Search for: All records

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. 

Designing suitable tasks for visualization evaluation remains challenging. Traditional evaluation techniques commonly rely on 'low-level' or 'open-ended' tasks to assess the efficacy of a proposed visualization, however, nontrivial trade-offs exist between the two. Low-level tasks allow for robust quantitative evaluations, but are not indicative of the complex usage of a visualization. Open-ended tasks, while excellent for insight-based evaluations, are typically unstructured and require time-consuming interviews. Bridging this gap, we propose inferential tasks: a complementary task category based on inferential learning in psychology. Inferential tasks produce quantitative evaluation data in which users are prompted to form and validate their own findings with a visualization. We demonstrate the use of inferential tasks through a validation experiment on two well-known visualization tools. 

Visual exploration of large multi-dimensional datasets has seen tremendous progress in recent years, allowing users to express rich data queries that produce informative visual summaries, all in real time. Techniques based on data cubes are some of the most promising approaches. However, these techniques usually require a large memory footprint for large datasets. To tackle this problem, we present NeuralCubes: neural networks that predict results for aggregate queries, similar to data cubes. NeuralCubes learns a function that takes as input a given query, for instance, a geographic region and temporal interval, and outputs the result of the query. The learned function serves as a real-time, low-memory approximator for aggregation queries. Our models are small enough to be sent to the client side (e.g. the web browser for a web-based application) for evaluation, enabling data exploration of large datasets without database/network connection. We demonstrate the effectiveness of NeuralCubes through extensive experiments on a variety of datasets and discuss how NeuralCubes opens up opportunities for new types of visualization and interaction. 

Most visual analytics systems assume that all foraging for data happens before the analytics process; once analysis begins, the set of data attributes considered is fixed. Such separation of data construction from analysis precludes iteration that can enable foraging informed by the needs that arise in-situ during the analysis. The separation of the foraging loop from the data analysis tasks can limit the pace and scope of analysis. In this paper, we present CAVA, a system that integrates data curation and data augmentation with the traditional data exploration and analysis tasks, enabling information foraging in-situ during analysis. Identifying attributes to add to the dataset is difficult because it requires human knowledge to determine which available attributes will be helpful for the ensuing analytical tasks. CAVA crawls knowledge graphs to provide users with a a broad set of attributes drawn from external data to choose from. Users can then specify complex operations on knowledge graphs to construct additional attributes. CAVA shows how visual analytics can help users forage for attributes by letting users visually explore the set of available data, and by serving as an interface for query construction. It also provides visualizations of the knowledge graph itself to help users understand complex joins such as multi-hop aggregations. We assess the ability of our system to enable users to perform complex data combinations without programming in a user study over two datasets. We then demonstrate the generalizability of CAVA through two additional usage scenarios. The results of the evaluation confirm that CAVA is effective in helping the user perform data foraging that leads to improved analysis outcomes, and offer evidence in support of integrating data augmentation as a part of the visual analytics pipeline. 

Many visual analytics systems allow users to interact with machine learning models towards the goals of data exploration and insight generation on a given dataset. However, in some situations, insights may be less important than the production of an accurate predictive model for future use. In that case, users are more interested in generating of diverse and robust predictive models, verifying their performance on holdout data, and selecting the most suitable model for their usage scenario. In this paper, we consider the concept of Exploratory Model Analysis (EMA), which is defined as the process of discovering and selecting relevant models that can be used to make predictions on a data source. We delineate the differences between EMA and the well‐known term exploratory data analysis in terms of the desired outcome of the analytic process: insights into the data or a set of deployable models. The contributions of this work are a visual analytics system workflow for EMA, a user study, and two use cases validating the effectiveness of the workflow. We found that our system workflow enabled users to generate complex models, to assess them for various qualities, and to select the most relevant model for their task.