skip to main content
10.1145/2207676.2208549acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageschiConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Delta: a tool for representing and comparing workflows

Authors Info & Claims
Published:05 May 2012Publication History

ABSTRACT

Tutorials and sample workflows for complicated, feature-rich software packages are widely available online. As a result users must differentiate between workflows to choose the most suitable one for their task. We present Delta, an interactive workflow visualization and comparison tool that helps users identify the tradeoffs between workflows. We conducted an initial study to identify the set of attributes users attend to when comparing workflows, finding that they consider result quality, their knowledge of commands, and the efficiency of the workflow. We then designed Delta to surface these attributes at three granularities: a high-level, clustered view; an intermediate-level list view that contains workflow summaries; and a low-level detail view that allows users to compare two individual workflows. Finally, we conducted an evaluation of Delta on a small corpus of 30 workflows and found that the intermediate list view provided the best information density. We conclude with thoughts on how such a workflow comparison system could be scaled up to larger corpora in the future.

Skip Supplemental Material Section

Supplemental Material

paperfile1768-3.mp4

mp4

29.5 MB

References

  1. Andrews, K., Wohlfahrt, M., and Wurzinger, G. Visual Graph Comparison. Info. Vis., pp. 62--67, 2009. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Bederson, B., Shneiderman, B., and Wattenberg, M. Ordered and quantum treemaps: Making effective use of 2D space to display hierarchies. ACM Trans. Graph, 21(4):833--854, 2002. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Chen, H.-T., Wei, L.-Y. and Chang, C.-F. Nonlinear Revision Control for Images. ACM Trans. Graph, 30(4), Article 105, 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Chi, E. H., Pirolli, P., Chen, K., and Pitkow, J. Using information scent to model user information needs and actions and the Web. ACM CHI, pp. 490--497, 2001. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Chi, E., Pirolli, P., and Pitkow, J. The scent of a site: a system for analyzing and predicting information scent, usage, and usability of a Web site. ACM CHI, pp. 161--168, 2000. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Cutrell, E. and Guan Z. What are you looking for?: an eye-tracking study of information usage in web search. ACM CHI. pp. 407--416. 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Cutting, D., Karger, D., Pedersen, J., and Tukey, J. Scatter/Gather: a cluster-based approach to browsing large document collections. SIGIR. pp. 318--329. 1992. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Denning, J. D., Kerr, W. B., and Pellacini, F. MeshFlow: Interactive Visualization of Mesh Construction Sequences. ACM Trans. Graph, 30(4), Article 66, 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Dorn, B. and Guzdial, M. Learning on the job: characterizing the programming knowledge and learning strategies of web designers. ACM CHI, pp. 703--712. 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Grabler, F., Agrawala, M., Li, W., Dontcheva, M. and Igarashi, T. Generating Photo Manipulation Tutorials by Demonstration. SIGGRAPH. pp. 66:1--66:9, 2009. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Grossman, T., Matejka, J. and Fitzmaurice, G. Chronicle: Capture, Exploration, and Playback of Document Workflow Histories. UIST, pp. 143--152, 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Grossman, T., Fitzmaurice, G. and Attar, R. A Survey of Software Learnability: Metrics, Methodologies and Guidelines. ACM CHI, pp. 649--658, 2009. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Guan. Z., and Cutrell, E. An eye tracking study of the effect of target rank on web search. ACM CHI, pp. 417--420, 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Hearst, M. Search User Interfaces (1st ed.). Cambridge University Press, New York, NY, USA. 2009. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. Heer, J., Mackinlay, J., Stolte, C. and Agrawala, M. Graphical Histories for Visualization: Supporting Analysis, Communication, and Evaluation. IEEE TVCG, pp. 1189--1196, 2008. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Jing, F. Wang, W., Yao, Y., Deng, K., Zhang, L., and Ma, W.-Y. IGroup: web image search results clustering. ACM Multimedia, pp. 377--384, 2006. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. Koop, D., Scheidegger, C., Callahan, S., Freire, J., and Silva, C. VisComplete: Automating Suggestions for Visualization Pipelines. IEEE TVCG, pp. 1691--1698, 2008. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Kurlander, D.,and Feiner, S. Editable graphical histories. IEEE Visual Languages, pp. 127--134, 1988.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  19. LaFreniere, B., Bunt, A., Lount, M., Krynicki, F., and Terry, M. AdaptableGIMP: designing a sociallyadaptable interface. UIST Adjunct, pp. 89--90. 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Lee, B., Srivastava, S., Kumar, R., Brafman, R., and Klemmer, S. Designing with Interactive Example Galleries. ACM CHI, pp. 2257--2266, 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. Nakamura, T. and Igarashi, I. An application-independent system for visualizing user operation history. UIST, pp. 23--32, 2008. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. Pirolli, P. and Card, S. Information foraging. Psychological Review, 106(4):643--675, 1999.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  23. Santos, E., Lins, L., Ahrens, J., Freire, J., and Silva, C. A first study on clustering collections of workflow graphs. IPAW, pp. 160--173, 2008. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. Sorokin, A. and Forsyth, D. Utility data annotation with Amazon Mechanical Turk. CVPRW, pp.1--8, 2008.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  25. Wagner, R. and Fischer, M. The String-to-String Correction Problem. J. ACM, 21(1):168--173, 1974. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Delta: a tool for representing and comparing workflows

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Conferences
      CHI '12: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
      May 2012
      3276 pages
      ISBN:9781450310154
      DOI:10.1145/2207676

      Copyright © 2012 ACM

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 5 May 2012

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article

      Acceptance Rates

      Overall Acceptance Rate6,199of26,314submissions,24%

      Upcoming Conference

      CHI '24
      CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
      May 11 - 16, 2024
      Honolulu , HI , USA

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader