Effective data analysis ideally requires the analyst to have high expertise as well as high knowledge of the data. Even with such familiarity, manually pursuing all potential hypotheses and exploring all possible views is impractical. We present DataSite, a proactive visual analytics system where the burden of selecting and executing appropriate computations is shared by an automatic server-side computation engine. Salient features identified by these automatic background processes are surfaced as notifications in a feed timeline. DataSite effectively turns data analysis into a conversation between analyst and computer, thereby reducing the cognitive load and domain knowledge requirements. We validate the system with a user study comparing it to a recent visualization recommendation system, yielding significant improvement, particularly for complex analyses that existing analytics systems do not support well.
ThomasJJCookKA. Illuminating the path: the research and development agenda for visual analytics. Los Alamitos, CA: IEEE Computer Society Press, 2005.
2.
BadamSKZhaoJSenSet al. TimeFork: interactive prediction of time series. In: Proceedings of the ACM conference on human factors in computing systems, San Jose, CA, 7–12 May 2016, pp. 5409–5420. New York: ACM.
SaketBKimHBrownETet al. Visualization by demonstration: an interaction paradigm for visual data exploration. IEEE T Vis Comput Gr2017; 23(1): 331–340.
5.
WongsuphasawatKMoritzDAnandAet al. Voyager: exploratory analysis via faceted browsing of visualization recommendations. IEEE T Vis Comput Gr2016; 22(1): 649–658.
6.
WongsuphasawatKQuZMoritzDet al. Voyager 2: augmenting visual analysis with partial view specifications. In: Proceedings of the ACM conference on human factors in computing systems, Denver, CO, 6–11 May 2017, pp. 2648–2659. New York: ACM.
7.
KeimDAMansmannFSchneidewindJet al. Challenges in visual data analysis. In: Proceedings of the international conference on information visualization, London, 5–7 July 2006, pp. 9–16. New York: IEEE.
8.
TukeyJW. Exploratory data analysis. Reading, MA: Pearson, 1977.
9.
ShneidermanB. Dynamic queries for visual information seeking. IEEE Softw1994; 11(6): 70–77.
10.
YeeKPSwearingenKLiKet al. Faceted metadata for image search and browsing. In: Proceedings of the ACM conference on human factors in computing systems, Fort Lauderdale, FL, 5–10 April 2003, pp. 401–408. New York: ACM.
11.
BostockMOgievetskyVHeerJ. D3: data-driven documents. IEEE T Vis Comput Gr2011; 17(12): 2301–2309.
12.
WilkinsonL. The grammar of graphics. New York: Springer Science & Business Media, 2006.
13.
WickhamH. ggplot2: elegant graphics for data analysis. New York: Springer, 2016.
14.
SatyanarayanARussellRHoffswellJet al. Reactive Vega: a streaming dataflow architecture for declarative interactive visualization. IEEE T Vis Comput Gr2016; 22(1): 659–668.
MéndezGGNacentaMAVandenhesteS. iVoLVER: interactive visual language for visualization extraction and reconstruction. In: Proceedings of the ACM conference on human factors in computing systems, San Jose, CA, 7–12 May 2016, pp. 4073–4085. New York: ACM.
17.
RenDHöllererTYuanX. iVisDesigner: expressive interactive design of information visualizations. IEEE T Vis Comput Gr2014; 20(12): 2092–2101.
18.
LiuZThompsonJWilsonAet al. Data Illustrator: augmenting vector design tools with lazy data binding for expressive visualization authoring. In: Proceedings of the ACM conference on human factors in computing systems, Montreal, QC, Canada, 21–26 April 2018, pp. 123:1–123:13. New York: ACM.
19.
XiaHRicheNHChevalierFet al. DataInk: direct and creative data-oriented drawing. In: Proceedings of the ACM conference on human factors in computing systems, Montreal, QC, Canada, 21–26 April 2018, pp. 223:1–223:13. New York: ACM.
20.
StolteCTangDHanrahanP. Polaris: a system for query, analysis, and visualization of multidimensional relational databases. IEEE T Vis Comput Gr2002; 8(1): 52–65.
MackinlayJ. Automating the design of graphical presentations of relational information. ACM T Graph1986; 5(2): 110–141.
24.
