Search for: All records

Abstract The increasing integration of artificial intelligence (AI) in visual analytics (VA) tools raises vital questions about the behavior of users, their trust, and the potential of induced biases when provided with guidance during data exploration. We present an experiment where participants engaged in a visual data exploration task while receiving intelligent suggestions supplemented with four different transparency levels. We also modulated the difficulty of the task (easy or hard) to simulate a more tedious scenario for the analyst. Our results indicate that participants were more inclined to accept suggestions when completing a more difficult task despite theai's lower suggestion accuracy. Moreover, the levels of transparency tested in this study did not significantly affect suggestion usage or subjective trust ratings of the participants. Additionally, we observed that participants who utilized suggestions throughout the task explored a greater quantity and diversity of data points. We discuss these findings and the implications of this research for improving the design and effectiveness ofai‐guidedvatools. 

Abstract The visual analytics community has long aimed to understand users better and assist them in their analytic endeavors. As a result, numerous conceptual models of visual analytics aim to formalize common workflows, techniques, and goals leveraged by analysts. While many of the existing approaches are rich in detail, they each are specific to a particular aspect of the visual analytic process. Furthermore, with an ever‐expanding array of novel artificial intelligence techniques and advances in visual analytic settings, existing conceptual models may not provide enough expressivity to bridge the two fields. In this work, we propose an agent‐based conceptual model for the visual analytic process by drawing parallels from the artificial intelligence literature. We present three examples from the visual analytics literature as case studies and examine them in detail using our framework. Our simple yet robust framework unifies the visual analytic pipeline to enable researchers and practitioners to reason about scenarios that are becoming increasingly prominent in the field, namely mixed‐initiative, guided, and collaborative analysis. Furthermore, it will allow us to characterize analysts, visual analytic settings, and guidance from the lenses of human agents, environments, and artificial agents, respectively. 

Abstract Researchers collect large amounts of user interaction data with the goal of mapping user's workflows and behaviors to their high‐level motivations, intuitions, and goals. Although the visual analytics community has proposed numerous taxonomies to facilitate this mapping process, no formal methods exist for systematically applying these existing theories to user interaction logs. This paper seeks to bridge the gap between visualization task taxonomies and interaction log data by making the taxonomies more actionable for interaction log analysis. To achieve this, we leverage structural parallels between how people express themselves through interactions and language by reformulating existing theories asregular grammars.We represent interactions asterminalswithin a regular grammar, similar to the role of individual words in a language, and patterns of interactions ornon‐terminalsasregular expressionsover these terminals to capture common language patterns. To demonstrate our approach, we generate regular grammars for seven existing visualization taxonomies and develop code to apply them to three public interaction log datasets. In analyzing these regular grammars, we find that the taxonomies at the low‐level (i.e., terminals) show mixed results in expressing multiple interaction log datasets, and taxonomies at the high‐level (i.e., regular expressions) have limited expressiveness, due to primarily two challenges: inconsistencies in interaction log dataset granularity and structure, and under‐expressiveness of certain terminals. Based on our findings, we suggest new research directions for the visualization community to augment existing taxonomies, develop new ones, and build better interaction log recording processes to facilitate the data‐driven development of user behavior taxonomies.