A plethora of dimensionality reduction techniques have emerged over the past decades, leaving researchers and analysts with a wide variety of choices for reducing their data, all the more so given some techniques come with additional hyper-parametrization (e.g., t-SNE, UMAP, etc.). Recent studies are showing that people often use dimensionality reduction as a black-box regardless of the specific properties the method itself preserves. Hence, evaluating and comparing 2D embeddings is usually qualitatively decided, by setting embeddings side-by-side and letting human judgment decide which embedding is the best. In this work, we propose a quantitative way of evaluating embeddings, that nonetheless places human perception at the center. We run a comparative study, where we ask people to select "good" and "misleading" views between scatterplots of low-dimensional embeddings of image datasets, simulating the way people usually select embeddings. We use the study data as labels for a set of quality metrics for a supervised machine learning model whose purpose is to discover and quantify what exactly people are looking for when deciding between embeddings. With the model as a proxy for human judgments, we use it to rank embeddings on new datasets, explain why they are relevant, and quantify the degree of subjectivity when people select preferred embeddings.

We present an exploratory study on the accessibility of images in publications when viewed with color vision deficiencies (CVDs). The study is based on 1,710 images sampled from a visualization dataset (VIS30K) over five years. We simulated four CVDs on each image. First, four researchers (one with a CVD) identified existing issues and helpful aspects in a subset of the images. Based on the resulting labels, 200 crowdworkers provided 30,000 ratings on present CVD issues in the simulated images. We analyzed this data for correlations, clusters, trends, and free text comments to gain a first overview of paper figure accessibility. Overall, about 60 % of the images were rated accessible. Furthermore, our study indicates that accessibility issues are subjective and hard to detect. On a meta-level, we reflect on our study experience to point out challenges and opportunities of large-scale accessibility studies for future research directions.

A common enhancement of scatterplots represents points as small multiples, glyphs, or thumbnail images. As this encoding often results in overlaps, a general strategy is to alter the position of the data points, for instance, to a grid-like structure. Previous approaches rely on solving expensive optimization problems or on dividing the space that alter the global structure of the scatterplot. To find a good balance between efficiency and neighborhood and layout preservation, we propose Hagrid, a technique that uses space-filling curves (SFCs) to “gridify” a scatterplot without employing expensive collision detection and handling mechanisms. Using SFCs ensures that the points are plotted close to their original position, retaining approximately the same global structure. The resulting scatterplot is mapped onto a rectangular or hexagonal grid, using Hilbert and Gosper curves. We discuss and evaluate the theoretic runtime of our approach and quantitatively compare our approach to three state-of-the-art gridifying approaches, DGrid, Small multiples with gaps SMWG, and CorrelatedMultiples CMDS, in an evaluation comprising 339 scatterplots. Here, we compute several quality measures for neighborhood preservation together with an analysis of the actual runtimes. The main results show that, compared to the best other technique, Hagrid is faster by a factor of four, while achieving similar or even better quality of the gridified layout. Due to its computational efficiency, our approach also allows novel applications of gridifying approaches in interactive settings, such as removing local overlap upon hovering over a scatterplot.