Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 65 references

The Human-Data-Model Interaction Canvas for Visual Analytics

T0 review · 4 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read This paper argues that visual analytics can be mapped as six flows between humans, data, and models, and that this map tells systems apart and guides new designs.

desk verdict A useful VA synthesis canvas whose 'data contribution' arrow is semantically broken; honest position paper worth peer review with a requested revision. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.07534 v1 pith:FTRHOFSZ submitted 2025-05-12 cs.HC cs.AIcs.LG

Jürgen Bernard This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.HCcs.AIcs.LG
keywords visualanalyticshuman-data-modelinteractionHDMICanvasEEEframeworkknowledgeexternalizationexplainableAIprocessmodelsdesignspace
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This position paper argues that visual analytics has been underserved by process models that mainly describe a one-way flow from data to insights. It proposes a more balanced picture in which humans, data, and models are all actors who both contribute to and benefit from a visual analytics process, connected by six directed flows. If the canvas is adopted, it would give practitioners a common language to distinguish concrete visual analytics systems rather than only stating general principles, and it would give external stakeholders a way to see what visual analytics can offer.

What carries the argument

The central object is the HDMI Canvas, a 3 by 2 arrangement of six directed arrows connecting humans, data, and models to the visual analytics process. The three incoming arrows are the EEE contributions: Externalization of human knowledge and preferences, Exploration of data, and Explanation of models; the three outgoing arrows are the benefits each actor receives. The canvas carries the argument by turning each arrow into a concrete list of visual analytics building blocks, so that a system can be described by which flows it uses and a designer can use the lists as a checklist for constructing new systems.

What would settle it

A survey of a broad sample of visual analytics systems that yields a substantial fraction of systems that cannot be assigned to the six flows, or a study in which independent analysts using the HDMI Canvas produce conflicting descriptions of the same system, would show the canvas does not reliably differentiate approaches.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is the HDMI Canvas: a structured perspective on visual analytics that positions humans, data, and models as key actors, with three incoming arrows representing contributions to the process and three outgoing arrows representing benefits from the process. The contributions are the EEE framework: Externalization of human knowledge and preferences, Exploration of data, and Explanation of models. The benefits are the outcomes each actor receives, such as knowledge and insight for humans, enriched and reusable data for data, and improved, explained, and trusted models for models. The paper argues that this six-flow structure gives visual analytics enhanced descriptive power, because it can differentiate between concrete building blocks of existing systems, and generative power, because it can guide the design of novel visual analytics processes. Two case studies, iPCA and IRVINE, are used to show how systems can be characterized by which of the six flows they support.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that visual analytics processes can be meaningfully decomposed into exactly these six predefined contribution and benefit flows, and the paper explicitly states in Section 6 that no empirical data yet backs the utility claim.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Existing visual analytics systems can be compared by which of the six contribution and benefit flows they realize, as iPCA realizes five flows and IRVINE realizes all six.
  • The canvas provides a generative design checklist: new visual analytics processes can be generated by deciding which actors contribute and benefit, with a fully integrated human-data-model Supertool when all six flows are present.
  • Human knowledge externalization becomes a first-class contribution alongside data exploration and model explanation, aligning the field with modern feedback loops, interactive labeling, and explainable AI.
  • The canvas vocabulary is intended to be accessible to external stakeholders, so it can support interdisciplinary project scoping and user-centered design without requiring prior visual analytics training.
  • The two case studies suggest the canvas can describe both research prototypes and real industrial systems, supporting its use for communication and outreach.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • A natural extension would be to turn the canvas into an evaluation rubric: future work could code a corpus of visual analytics papers by the six flows and test whether that coding predicts system adoption, user satisfaction, or analytical success.
  • Because the canvas treats data as an active actor rather than a passive repository, it could connect to broader debates about data feminism and data humanism, though the paper leaves that link implicit.
  • The building-block lists could be tested empirically through a card-sorting or annotation study, measuring whether independent analysts agree on which blocks a given system uses.
  • The six-flow structure could be extended with additional arrows for ethics, governance, or societal impact, but the paper does not propose such an extension.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

4 major / 4 minor

Summary. This position paper reviews 16 visual analytics process models and frameworks, distills nine observations from that reflection, and proposes the HDMI Canvas, a conceptual structure in which humans, data, and models are treated as actors that both benefit from and contribute to VA processes. The contribution side is formalized as the EEE Framework: Externalization of human knowledge, Exploration of data, and Explanation of models. The paper claims descriptive power for differentiating VA building blocks and generative power for designing new VA processes, and it illustrates the canvas with two case studies (iPCA and IRVINE). It also discusses limitations, including the absence of empirical evidence for the utility claim.

