research-article

Variability in data visualization: a software product line approach

Authors:

Jose-Miguel Horcas,

Jose A. Galindo,

David BenavidesAuthors Info & Claims

SPLC '22: Proceedings of the 26th ACM International Systems and Software Product Line Conference - Volume A

Pages 55 - 66

https://doi.org/10.1145/3546932.3546993

Published: 12 September 2022 Publication History

Abstract

Data visualization aims to effectively communicate quantitative information by understanding which techniques and displays work better for different circumstances and why. There are a variety of software solutions capable of generating a multitude of different visualizations of the same dataset. However, data visualization exposes a large space of visual configurations depending on the type of data to be visualized, the different displays (e.g., scatter plots, line graphs, pie charts), the visual components to encode the data (e.g., lines, dots, bars), or the specific visual attributes of those components (e.g., color, shape, size, length). Researchers and developers are not usually aware about best practices in data visualization, and they are required to learn about both the design practices that make communication effective and the low level details of the specific software tool used to generate the visualization. This paper proposes a software product line approach to model and materialize the variability of the visualization design process, guided by feature models. We encode the visualization knowledge regarding the best design practices, resolve the variability following a step-wise configuration approach, and then evaluate our proposal for a specific software visualization tool. Our solution helps researchers and developers communicate their quantitative results effectively by assisting them in the selection and generation of the visualizations that work best for each case. We open a new window of research where data visualization and variability meet each other.

References

[1]

Mauricio Alférez, Mathieu Acher, José Angel Galindo, Benoit Baudry, and David Benavides. 2019. Modeling variability in the video domain: language and experience report. Softw. Qual. J. 27, 1 (2019), 307--347.

Digital Library

[2]

Georg Rock Anna Schmitt, Christian Bettinger. 2018. Glencoe - A Tool for Specification, Visualization and Formal Analysis of Product Lines. In 25th International Conference on Transdisciplinary Engineering (Advances in Transdisciplinary Engineering). 665--673.

[3]

Sven Apel, Don S. Batory, Christian Kästner, and Gunter Saake. 2013. Feature-Oriented Software Product Lines - Concepts and Implementation. Springer.

[4]

Mohsen Asadi, Samaneh Soltani, Dragan Gasevic, and Marek Hatala. 2016. The effects of visualization and interaction techniques on feature model configuration. Emp. Soft. Eng. 21, 4 (2016), 1706--1743.

Digital Library

[5]

David Benavides, Pablo Trinidad Martín-Arroyo, and Antonio Ruiz Cortés. 2005. Automated Reasoning on Feature Models. In 17th International Conference on Advanced Information Systems Engineering (CAiSE) (LNCS, Vol. 3520). Springer, 491--503.

Digital Library

[6]

Jacques Bertin. 1983. Semiology of graphics. University of Wisconsin press.

Digital Library

[7]

Michael Bostock, Vadim Ogievetsky, and Jeffrey Heer. 2011. D³ Data-Driven Documents. IEEE Trans. Vis. Comput. Graph. 17, 12 (2011), 2301--2309.

Digital Library

[8]

Matthew Brehmer, Sheelagh Carpendale, Bongshin Lee, and Melanie Tory. 2014. Pre-Design Empiricism for Information Visualization: Scenarios, Methods, and Challenges. In 5th BELIV. 147--151.

Digital Library

[9]

Alberto Cairo. 2012. The Functional Art: An introduction to information graphics and visualization. New Riders.

[10]

Mainak Chakraborty and Ajit Pratap Kundan. 2021. Grafana. Apress, 187--240.

[11]

Ed Huai-hsin Chi. 2002. A framework for visualizing information. Vol. 1. Springer Science & Business Media.

[12]

William S Cleveland and Robert McGill. 1985. Graphical perception and graphical methods for analyzing scientific data. Science 229, 4716 (1985), 828--833.

[13]

Krzysztof Czarnecki, Simon Helsen, and Ulrich W. Eisenecker. 2005. Formalizing cardinality-based feature models and their specialization. Softw. Process. Improv. Pract. 10, 1 (2005), 7--29.

