1

SIMS 247: Information Visualization and PresentationMarti Hearst

Oct 19, 2005 

 

2

Today

• Incorporating Time– Time in Desktop Search– Time in Photo Collections

• Visualizing Time– Time graph searching

• Hochheiser & Shneiderman• Wattenberg

– Complex Serial Data • Carlis & Konstan

3

Time in Desktop SearchStuff I’ve Seen personal information searchDumais et al. ‘93

4

SIS, Timeline w/ Landmarks, Rignel, Cutrell, Dumais, Horvitz. ‘03

Search Results

Distribution of Results Over Time

Memory Landmarks- General (world, calendar)- Personal (appts, photos)<linked by time to results>

5

SIS, Timeline Experiment

Dates Only Landmarks + Dates0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Sea

rch

Tim

e (s

)

With Landmarks Without Landmarks

6

Time in DesktopJun Rekimoto, "TimeScape: A Time Machine for the Desktop Environment", CHI'99 late-breaking results, 1999.

http://www.csl.sony.co.jp/person/rekimoto/tmc/images.html

7

Lifestreams(Fertig, Freeman, Gelernter 96)

8

Time in Photo Collections

9

UIs for Personal Photo Collections

• Research on personal photo collections shows:– Chronology important– But people and events more important

• Metadata– Useful, but tedious to input– Graham et al. developed effective automated

grouping mechanisms using time

10

PDA Photo Browsing(Manual Grouping)Harada et al. ‘04

11

PDA Photo Browsing(Timeline) Harada et al. ‘04

12

Usability Study

• Compared automated vs manual labeling• Compared timeline vs no timeline

– For search task people were faster with timeline on second exposure only; strong learning effect

– For browsing task, success rate was 14% higher for timeline interface on first exposure

– People did as well on automated grouping as on manual (except for browsing task)

– No overall preference for any of the approaches• But people prefered their manual organization for

browsing

13

Dynamic Timeline for PhotosKullberg 1996

14

TimeQuiltHuynh et al. ’05http://research.microsoft.com/~sdrucker/interest.htm

http://research.microsoft.com/~sdrucker/papers/CHI%20Time%20Quilt.ppt

15

PhotoCatBurgener, Fisher, Nelson, Wooldridge ‘05

16

PhotoCatBurgener, Fisher, Nelson, Wooldridge ‘05

17

Searching Time Sequence Data

18

Motivation: Standard time plots are very compelling, but can only display a limited amount of data

Timebox widgets for interactive explorationHochheiser and Shneiderman ‘02

19

Idea:

Query the data!

(See video)

20

Usability studies

• 24 Computer Science students completed various tasks using different but semantically equivalent input mechanisms:– Timebox queries– Fill-in– Range sliders

21

Study 1

• Fully specified tasks. (“During days 22-23, are there more stocks between 69-119, 59-109, or 49-99”)– Form fill in fastest– Range sliders second.– Timeboxes last.

22

Study 2

• More open-ended tasks.• Compare:

– Timeboxes with graphical output– Forms with graphical output– Forms with tabular output

• No statistically significant difference.

(Were the users already familiar with timeboxes?)

23

Compare to Wattenberg’sTime Graph Sketch