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

Nikhila Nyapathy

dblp:252/4383 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
1since 2021 · last 2021
—ORCID · none

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

Human-computer interaction and ubiquitous computing · 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 2 heaviest of 2, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Visualization and visual analytics › interaction techniques
natural language interface
0.512021
Collecting and Characterizing Natural Language Utterances for Specifying Data Visualizations · CHI 2021
Visualization and visual analytics › visualization authoring
visualization specification
0.112021
Collecting and Characterizing Natural Language Utterances for Specifying Data Visualizations · CHI 2021

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

utterance characterization · 0.5online study · 0.5
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2021 Collecting and Characterizing Natural Language Utterances for Specifying Data Visualizations
abstract
Natural language interfaces (NLIs) for data visualization are becoming increasingly popular both in academic research and in commercial software. Yet, there is a lack of empirical understanding of how people specify visualizations through natural language. We conducted an online study (N = 102), showing participants a series of visualizations and asking them to provide utterances they would pose to generate the displayed charts. From the responses, we curated a dataset of 893 utterances and characterized the utterances according to (1) their phrasing (e.g., commands, queries, questions) and (2) the information they contained (e.g., chart types, data aggregations). To help guide future research and development, we contribute this utterance dataset and discuss its applications toward the creation and benchmarking of NLIs for visualization.
Arjun Srinivasan, Nikhila Nyapathy, Bongshin Lee, Steven Mark Drucker, John T. Stasko
CHI2