tamassia, R., Tollis, I.: Graph Drawing. Algorithms for the Visualisation of Graphs. Prentice Hall, New Jersey (1999)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Cole, R.: The Management and Visualisation of Document Collections Using Formal Concept Analysis. PhD thesis, Griffith University, School of Information Technology, Parklands Drive, Southport, QLD (2000)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Cole, R.J.: Automatic layout of concept lattices using force directed placement and genetic algorithms. In: Edwards, J. (ed.) 23rd Australiasian Computer Science Conference. Australian Computer Science Communications, vol. 22, pp. 47–53. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos (2000)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Cole, R.J.: Automatic layout of concept lattices using layer diagrams and additive diagrams. In: Oudshoorn, M. (ed.) 24th Australiasian Computer Science Conference. Australian Computer Science Communications, vol. 23, pp. 47–53. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos (2001)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ganter, B., Wille, R.: Formal Concept Analysis: Mathematical Foundations. Springer, Berlin (1999)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Wille, R.: Truncated distributive lattices: Conceptual structures of simple-implicational theories. Order 20(3), 229–238 (2003)zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Becker, P.: Using intermediate representation systems to interact with concept lattices. In: Ganter, B., Godin, R. (eds.) ICFCA 2005. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 3403, pp. 265–268. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Richard Cole
    • 1
  • Jon Ducrou
    • 2
  • Peter Eklund
    • 2
  1. 1.School of Information Technology and Electrical EngineeringUniversity of QueenslandSt. LuciaAustralia
  2. 2.School of Economics and Information SystemsUniversity of WollongongWoolongongAustralia

Personalised recommendations