Significance. If the conceptual structure were sound, the HDMI Canvas would be a useful complement to existing VA process models, especially for communication with external stakeholders and for shifting attention from commonalities to differences among systems. The paper's strengths include its broad literature reflection, the clear visual metaphor of six directed flows, and the inclusion of modern human-centered concerns such as knowledge externalization, feedback loops, and explainable AI. The two case studies help illustrate how existing systems can be mapped onto the canvas. However, the central descriptive and generative claims rest on a semantic asymmetry in the EEE Framework and on illustrative rather than evaluative case studies, as the author explicitly acknowledges in Section 6.

major comments (4)
  1. [Section 3.2 / Figure 1] The EEE Framework's 'Data Exploration' arrow is not a contribution by data. 'Externalization of human knowledge' and 'Explanation of models' name the actor as the subject of the verb, but 'Data Exploration' names an activity performed on data; the bullet list under it (representation of patterns, detection of clusters, relation discovery, etc.) describes what analysts or models do to data, not what data contributes. The case studies confirm this reading: iPCA's data exploration steps (1) and (2) are user interactions with the visualization, and IRVINE's step (1) is engineers exploring data. As a result, the data-contribution arrow is satisfied by any VA system that supports exploration, so it cannot discriminate between a passive-repository view of data and an active-actor view, directly undercutting the paper's descriptive-power claim. Section 6's 'Data Actors?' discussion acknowledges the debate but does not reconcile it with the arrow's semantics. The paper should either redefine the arrow as a genuine data contribution (e.g., data affordances, query responses, data-driven constraints) or explicitly reframe it as a process contribution and accept the resulting asymmetry.
  2. [Abstract / Section 6] The abstract states that utility is 'demonstrated through two preliminary case studies,' but Section 6 says 'empirical data does not yet exist to back up the utility claim made.' These statements are in tension. The two case studies show that existing systems can be mapped onto the canvas, but they do not show that the canvas eases differentiation or guides design better than alternative taxonomies. Since descriptive and generative power are the paper's central claims, the paper should either weaken the wording to 'illustrated' and 'hypothesized' or add an evaluation protocol, such as independent analysts applying the canvas to a diverse set of systems and measuring agreement, coverage, and discriminative value.
  3. [Section 5.2] The IRVINE case study is drawn from the author's own prior system, which raises a mild self-reference concern. Because the canvas was developed after that system, the mapping may be post hoc and self-confirming. The paper should acknowledge this selection bias and ideally add at least one third-party system mapped by researchers not involved in the canvas design to strengthen the descriptive-power argument.
  4. [Section 4.3] The paper claims generative power for the canvas, but the only supporting evidence is retrospective mapping of existing systems; no prospective example is given of the canvas being used to design a new VA process or system. As a position paper, this may be acceptable if framed as a hypothesis, but the current phrasing in Section 4.3 and the Conclusions overstates what has been shown.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Section 5.2] There is a typo in 'dynamic paramete fine-tuning'; it should read 'dynamic parameter fine-tuning.'
  2. [Section 4.3] The term 'Supertool' is used to describe a fully integrated VA system, but it is not defined before its first use; a brief definition or reference would help readers.
  3. [Section 6] In the 'What is Knowledge?' discussion, the relationship between the 'knowledge and preferences as a tandem' statement and the human-benefit bullet 'Insight, evidence, and knowledge generation' could be clarified, since the canvas elsewhere seems to treat knowledge generation as a human benefit.
  4. [Section 3.2] The EEE acronym is memorable, but the phrase 'Exploration of data' should be reworded or qualified to make clear whether the contribution is made by data, by the VA process, or by human and model actors acting on data; this wording issue is related to the major semantic concern above.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circular derivation: the HDMI Canvas is an explicitly preliminary taxonomy with no fitted parameters or prediction loop.

