Debates: Overview Detail vs. Focus Context 2-D vs. 3-D

1
DebatesOverviewDetail vs. FocusContext2-D
vs. 3-D

• cs5984 Information Visualization
• Chris North

2
OverviewDetail vs. FocusContext
3
Today

• Hornbaek, Fisheye vs. OverviewDetail, web
• Luhui, Shumei

4
2-D vs. 3-D
5
Multi-Dimensional data

• Variety of studies
• Merwin, Wickens, Boyle, Boyer, Hollands, Barfield
• data plots, air traffic control,
• E.g 2 2D views vs. 1 3D view vs. 2Dcolor

6
Results

• Hard to make sense of it all
• In general
• 2D better accuracy, efficiency
• 3D better overview, trends
• Architects know this!
• Orthographic 3d for overview
• Plan, profile, section (?) for exact measurements

7
Ware et al.

• Nodelink graph structures in 3D space
• 4 versions
• Static 2D 3D graph projected onto 2D, static
• Stereo 3D
• Rotation 3D (head-coupled)
• StereoRotation 3D
• Task path finding
• Exist path of length 2 between 2 highlighted
  nodes?

8
Results

• Error rates different, Response times same
• Static 2D worst
• Stereo 3D 1.6x better
• Rotation 3D 2.2x better
• StereoRot 3.0x better
• Method of rotation not important

9
So?

• Static 3D beat static 2D
• 3D good for revealing complex structure?
• Better to see things that are 3D in 3D! (Hubona)
• 2D 3D - stereo - rotation
• Of course its the worst!
• What about 2D interaction, alternative layouts?
• Springs, aggregation, focal nodes,
  hierarchization,

10
Modjeska

• Hierarchical data in VR
• 2 UIs
• 3D fly through (6 dof, VRML) similar to SGI FSN
• 2D map-view (top view of VR) with zoom/pan like
  Pad

11
Results

• Number of search targets found
• 3D 11.0
• 2D 13.6 (sig)
• 3D navigation cumbersome
• 3D version is basically 2D!

12
Carr et al.

• 3D visualizations for Hierarchical data
• Landscape like 3D in Modjeska
• InfoCube 3D containment, boxes in boxes,
  transparency
• CamTree like ConeTree
• VRML 6 dof navigation only
• Tasks
• Search
• Count
• Compare

13
Results

• 3 Tasks Search, Count, Compare
• Best to worst (perf time errors)
• Landscape
• CamTree
• InfoCube
• Landscape users used as 2D!
• Birds eye, then zoom in

14
So?

• 3D (6 dof) navigation cumbersome
• Custom interaction techniques more important
• When doing 3D Vis, dont just do 6 dof VR
• E.g. ConeTree directory rotations, pruning, DQ,
  etc.
• VR can beat PR! (Physical Reality)
• Need overview map for 3D
• Disorientation problem
• e.g. Harmony web browser

15
Conflicting Results?

• Design of 3D navigation controls
• Head tracking (natural) vs. control panel
  (unnatural)
• Look at vs. Be in
• Fish-tank VR vs. Immersive VR
• Fish-tank 2 dof, never lost, easier
• Immersive 6 dof, disorientation, harder
• Multi-D vs. Graph vs. Tree
• Tree can be done well in 2D

16
Summary

• Interaction design more important than 2D/3D
• Can make good displays in 2D or 3D
• Interaction makes or breaks
• Currently 2D interaction designs more advanced
• Fisheye, FC, OD, zoom/pan,
• Fish-tank 3D
• Promising results for visualizing complex
  structure
• E.g Networks, biology molecules

17
To Do

• Compare good 2D Vis. to good 3D Vis.
• E.g HyperbolicTree vs. ConeTree
• Theory
• Cost structure of information access (Card et
  al.)
• Calculate clicks/time to access info
• What about Immersive VR?
• Tool builders evaluators
• Builders dont test their good tools
• Evaluators do good tests on lame tools

18
Assignment

• Tues fun stuff
• Project presentations, paper

19
Project Presentations

• Dynamic Data Visualization
• Umer, Dilshad, Satyajit
• Multi-Dimensional Parameter Space Visualization
• Ravi, Prasuna, Ashwini, Vijay
• Web Snap
• Sanjini, Joy, Aarthi
• Data Structure Visualization Evaluation
• Priya, Gowri, Fanye, Aejaaz
• Data Structure Visualization Tool
• Sumithra, Luhui, Shumei (and Matt, Sam)
• Biotech Visualization
• Margaret, Josh, Matt, Yuying
• Chat Log Visualization
• Marcus, Marty, Purvi
• Menu Visualization
• Chris
• Data Density and Distraction Evaluation
• Maulik, Ajay, Denzil

Thursday,April 26
Tuesday,May 1