[14]

Krzysztof Czarnecki, Simon Helsen, and Ulrich W. Eisenecker. 2005. Staged configuration through specialization and multilevel configuration of feature models. Sw. Proc. Imp. Prac. 10, 2 (2005), 143--169.

[15]

Stephan Diehl. 2007. Software visualization: visualizing the structure, behaviour, and evolution of software. Springer Science & Business Media.

[16]

Ensheng Dong, Hongru Du, and Lauren Gardner. 2020. An interactive web-based dashboard to track COVID-19 in real time. The Lancet Infectious Diseases 20, 5 (2020), 533--534.

[17]

Stephanie DH Evergreen. 2019. Effective data visualization: The right chart for the right data. SAGE publications.

[18]

Janet Feigenspan, Christian Kästner, Sven Apel, Jörg Liebig, Michael Schulze, Raimund Dachselt, Maria Papendieck, Thomas Leich, and Gunter Saake. 2013. Do background colors improve program comprehension in the #ifdef hell? Empir. Softw. Eng. 18, 4 (2013), 699--745.

Digital Library

[19]

Stephen Few. 2012. Show Me the Numbers: Designing Tables and Graphs to Enlighten (2nd ed.). Analytics Press, Oakland, CA, USA.

[20]

Camilla Forsell and Matthew Cooper. 2012. Questionnaires for Evaluation in Information Visualization. In 4th Workshop: Beyond Time and Errors: Novel Evaluation Methods for Visualization (BELIV).

Digital Library

[21]

José A. Galindo and David Benavides. 2020. A Python framework for the automated analysis of feature models: A first step to integrate community efforts. In 24th ACM International Systems and Software Product Line Conference (SPLC), Vol. B. ACM, Montreal, Canada, 52--55.

Digital Library

[22]

Matthias Galster, DannyWeyns, Dan Tofan, Bartosz Michalik, and Paris Avgeriou. 2014. Variability in Software Systems---A Systematic Literature Review. IEEE Trans. on Softw. Eng. 40, 3 (2014), 282--306.

Digital Library

[23]

Ian E Gordon. 2004. Theories of visual perception. Psychology press.

[24]

Ruben Heradio, David Fernández-Amorós, Christoph Mayr-Dorn, and Alexander Egyed. 2019. Supporting the statistical analysis of variability models. In 41st Int. Conf. on Soft. Eng. (ICSE). 843--853.

Digital Library

[25]

José Miguel Horcas, Mónica Pinto, and Lidia Fuentes. 2022. Empirical analysis of the tool support for software product lines. Software and Systems Modeling (2022).

Digital Library

[26]

J. D. Hunter. 2007. Matplotlib: A 2D Graphics Environment. Computing in Science & Engineering 9, 03 (2007), 90--95.

Digital Library

[27]

Sheny Illescas, Roberto E. Lopez-Herrejon, and Alexander Egyed. 2016. Towards Visualization of Feature Interactions in Software Product Lines. In 4th IEEE Work. Conf. on Soft. Vis. (VISSOFT). 46--50.

[28]

Tobias Isenberg, Petra Isenberg, Jian Chen, Michael Sedlmair, and Torsten Möller. 2013. A Systematic Review on the Practice of Evaluating Visualization. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 19, 12 (2013), 2818--2827.

Digital Library

[29]

Ivar Jacobson, Martin L. Griss, and Patrik Jonsson. 1997. Software reuse - architecture, process and organization for business. Addison-Wesley-Longman.

Digital Library

[30]

Christian Kästner, Salvador Trujillo, and Sven Apel. 2008. Visualizing Software Product Line Variabilities in Source Code. In 12th International Conference on Software Product Lines (SPLC), Vol. 2 (Workshops). 303--312.

[31]

Andy Kirk. 2012. Data Visualization: a successful design process. Packt publishing.

