Demo Data from SIGIR 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Douglas Taggart
dblp:151/6095
· DBLP profile ↗
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
0since 2021 · last 2014
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Graphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 1
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% | |
| Human-computer interaction and pervasive computing
1 paper |
Usability and user experience research · 100% |
Topics — the 3 heaviest of 3, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Visualization and visual analytics
graph visualization |
0.2 | 1 | 2014 | How to Display Group Information on Node-Link Diagrams: An Evaluation · IEEE Trans. Vis. Comput. Graph. 2014 |
Visualization and visual analytics › graph visualization
node-link diagram |
0.2 | 1 | 2014 | How to Display Group Information on Node-Link Diagrams: An Evaluation · IEEE Trans. Vis. Comput. Graph. 2014 |
Usability and user experience research › evaluation methodology
visualization evaluation |
0.1 | 1 | 2014 | How to Display Group Information on Node-Link Diagrams: An Evaluation · IEEE Trans. Vis. Comput. Graph. 2014 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
user study · 0.4eye tracking · 0.4
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2014 | How to Display Group Information on Node-Link Diagrams: An EvaluationabstractWe present the results of evaluating four techniques for displaying group or cluster information overlaid on node-link diagrams: node coloring, GMap, BubbleSets, and LineSets. The contributions of the paper are three fold. First, we present quantitative results and statistical analyses of data from an online study in which approximately 800 subjects performed 10 types of group and network tasks in the four evaluated visualizations. Specifically, we show that BubbleSets is the best alternative for tasks involving group membership assessment; that visually encoding group information over basic node-link diagrams incurs an accuracy penalty of about 25 percent in solving network tasks; and that GMap's use of prominent group labels improves memorability. We also show that GMap's visual metaphor can be slightly altered to outperform BubbleSets in group membership assessment. Second, we discuss visual characteristics that can explain the observed quantitative differences in the four visualizations and suggest design recommendations. This discussion is supported by a small scale eye-tracking study and previous results from the visualization literature. Third, we present an easily extensible user study methodology. Radu Jianu, Adrian Rusu, Yifan Hu 0001, Douglas Taggart |
IEEE Trans. Vis. Comput. Graph. | 4 |