BertinJ. Semiology of graphics: diagrams, networks, maps. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press, 1983.
25.
ClevelandWSMcGillR. Graphical perception: theory, experimentation, and application to the development of graphical methods. J Am Stat Assoc1984; 79(387): 531–554.
26.
MackinlayJHanrahanPStolteC. Show me: automatic presentation for visual analysis. IEEE T Vis Comput Gr2007; 13(6): 1137–1144.
27.
RothSFKolojejchickJMattisJet al. Interactive graphic design using automatic presentation knowledge. In: Proceedings of the ACM conference on human factors in computing systems, Boston, MA, 24–28 April 1994, pp. 112–117. New York: ACM.
28.
SeoJShneidermanB. A rank-by-feature framework for interactive exploration of multidimensional data. Inform Visual2005; 4(2): 96–113.
PerryDBHoweBKeyAMFet al. VizDeck: streamlining exploratory visual analytics of scientific data. In: Iconference proceedings, Dallas, USA, 12–15 February 2013, pp. 338–350. https://ischools.org/blog/2012/12/05/iconference-2013/
31.
Van Den ElzenSVan WijkJJ. Small multiples, large singles: a new approach for visual data exploration. Computer Graphics Forum2013; 32(3, pt 2): 191–200.
32.
SiddiquiTKimALeeJet al. Effortless data exploration with zenvisage: an expressive and interactive visual analytics system. Proc VLD Endow2016; 10(4): 457–468.
33.
TangBHanSYiuMLet al. Extracting top-K insights from multi-dimensional data. In: Proceedings of the ACM international conference on management of data, Chicago, IL, 14–19 May 2017, pp. 1509–1524. New York: ACM.
34.
NovaisRNunesCLimaCet al. On the proactive and interactive visualization for feature evolution comprehension: an industrial investigation. In: Proceedings of the international conference on software engineering, Zurich, 2–9 June 2012, pp. 1044–1053. New York: IEEE.
35.
GómezJAGBuck-ColemanAPlaisantCet al. TreeVersity: comparing tree structures by topology and node’s attributes differences. In: Proceedings of the IEEE conference on visual analytics science & technology, Providence, RI, 23–28 October 2011, pp. 275–276. New York: IEEE.
36.
DhamdhereKMcCurleyKSNahmiasRet al. Analyza: exploring data with conversation. In: Proceedings of ACM conference on intelligent user interfaces, Limassol, Cyprus, 13–16 March 2017, pp. 493–504. New York: ACM.
37.
BadamSKElmqvistNFeketeJD. Steering the craft: UI elements and visualizations for supporting progressive visual analytics. Comp Gr Forum2017; 36(3): 491–502.
38.
BatchAElmqvistN. The interactive visualization gap in initial exploratory data analysis. IEEE T Vis Comput Gr2018; 24: 278–287.
39.
ScheinAIPopesculAUngarLHet al. Methods and metrics for cold-start recommendations. In: Proceedings of ACM conference on research and development in information retrieval, Tampere, 11–15 August 2002, pp. 253–260. New York: ACM.
40.
PearsonK. Notes on regression and inheritance in the case of two parents. Proc Royal Soc London1895; 58: 240–242, https://www.jstor.org/stable/115794
41.
HendersonHVVellemanPF. Building multiple regression models interactively. Biometrics1981; 37(2): 391–411.
42.
BarrDJLevyRScheepersCet al. Random effects structure for confirmatory hypothesis testing: keep it maximal. J Mem Lang2013; 68(3): 255–278.
43.
GreenSHeerJManningCD. The efficacy of human post-editing for language translation. In: Proceedings of the ACM conference on human factors in computing systems, Paris, 27 April–2 May 2013, pp. 439–448. New York: ACM.
44.
KerrNL. HARKing: hypothesizing after the results are known. Pers Soc Psychol Rev1998; 2(3): 196–217.
45.
SelvinHStuartA. Data-dredging procedures in survey analysis. Am Statist1966; 20(3): 20–23.
46.
YalcinMAElmqvistNBedersonBB. Keshif: rapid and expressive tabular data exploration for novices. IEEE T Vis Comput Gr2018; 24(8): 2339–2352.
47.
KeimDA. Visual exploration of large data sets. Commun ACM2001; 44(8): 38–44.