full rationale

This is a position paper, not a derivation: it proposes a conceptual canvas for characterizing VA systems. There are no equations, no fitted parameters, no statistical predictions, and no empirical outcome whose value is determined by construction. The EEE framework and the six canvas flows are definitions assembled from existing literature and observations, not results derived from those definitions. The two case studies (iPCA and IRVINE) are presented as qualitative illustrations of how the canvas can be applied, and the paper explicitly disclaims validation: 'empirical data does not yet exist to back up the utility claim made' (Section 6). The IRVINE example is the author's own prior design study, so the demonstration has a mildly self-referential character, but it is not load-bearing in the sense of a circular proof: the canvas's structure is not justified solely by that citation, and the paper does not present the case studies as statistical evidence. The 'Data Actors?' discussion (Section 6) even flags an unresolved semantic tension around treating data as an actor, which is an internal-consistency concern rather than a circularity. No step in the paper reduces its central claim to its own inputs, so the circularity score is 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 3 assumptions · 1 invented entities

The canvas contributes structure, not numbers, so there are no free parameters. Its load-bearing assumptions are conceptual: the triadic actor model, the benefit and contribution split, and the completeness of the six building-block lists. The only invented entity is the active role assigned to data, which the paper itself flags as contested.

assumptions (3)
  • domain assumption VA processes can be modeled as interactions among three actors: humans, data, and models.
    The entire canvas rests on this triadic actor model, stated in Section 3; it is a plausible but unproven simplification of real VA practice.
  • ad hoc to paper Each actor's engagement can be separated into benefits from and contributions to the process, and these can be captured by the six flow categories.
    This is the paper's own organizing choice, introduced in Sections 3 and 4.2, not derived from prior frameworks.
  • domain assumption The enumerated building-block lists are comprehensive enough to describe any VA system and discriminative enough to differentiate systems.
    The descriptive and generative power claims in Section 4.3 assume list completeness; no systematic coverage analysis is provided.
invented entities (1)
  • Data as an active actor
    purpose: To justify treating data as something that contributes to and benefits from VA processes, alongside humans and models.
    The paper anthropomorphizes data as a contributor and beneficiary in Sections 3 and 4, but Section 6 ('Data Actors?') acknowledges the role is debated and unresolved.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of The Human-Data-Model Interaction Canvas for Visual Analytics." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/FTRHOFSZ

@misc{pith2026250507534,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: The Human-Data-Model Interaction Canvas for Visual Analytics},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/FTRHOFSZ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.07534}
}
read the original abstract

Visual Analytics (VA) integrates humans, data, and models as key actors in insight generation and data-driven decision-making. This position paper values and reflects on 16 VA process models and frameworks and makes nine high-level observations that motivate a fresh perspective on VA. The contribution is the HDMI Canvas, a perspective to VA that complements the strengths of existing VA process models and frameworks. It systematically characterizes diverse roles of humans, data, and models, and how these actors benefit from and contribute to VA processes. The descriptive power of the HDMI Canvas eases the differentiation between a series of VA building blocks, rather than describing general VA principles only. The canvas includes modern human-centered methodologies, including human knowledge externalization and forms of feedback loops, while interpretable and explainable AI highlight model contributions beyond their conventional outputs. The HDMI Canvas has generative power, guiding the design of new VA processes and is optimized for external stakeholders, improving VA outreach, interdisciplinary collaboration, and user-centered design. The utility of the HDMI Canvas is demonstrated through two preliminary case studies.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2505.07534 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. The HDMI Canvas defines six lists of key VA building blocks that describe how humans, data, and models contribute to the VA process and benefit from the process. The canvas supports the characterization of existing approaches and the design of novel VA solutions. Abstract Visual Analytics (VA) integrates humans, data, and models as key actors in insight generation and data-driven decision-making. This position paper… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. The iPCA [JZF∗ 09] white box approach leverages five out of six key information flows to enable performing both ex￾ploratory data analysis and model analysis (PCA). 4.3. HDMI Canvas Usage with External Stakeholders The HDMI Canvas supports communication with external stake￾holders by making VA building blocks and interaction flows ac￾cessible to audiences unfamiliar with VA terminology. Many terms used in the canvas… view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

65 extracted references · 60 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    write newline

    " write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION fin.entry add.period write newline FUNCTION new.block output.state before.all = 'skip after.block 'output.state := if FUNCTION new.sentence output.state after.block = 'skip output.state before.all = 'skip after.sentence 'output.state := if if FUNCTION not #0 #1 if FUNCTION and 'skip pop #0 if FUNCTIO...

