Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Tanmay Kotha

dblp:352/4306 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
1since 2021 · last 2024
—ORCID · none

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Graphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 1 · 1 since 2021

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Computer graphics and multimedia
1 paper
Visualization and visual analytics · 100%

Topics — the 3 heaviest of 3, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Visualization and visual analytics › topological data analysis
topology-based visualization
0.812024
A Comparative Study of the Perceptual Sensitivity of Topological Visualizations to Feature Variations · IEEE Trans. Vis. Comput. Graph. 2024
Visualization and visual analytics › visual encoding
color mapping
0.212024
A Comparative Study of the Perceptual Sensitivity of Topological Visualizations to Feature Variations · IEEE Trans. Vis. Comput. Graph. 2024
Visualization and visual analytics › scientific visualization
scalar field visualization
0.212024
A Comparative Study of the Perceptual Sensitivity of Topological Visualizations to Feature Variations · IEEE Trans. Vis. Comput. Graph. 2024

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

human subject study · 0.8gaussian signal analysis · 0.8
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2024 A Comparative Study of the Perceptual Sensitivity of Topological Visualizations to Feature Variations
abstract
Color maps are a commonly used visualization technique in which data are mapped to optical properties, e.g., color or opacity. Color maps, however, do not explicitly convey structures (e.g., positions and scale of features) within data. Topology-based visualizations reveal and explicitly communicate structures underlying data. Although our understanding of what types of features are captured by topological visualizations is good, our understanding of people's perception of those features is not. This paper evaluates the sensitivity of topology-based isocontour, Reeb graph, and persistence diagram visualizations compared to a reference color map visualization for synthetically generated scalar fields on 2-manifold triangular meshes embedded in 3D. In particular, we built and ran a human-subject study that evaluated the perception of data features characterized by Gaussian signals and measured how effectively each visualization technique portrays variations of data features arising from the position and amplitude variation of a mixture of Gaussians. For positional feature variations, the results showed that only the Reeb graph visualization had high sensitivity. For amplitude feature variations, persistence diagrams and color maps demonstrated the highest sensitivity, whereas isocontours showed only weak sensitivity. These results take an important step toward understanding which topology-based tools are best for various data and task scenarios and their effectiveness in conveying topological variations as compared to conventional color mapping.
Tushar M. Athawale, Bryan Triana, Tanmay Kotha, David Pugmire, Paul Rosen 0001
IEEE Trans. Vis. Comput. Graph.3