[32]

Cole Nussbaumer Knaflic. 2015. Storytelling with data: A data visualization guide for business professionals. John Wiley & Sons.

[33]

Jacob Krüger, Marcus Pinnecke, Andy Kenner, Christopher Kruczek, Fabian Benduhn, Thomas Leich, and Gunter Saake. 2018. Composing annotations without regret? Practical experiences using FeatureC. Softw. Pract. Exp. 48, 3 (2018), 402--427.

[34]

Kuno Kurzhals and Daniel Weiskopf. 2018. Exploring the Visualization Design Space with Repertory Grids. Computer Graphics Forum 37, 3 (2018), 133--144.

[35]

Heidi Lam, Enrico Bertini, Petra Isenberg, Catherine Plaisant, and Sheelagh Carpendale. 2012. Empirical Studies in Information Visualization: Seven Scenarios. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 18, 9 (2012), 1520--1536.

Digital Library

[36]

M. Lanza and S. Ducasse. 2003. Polymetric views - a lightweight visual approach to reverse engineering. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 29, 9 (2003), 782--795.

Digital Library

[37]

Andrea Lau and Andrew Vande Moere. 2007. Towards a Model of Information Aesthetics in Information Visualization. In 11th International Conference Information Visualization (IV). 87--92.

Digital Library

[38]

Roberto Erick Lopez-Herrejon, Sheny Illescas, and Alexander Egyed. 2018. A systematic mapping study of information visualization for software product line engineering. J. Softw. Evol. Process. 30, 2 (2018).

[39]

Jabier Martinez, Tewfik Ziadi, Raul Mazo, Tegawendé F. Bissyandé, Jacques Klein, and Yves Le Traon. 2014. Feature Relations Graphs: A Visualisation Paradigm for Feature Constraints in Software Product Lines. In 2nd IEEE Working Conference on Software Visualization (VISSOFT). 50--59.

Digital Library

[40]

Sean McKenna, Dominika Mazur, James Agutter, and Miriah Meyer. 2014. Design Activity Framework for Visualization Design. IEEE Trans. on Vis. and Comp. Graph. 20, 12 (2014), 2191--2200.

[41]

Jens Meinicke, Thomas Thüm, Reimar Schröter, Fabian Benduhn, Thomas Leich, and Gunter Saake. 2017. Mastering Software Variability with FeatureIDE. Springer.

[42]

Miriah Meyer, Michael Sedlmair, P Samuel Quinan, and Tamara Munzner. 2015. The nested blocks and guidelines model. Information Visualization 14, 3 (2015), 234--249.

[43]

Stephen R. Midway. 2020. Principles of Effective Data Visualization. Patterns 1, 9 (2020), 100141.

[44]

Daniel Moody. 2009. The "Physics" of Notations: Toward a Scientific Basis for Constructing Visual Notations in Software Engineering. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 35, 6 (2009), 756--779.

Digital Library

[45]

Daniel-Jesus Munoz, Jeho Oh, Mónica Pinto, Lidia Fuentes, and Don S. Batory. 2019. Uniform random sampling product configurations of feature models that have numerical features. In 23rd International Systems and Software Product Line Conference (SPLC). ACM, 39:1--39:13.

Digital Library

[46]

Tamara Munzner. 2009. A Nested Model for Visualization Design and Validation. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 15, 6 (2009), 921--928.

Digital Library

[47]

Scott Murray. 2017. Interactive data visualization for the web: an introduction to designing with D3. "O'Reilly Media, Inc.".

[48]

Daren Nestor, Luke O'Malley, Aaron J. Quigley, Ernst Sikora, and Steffen Thiel. 2007. Visualisation of Variability in Software Product Line Engineering. In 1st Workshop on Variability Modelling of Software-Intensive Systems (VaMoS). 71--78. http://www.vamos-workshop.net/proceedings/VaMoS_2007_Proceedings.pdf

[49]

Daren Nestor, Steffen Thiel, Goetz Botterweck, Ciarán Cawley, and Patrick Healy. 2008. Applying visualisation techniques in software product lines. In ACM Symp. on Software Visualization. 175--184.