  2. [2]

    write newline

    " write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION fin.entry.original add.period write newline FUNCTION new.block output.state before.all = 'skip after.block 'output.state := if FUNCTION new.sentence output.state after.block = 'skip output.state before.all = 'skip after.sentence 'output.state := if if FUNCTION not #0 #1 if FUNCTION and 'skip pop #0 i...

  3. [3]

    B., Kulesza T

    Amershi S., Cakmak M., Knox W. B., Kulesza T. : Power to the people: The role of humans in interactive machine learning. AI Magazine 35, 4 (2014), 105--120

    work page 2014

  4. [4]

    E., Guinn C

    Allen J. E., Guinn C. I., Horvtz E. : Mixed-initiative interaction. IEEE Intelligent Systems and their Applications 14, 5 (1999), 14--23

    work page 1999

  5. [5]

    : User-based visual-interactive similarity definition for mixed data objects-concept and first implementation

    Bernard J., Sessler D., Ruppert T., Davey J., Kuijper A., Kohlhammer J. : User-based visual-interactive similarity definition for mixed data objects-concept and first implementation. In Proceedings of WSCG (2014), vol. 22, Eurographics, Vaclav Skala - Union Agency, pp. 329--338

    work page 2014

  6. [6]

    : Towards user-centered active learning algorithms

    Bernard J., Zeppelzauer M., Lehmann M., M\" u ller M., Sedlmair M. : Towards user-centered active learning algorithms. Computer Graphics Forum (CGF) (2018), 121--132

    work page 2018

  7. [7]

    : A Unified Process for Visual-Interactive Labeling

    Bernard J., Zeppelzauer M., Sedlmair M., Aigner W. : A Unified Process for Visual-Interactive Labeling . In EuroVis Wkshp. Visual Analytics (EuroVA) (2017), Eurographics

    work page 2017

  8. [8]

    : VIAL: a unified process for visual interactive labeling

    Bernard J., Zeppelzauer M., Sedlmair M., Aigner W. : VIAL: a unified process for visual interactive labeling. Vis. Comput. 34, 9 (2018), 1189--1207

    work page 2018

Show all 65 references
  1. [9]

    : CRISP-DM 1.0: Step-by-step Data Mining Guide

    Chapman P., Clinton J., Kerber R., Khabaza T., Reinartz T., Shearer C., Wirth R. : CRISP-DM 1.0: Step-by-step Data Mining Guide. Tech. rep., CRISP-DM Consortium, 1999

    1999

  2. [10]

    : Characterizing guidance in visual analytics

    Ceneda D., Gschwandtner T., May T., Miksch S., Schulz H.-J., Streit M., Tominski C. : Characterizing guidance in visual analytics. IEEE transactions on visualization and computer graphics 23, 1 (2016), 111--120

    2016

  3. [11]

    M., Jusufi I., Kucher K., Rossi F., Kerren A

    Chatzimparmpas A., Martins R. M., Jusufi I., Kucher K., Rossi F., Kerren A. : The state of the art in enhancing trust in machine learning models with the use of visualizations. Computer Graphics Forum (CGF) 39, 3 (2020), 713--756

    2020

  4. [12]

    K., Mackinlay J

    Card S. K., Mackinlay J. D., Shneiderman B. : Readings in information visualization - using vision to think. Academic Press, 1999

    1999

  5. [13]

    F., Schraagen J

    Chipman S. F., Schraagen J. M., Shalin V. L. : Introduction to cognitive task analysis. In Cognitive task analysis. Psychology Press, 2000, pp. 17--38

    2000

  6. [14]

    A., Thomas J

    Cook K. A., Thomas J. J. : Illuminating the path: The research and development agenda for visual analytics. Tech. rep., Pacific Northwest National Lab.(PNNL), Richland, WA (United States), 2005

    2005

  7. [15]

    D'ignazio C., Klein L. F. : Data feminism. MIT press, 2023

    2023

  8. [16]

    : IRVINE: A design study on analyzing correlation patterns of electrical engines

    Eirich J., Bonart J., J \" a ckle D., Sedlmair M., Schmid U., Fischbach K., Schreck T., Bernard J. : IRVINE: A design study on analyzing correlation patterns of electrical engines. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics (TVCG) 28, 1 (2022), 11--21

    2022

  9. [17]

