Titel: | Experimental analysis of the accessibility of drawings with few segments |
---|---|
AutorInnen: |
Philipp Kindermann
Wouter Meulemans André Schulz |
Kategorie: | Konferenzbandbeiträge |
erschienen in: | Proceedings of the 25th International Symposium on Graph Drawing and Network Visualization (GD'17), pp. 52-64 |
Abstract: | The visual complexity of a graph drawing is defined as the number of geometric objects needed to represent all its edges. In particular, one object may represent multiple edges, e.g., one needs only one line segment to draw two collinear incident edges. We study the question if drawings with few segments have a better aesthetic appeal and help the user to asses the underlying graph. We design an experiment that investigates two different graph types (trees and sparse graphs), three different layout algorithms for trees, and two different layout algorithms for sparse graphs. We asked the users to give an aesthetic ranking on the layouts and to perform a furthest-pair or shortest-path task on the drawings. |
Download: | Proceeding Website |
BibTeX-Eintrag: | @InProceedings{kms-eaadf-gd17, author = {Philipp Kindermann and Wouter Meulemans and Andr{\'e} Schulz}, title = {Experimental analysis of the accessibility of drawings with few segments}, booktitle = {Proc. 25th International Symposium on Graph Drawing and Network Visualization (GD'17)}, year = {2017}, editor = {Fabrizio Frati and Kwan-Liu Ma}, volume = {10692}, series = {LNCS}, pages = {52--64}, publisher = {Springer}, abstract = {The visual complexity of a graph drawing is defined as the number of geometric objects needed to represent all its edges. In particular, one object may represent multiple edges, e.g., one needs only one line segment to draw two collinear incident edges. We study the question if drawings with few segments have a better aesthetic appeal and help the user to asses the underlying graph. We design an experiment that investigates two different graph types (trees and sparse graphs), three different layout algorithms for trees, and two different layout algorithms for sparse graphs. We asked the users to give an aesthetic ranking on the layouts and to perform a furthest-pair or shortest-path task on the drawings.}, doi = {10.1007/978-3-319-73915-1_5}, } |