Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “sensemaking”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

24 records · Page 2
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2013

How Analysts Cognitively “Connect the Dots”

As analysts attempt to make sense of a collection of documents, such as intelligence analysis reports, they may wish to “connect the dots” between pieces of information that may initially seem unrelated. This process of synthesizing information between information requires users to make connections between pairs of documents, creating a conceptual story. We conducted a user study to analyze the process by which users connect pairs of documents and how they spatially arrange information. Users created conceptual stories that connected the dots using organizational strategies that ranged in complexity. We propose taxonomies for cognitive connections and physical structures used when trying to “connect the dots” between two documents. We compared the user-created stories with a data-mining algorithm that constructs chains of documents using co-occurrence metrics. Using the insight gained into the storytelling process, we offer design considerations for the existing data mining algorithm and corresponding tools to combine the power of data mining and the complex cognitive processing of analysts.

data mining↗
DOE OSTI2014

From Streaming Data to Streaming Insights: The Impact of Data Velocities on Mental Models

The rise of Big Data has influenced the design and technical implementation of visual analytic tools required to handle the increased volumes, velocities, and varieties of data. This has required a set of data management and computational advancements to allow us to store and compute on such datasets. However, as the ultimate goal of visual analytic technology is to enable the discovery and creation of insights from the users, an under-explored area is understanding how these datasets impact their mental models. That is, how have the analytic processes and strategies of users changed? How have users changed their perception of how to leverage, and ask questions of, these datasets?

analysis in motion↗
DOE OSTI2014

Modeling in Big Data Environments

Human-Centered Big Data Research (HCBDR) is an area of work that focuses on the methodologies and research areas focused on understanding how humans interact with “big data”. In the context of this paper, we refer to “big data” in a holistic sense, including most (if not all) the dimensions defining the term, such as complexity, variety, velocity, veracity, etc. Simply put, big data requires us as researchers of to question and reconsider existing approaches, with the opportunity to illuminate new kinds of insights that were traditionally out of reach to humans. The purpose of this article is to summarize the discussions and ideas about the role of models in HCBDR at a recent workshop. Models, within the context of this paper, include both computational and conceptual mental models. As such, the discussions summarized in this article seek to understand the connection between these two categories of models.

big data↗
DOE OSTI2014

The VAST Challenge: History, Scope, and Outcomes: An introduction to the Special Issue

Visual analytics aims to facilitate human insight from complex data via a combination of visual representations, interaction techniques, and supporting algorithms. To create new tools and techniques that achieve this goal requires that researchers have an understanding of analytical questions to be addressed, data that illustrates the complexities and ambiguities found in realistic analytic settings, and methods for evaluating whether the plausible insights are gained through use of the new methods. However, researchers do not, generally speaking, have access to analysts who can articulate their problems or operational data that is used for analysis. To fill this gap, the Visual Analytics Science and Technology (VAST) Challenge has been held annually since 2006. The VAST Challenge provides an opportunity for researchers to experiment with realistic but not real problems, using realistic synthetic data with known events embedded. Since its inception, the VAST Challenge has evolved along with the visual analytics research community to pose more complex challenges, ranging from text analysis to video analysis to large scale network log analysis. The seven years of the VAST Challenge have seen advancements in research and development, education, evaluation, and in the challenge process itself. This special issue of Information Visualization highlights some of the noteworthy advancements in each of these areas. Some of these papers focus on important research questions related to the challenge itself, and other papers focus on innovative research that has been shaped by participation in the challenge. This paper describes the VAST Challenge process and benefits in detail. It also provides an introduction to and context for the remaining papers in the issue.

visual analytics, sensemaking, evaluation, crowdso↗
DOE OSTI2017

User-Centered Evaluation of Visual Analytics

Visual analytics systems are becoming very popular. More domains now use interactive visualizations to analyze the ever-increasing amount and heterogeneity of data. More novel visualizations are being developed for more tasks and users. We need to ensure that these systems can be evaluated to determine that they are both useful and usable. A user-centered evaluation for visual analytics needs to be developed for these systems. While many of the typical human-computer interaction (HCI) evaluation methodologies can be applied as is, others will need modification. Additionally, new functionality in visual analytics systems needs new evaluation methodologies. There is a difference between usability evaluations and user-centered evaluations. Usability looks at the efficiency, effectiveness, and user satisfaction of users carrying out tasks with software applications. User-centered evaluation looks more specifically at the utility provided to the users by the software. This is reflected in the evaluations done and in the metrics used. In the visual analytics domain this is very challenging as users are most likely experts in a particular domain, the tasks they do are often not well defined, the software they use needs to support large amounts of different kinds of data, and often the tasks last for months. These difficulties are discussed more in the section on User-centered Evaluation. Our goal is to provide a discussion of user-centered evaluation practices for visual analytics, including existing practices that can be carried out and new methodologies and metrics that need to be developed and agreed upon by the visual analytics community. The material provided here should be of use for both researchers and practitioners in the field of visual analytics. Researchers and practitioners in HCI and interested in visual analytics will find this information useful as well as a discussion on changes that need to be made to current HCI practices to make them more suitable to visual analytics. A history of analysis and analysis techniques and problems is provided as well as an introduction to user-centered evaluation and various evaluation techniques for readers from different disciplines. The understanding of these techniques is imperative if we wish to support analysis in the visual analytics software we develop. Currently the evaluations that are conducted and published for visual analytics software are very informal and consist mainly of comments from users or potential users. Our goal is to help researchers in visual analytics to conduct more formal user-centered evaluations. While these are time-consuming and expensive to carryout, the outcomes of these studies will have a defining impact on the field of visual analytics and help point the direction for future features and visualizations to incorporate. While many researchers view work in user-centered evaluation as a less-than-exciting area to work, the opposite is true. First of all, the goal is user-centered evaluation is to help visual analytics software developers, researchers, and designers improve their solutions and discover creative ways to better accommodate their users. Working with the users is extremely rewarding as well. While we use the term “users” in almost all situations there are a wide variety of users that all need to be accommodated. Moreover, the domains that use visual analytics are varied and expanding. Just understanding the complexities of a number of these domains is exciting. Researchers are trying out different visualizations and interactions as well. And of course, the size and variety of data are expanding rapidly. User-centered evaluation in this context is rapidly changing. There are no standard processes and metrics and thus those of us working on user-centered evaluation must be creative in our work with both the users and with the researchers and developers.

intelligence analysis↗
DOE OSTI2014

Toward Usable Interactive Analytics: Coupling Cognition and Computation

Interactive analytics provide users a myriad of computational means to aid in extracting meaningful information from large and complex datasets. Much prior work focuses either on advancing the capabilities of machine-centric approaches by the data mining and machine learning communities, or human-driven methods by the visualization and CHI communities. However, these methods do not yet support a true human-machine symbiotic relationship where users and machines work together collaboratively and adapt to each other to advance an interactive analytic process. In this paper we discuss some of the inherent issues, outlining what we believe are the steps toward usable interactive analytics that will ultimately increase the effectiveness for both humans and computers to produce insights.

semantic interaction↗