    : Semantic interaction for sensemaking: Inferring analytical reasoning for model steering

    Endert A., Fiaux P., North C. : Semantic interaction for sensemaking: Inferring analytical reasoning for model steering. IEEE Trans. Visualization & Computer Graphics (TVCG) 18, 12 (2012), 2879--2888

    2012

  10. [18]

    : Semantic interaction for visual text analytics

    Endert A., Fiaux P., North C. : Semantic interaction for visual text analytics. In ACM Conf. Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI) (2012), ACM , pp. 473--482

    2012

  11. [19]

    S., Ramakrishnan N., North C., Fiaux P., Andrews C

    Endert A., Hossain M. S., Ramakrishnan N., North C., Fiaux P., Andrews C. : The human is the loop: new directions for visual analytics. J. Intell. Inf. Syst. 43, 3 (2014), 411--435

    2014

  12. [20]

    Endert A., Ribarsky W., Turkay C., Wong B. L. W., Nabney I. T., Blanco I. D., Rossi F. : The state of the art in integrating machine learning into visual analytics. Computer Graphics Forum (CGF) 36, 8 (2017), 458--486

    2017

  13. [21]

    : Evaluating human-ai collaboration: A review and methodological framework

    Fragiadakis G., Diou C., Kousiouris G., Nikolaidou M. : Evaluating human-ai collaboration: A review and methodological framework. CoRR abs/2407.19098 (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  14. [22]

    A., Olsen Jr D

    Fails J. A., Olsen Jr D. R. : Interactive machine learning. In International Conference on Intelligent user interfaces (2003), pp. 39--45

    2003

  15. [23]

    : From data mining to knowledge discovery in databases

    Fayyad U., Piatetsky-Shapiro G., Smyth P. : From data mining to knowledge discovery in databases. AI magazine 17, 3 (1996), 37--37

    1996

  16. [24]

    : The role of explicit knowledge: A conceptual model of knowledge-assisted visual analytics

    Federico P., Wagner M., Rind A., Amor - Amoros A., Miksch S., Aigner W. : The role of explicit knowledge: A conceptual model of knowledge-assisted visual analytics. In IEEE Conf. Visual Analytics Science & Technology (VAST) (2017), IEEE Computer Society, pp. 92--103

    2017

  17. [25]

    : Swot analysis: A theoretical review

    Gürel E., Tat M. : Swot analysis: A theoretical review. Journal of International Social Research 10, 51 (2017), 994--1006

    2017

  18. [26]

    : Deconstructing human-ai collaboration: Agency, interaction, and adaptation

    Holter S., El - Assady M. : Deconstructing human-ai collaboration: Agency, interaction, and adaptation. Computer Graphics Forum (CGF) 43, 3 (2024)

    2024

  19. [27]

    : Interactive Scalable Interfaces for Machine Learning Interpretability

    Hohman F. : Interactive Scalable Interfaces for Machine Learning Interpretability. PhD thesis, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA, USA , 2021

    2021

  20. [28]

    : Principles of mixed-initiative user interfaces

    Horvitz E. : Principles of mixed-initiative user interfaces. In ACM Conf. Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI) (1999), Williams M. G., Altom M. W., (Eds.), ACM , pp. 159--166

    1999

  21. [29]

    H., Ziemkiewicz C., Fisher B

    Jeong D. H., Ziemkiewicz C., Fisher B. D., Ribarsky W., Chang R. : ipca: An interactive system for pca-based visual analytics. Computer Graphics Forum (CGF) 28, 3 (2009), 767--774

    2009

  22. [30]

    : Visual Analytics: Definition, Process, and Challenges

    Keim D., Andrienko G., Fekete J.-D., G \"o rg C., Kohlhammer J., Melan c on G. : Visual Analytics: Definition, Process, and Challenges. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2008, pp. 154--175

    2008

  23. [31]

    A., Calderwood R., Macgregor D

    Klein G. A., Calderwood R., Macgregor D. : Critical decision method for eliciting knowledge. IEEE Transactions on systems, man, and cybernetics 19, 3 (1989), 462--472

    1989

  24. [32]

    : The data revolution: Big data, open data, data infrastructures and their consequences

    Kitchin R. : The data revolution: Big data, open data, data infrastructures and their consequences. Sage, 2014

    2014

  25. [33]