Digital Library

[50]

Andreas Pleuss and Goetz Botterweck. 2012. Visualization of variability and configuration options. Int. J. Softw. Tools Technol. Transf. 14, 5 (2012), 497--510.

Digital Library

[51]

Klaus Pohl, Günter Böckle, and Frank van der Linden. 2005. Software Product Line Engineering - Foundations, Principles, and Techniques. Springer.

[52]

Daniela Rabiser, Herbert Prähofer, Paul Grünbacher, Michael Petruzelka, Klaus Eder, Florian Angerer, Mario Kromoser, and Andreas Grimmer. 2018. Multi-purpose, multi-level feature modeling of large-scale industrial software systems. Soft. Sys. Model. 17, 3 (2018), 913--938.

Digital Library

[53]

Mark-Oliver Reiser and Matthias Weber. 2007. Multi-level feature trees. Requir. Eng. 12, 2 (2007), 57--75.

Digital Library

[54]

Ruth Rosenholtz, Yuanzhen Li, and Lisa Nakano. 2007. Measuring visual clutter. Journal of Vision 7, 2 (2007), 17--17.

[55]

Chico Sundermann, Kevin Feichtinger, Dominik Engelhardt, Rick Rabiser, and Thomas Thüm. 2021. Yet another textual variability language?: a community effort towards a unified language. In 25th International Systems and Software Product Line Conference (SPLC). 136--147.

Digital Library

[56]

Eugene Syriani, Lechanceux Luhunu, and Houari A. Sahraoui. 2018. Systematic mapping study of template-based code generation. Comput. Lang. Syst. Struct. 52 (2018), 43--62.

[57]

Till Tantau. 2013. Graph Drawing in TikZ. J. Graph Algorithms Appl. 17, 4 (2013), 495--513.

[58]

Alexandru C Telea. 2014. Data visualization: principles and practice. CRC Press.

Digital Library

[59]

The dblp team. 2022. dblp computer science bibliography. Monthly snapshot release of March 2022. https://dblp.org/xml/release/dblp-2022-03-01.xml.gz

[60]

Pablo Trinidad, Antonio Ruiz Cortés, David Benavides, and Sergio Segura. 2008. Three-Dimensional Feature Diagrams Visualization. In 12th International Conference on Software Product Lines (SPLC), Vol. 2 (Workshops). 295--302.

[61]

Edward R Tufte. 1985. The visual display of quantitative information. The Journal for Healthcare Quality (JHQ) 7, 3 (1985), 15.

[62]

Simon Urli, Alexandre Bergel, Mireille Blay-Fornarino, Philippe Collet, and Sébastien Mosser. 2015. A visual support for decomposing complex feature models. In 3rd IEEE VISSOFT. 76--85.

[63]

Jagoda Walny, Christian Frisson, Mieka West, Doris Kosminsky, Søren Knudsen, Sheelagh Carpendale, and Wesley Willett. 2020. Data Changes Everything: Challenges and Opportunities in Data Visualization Design Handoff. IEEE Trans. Vis. Comp. Graph. 26, 1 (2020), 12--22.

[64]

Matthew O Ward, Georges Grinstein, and Daniel Keim. 2010. Interactive data visualization: foundations, techniques, and applications. AK Peters/CRC Press.

[65]

Hadley Wickham. 2009. ggplot2 - Elegant Graphics for Data Analysis. Springer.

[66]

Leland Wilkinson, Anushka Anand, and Robert L. Grossman. 2005. Graph-Theoretic Scagnostics. In IEEE Symposium on Information Visualization (InfoVis). 157--164.

