2016
Ware, Colin; Bolan, Daniel; Miller, Ricky; Rogers, David; Ahrens, James
Animated Versus Static Views of Steady Flow Patterns Proceedings Article
In: Proceedings of the ACM Symposium on Applied Perception, pp. 77–84, ACM, Anaheim, California, 2016, ISBN: 978-1-4503-4383-1.
Abstract | Links | BibTeX | Tags: animated flow, flow visualization, vector field visualization
@inproceedings{Ware:2016:AVS:2931002.2931012,
title = {Animated Versus Static Views of Steady Flow Patterns},
author = {Colin Ware and Daniel Bolan and Ricky Miller and David Rogers and James Ahrens},
url = {http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/2931002.2931012},
doi = {10.1145/2931002.2931012},
isbn = {978-1-4503-4383-1},
year = {2016},
date = {2016-01-01},
booktitle = {Proceedings of the ACM Symposium on Applied Perception},
pages = {77--84},
publisher = {ACM},
address = {Anaheim, California},
series = {SAP '16},
abstract = {Two experiments were conducted to test the hypothesis that animated representations of vector fields are more effective than common static representations even for steady flow. We compared four flow visualization methods: animated streamlets, animated orthogonal line segments (where short lines were elongated orthogonal to the flow direction but animated in the direction of flow), static equally spaced streamlines, and static arrow grids. The first experiment involved a pattern detection task in which the participant searched for an anomalous flow pattern in a field of similar patterns. The results showed that both the animation methods produced more accurate and faster responses. The second experiment involved mentally tracing an advection path from a central dot in the flow field and marking where the path would cross the boundary of a surrounding circle. For this task the animated streamlets resulted in better performance than the other methods, but the animated orthogonal particles resulted in the worst performance. We conclude with recommendations for the representation of steady flow patterns.},
keywords = {animated flow, flow visualization, vector field visualization},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {inproceedings}
}
Two experiments were conducted to test the hypothesis that animated representations of vector fields are more effective than common static representations even for steady flow. We compared four flow visualization methods: animated streamlets, animated orthogonal line segments (where short lines were elongated orthogonal to the flow direction but animated in the direction of flow), static equally spaced streamlines, and static arrow grids. The first experiment involved a pattern detection task in which the participant searched for an anomalous flow pattern in a field of similar patterns. The results showed that both the animation methods produced more accurate and faster responses. The second experiment involved mentally tracing an advection path from a central dot in the flow field and marking where the path would cross the boundary of a surrounding circle. For this task the animated streamlets resulted in better performance than the other methods, but the animated orthogonal particles resulted in the worst performance. We conclude with recommendations for the representation of steady flow patterns.
: . .
1.
Ware, Colin; Bolan, Daniel; Miller, Ricky; Rogers, David; Ahrens, James
Animated Versus Static Views of Steady Flow Patterns Proceedings Article
In: Proceedings of the ACM Symposium on Applied Perception, pp. 77–84, ACM, Anaheim, California, 2016, ISBN: 978-1-4503-4383-1.
@inproceedings{Ware:2016:AVS:2931002.2931012,
title = {Animated Versus Static Views of Steady Flow Patterns},
author = {Colin Ware and Daniel Bolan and Ricky Miller and David Rogers and James Ahrens},
url = {http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/2931002.2931012},
doi = {10.1145/2931002.2931012},
isbn = {978-1-4503-4383-1},
year = {2016},
date = {2016-01-01},
booktitle = {Proceedings of the ACM Symposium on Applied Perception},
pages = {77--84},
publisher = {ACM},
address = {Anaheim, California},
series = {SAP '16},
abstract = {Two experiments were conducted to test the hypothesis that animated representations of vector fields are more effective than common static representations even for steady flow. We compared four flow visualization methods: animated streamlets, animated orthogonal line segments (where short lines were elongated orthogonal to the flow direction but animated in the direction of flow), static equally spaced streamlines, and static arrow grids. The first experiment involved a pattern detection task in which the participant searched for an anomalous flow pattern in a field of similar patterns. The results showed that both the animation methods produced more accurate and faster responses. The second experiment involved mentally tracing an advection path from a central dot in the flow field and marking where the path would cross the boundary of a surrounding circle. For this task the animated streamlets resulted in better performance than the other methods, but the animated orthogonal particles resulted in the worst performance. We conclude with recommendations for the representation of steady flow patterns.},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {inproceedings}
}
Two experiments were conducted to test the hypothesis that animated representations of vector fields are more effective than common static representations even for steady flow. We compared four flow visualization methods: animated streamlets, animated orthogonal line segments (where short lines were elongated orthogonal to the flow direction but animated in the direction of flow), static equally spaced streamlines, and static arrow grids. The first experiment involved a pattern detection task in which the participant searched for an anomalous flow pattern in a field of similar patterns. The results showed that both the animation methods produced more accurate and faster responses. The second experiment involved mentally tracing an advection path from a central dot in the flow field and marking where the path would cross the boundary of a surrounding circle. For this task the animated streamlets resulted in better performance than the other methods, but the animated orthogonal particles resulted in the worst performance. We conclude with recommendations for the representation of steady flow patterns.