Cited By

Ren ALiu LWang YLiu XWang HXu KZhang XArora C(2024)Requirements Elicitation in Government Projects: A Preliminary Empirical Study2024 IEEE 32nd International Requirements Engineering Conference Workshops (REW)10.1109/REW61692.2024.00025(146-154)Online publication date: 24-Jun-2024
https://doi.org/10.1109/REW61692.2024.00025
Romero-Organvidez DHorcas JGalindo JBenavides D(2024)Data visualization guidance using a software product line approachJournal of Systems and Software10.1016/j.jss.2024.112029213:COnline publication date: 1-Jul-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1016/j.jss.2024.112029
Al-Sayyed RAlhenawi EAlazzam HWrikat ASuleiman D(2023)Mobile money fraud detection using data analysis and visualization techniquesMultimedia Tools and Applications10.1007/s11042-023-16068-483:6(17093-17108)Online publication date: 21-Jul-2023
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11042-023-16068-4

Index Terms

Variability in data visualization: a software product line approach
1. Human-centered computing
  1. Visualization
    1. Visualization application domains
      1. Information visualization
    2. Visualization techniques
      1. Graph drawings
2. Software and its engineering
  1. Software creation and management
    1. Software development techniques
      1. Reusability
        Software product lines

Recommendations

Data visualization guidance using a software product line approach
Abstract
Data visualization aims to convey quantitative and qualitative information effectively by determining which techniques and visualizations are most appropriate for different situations and why. Various software solutions can produce numerous ...
Highlights
- A new approach to manage the variability in data visualization using a software product line.
- Encoding best design practices for graphs and tables in feature models.
- Step-wise configuration approach to customize the most ...
Visualization of variability and configuration options

When designing, constructing, and maintaining diverse and variable software systems, a key challenge is the complexity of systems. A potential approach to tackle this challenge are techniques from variability management and product line engineering to ...
A Model and Framework for Visualization Exploration

Visualization exploration is the process of extracting insight from data via interaction with visual depictions of that data. Visualization exploration is more than presentation; the interaction with both the data and its depiction is as important as ...

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences

SPLC '22: Proceedings of the 26th ACM International Systems and Software Product Line Conference - Volume A

September 2022

266 pages

ISBN:9781450394437

DOI:10.1145/3546932

General Chairs:
Alexander Felfernig
Graz University of Technology, Austria
,
Lidia Fuentes
University of Málaga, Spain

Copyright © 2022 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]

Sponsors

SIGSOFT: ACM Special Interest Group on Software Engineering

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 12 September 2022

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Request Permissions

Check for updates

Badges

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Research-article

Funding Sources

FEDER Junta de Andalucía
MICINN
Junta de Andalucía

Conference

SPLC '22

Sponsor:

SIGSOFT

SPLC '22: 26th ACM International Systems and Software Product Line Conference

September 12 - 16, 2022

Graz, Austria

Acceptance Rates

SPLC '22 Paper Acceptance Rate 14 of 41 submissions, 34%;

Overall Acceptance Rate 167 of 463 submissions, 36%

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

2
Total Citations
View Citations
298
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)65
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)5

Reflects downloads up to 05 Mar 2025

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Ren ALiu LWang YLiu XWang HXu KZhang XArora C(2024)Requirements Elicitation in Government Projects: A Preliminary Empirical Study2024 IEEE 32nd International Requirements Engineering Conference Workshops (REW)10.1109/REW61692.2024.00025(146-154)Online publication date: 24-Jun-2024
https://doi.org/10.1109/REW61692.2024.00025
Romero-Organvidez DHorcas JGalindo JBenavides D(2024)Data visualization guidance using a software product line approachJournal of Systems and Software10.1016/j.jss.2024.112029213:COnline publication date: 1-Jul-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1016/j.jss.2024.112029
Al-Sayyed RAlhenawi EAlazzam HWrikat ASuleiman D(2023)Mobile money fraud detection using data analysis and visualization techniquesMultimedia Tools and Applications10.1007/s11042-023-16068-483:6(17093-17108)Online publication date: 21-Jul-2023
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11042-023-16068-4

View Options

Login options

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

Full Access

Get this Publication

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

eReader

View online with eReader.

Figures

Tables

Media

View Table of Conten