    K., Hauser H

    Kehrer J., Ladst \" a dter F., Muigg P., Doleisch H., Steiner A. K., Hauser H. : Hypothesis generation in climate research with interactive visual data exploration. IEEE Trans. Visualization & Computer Graphics (TVCG) 14, 6 (2008), 1579--1586

    2008

  26. [34]

    KOH D. S. M., TEE H. G., SOH B. K., TAN A. L. S. : Tools for facilitating critical decision method during tacit knowledge elicitation. In International Conference on Naturalistic Decision Making (2015)

    2015

  27. [35]

    : Data hunches: Incorporating personal knowledge into visualizations

    Lin H., Akbaba D., Meyer M., Lex A. : Data hunches: Incorporating personal knowledge into visualizations. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 29, 1 (2022), 504--514

    2022

  28. [36]

    : Data humanism: the revolutionary future of data visualization

    Lupi G. : Data humanism: the revolutionary future of data visualization. Print Magazine 30, 3 (2017)

    2017

  29. [37]

    : Information seeking in electronic environments

    Marchionini G. : Information seeking in electronic environments. No. 9. Cambridge university press, 1995

    1995

  30. [38]

    : Criteria for rigor in visualization design study

    Meyer M., Dykes J. : Criteria for rigor in visualization design study. IEEE Trans. Visualization & Computer Graphics (TVCG) 26, 1 (2020), 87--97

    2020

  31. [39]

    G., Hutton R

    Militello L. G., Hutton R. J. : Applied cognitive task analysis (acta): a practitioner's toolkit for understanding cognitive task demands. Ergonomics 41, 11 (1998), 1618--1641

    1998

  32. [40]

    : Human-data interaction: The human face of the data-driven society

    Mortier R., Haddadi H., Henderson T., McAuley D., Crowcroft J. : Human-data interaction: The human face of the data-driven society. CoRR abs/1412.6159 (2014)

    2014 arXiv

  33. [41]

    : A nested process model for visualization design and validation

    Munzner T. : A nested process model for visualization design and validation. IEEE Trans. Visualization & Computer Graphics (TVCG) 15, 6 (2009), 921--928

    2009

  34. [42]

    : The knowledge-creating company: How japanese companies create the dynamics of innovation

    Nonaka I., Takeuchi H. : The knowledge-creating company: How japanese companies create the dynamics of innovation. Oxford University Press, New York, 1995

    1995

  35. [43]

    : Data-first visualization design studies

    Oppermann M., Munzner T. : Data-first visualization design studies. In IEEE Workshop on Evaluation and Beyond - Methodological Approaches to Visualization ( BELIV ) (2020), Bezerianos A., Hall K. W., Huron S., Kay M., Meyer M., Sedlmair M., (Eds.), IEEE , pp. 74--80

    2020

  36. [44]

    : Business Model Generation: A Handbook for Visionaries, Game Changers, and Challengers

    Osterwalder A., Pigneur Y. : Business Model Generation: A Handbook for Visionaries, Game Changers, and Challengers. John Wiley & Sons, 2010

    2010

  37. [45]

    : Value Proposition Design: How to Create Products and Services Customers Want

    Osterwalder A., Pigneur Y., Bernarda G., Smith A. : Value Proposition Design: How to Create Products and Services Customers Want. John Wiley & Sons, 2014

    2014

  38. [46]

    : The sensemaking process and leverage points for analyst technology as identified through cognitive task analysis

    Pirolli P., Card S. : The sensemaking process and leverage points for analyst technology as identified through cognitive task analysis. In Proceedings of international conference on intelligence analysis (2005), vol. 5, McLean, VA, USA, pp. 2--4

    2005

  39. [47]

    : Visualization and automation in data science: Exploring the paradox of humans-in-the-loop

    Rogers J., Anastacio M., Bernard J., Chakhchoukh M., Faust R., Kerren A., Koch S., Kotthoff L., Turkay C., Wall E. : Visualization and automation in data science: Exploring the paradox of humans-in-the-loop. In IEEE Visualization in Data Science (VDS) (2024), IEEE , pp. 1--5

    2024

  40. [48]

    L., Blasilli G., Bourqui R., Auber D., Santucci G., Capobianco R., Bertini E., Giot R., Angelini M

    Rosa B. L., Blasilli G., Bourqui R., Auber D., Santucci G., Capobianco R., Bertini E., Giot R., Angelini M. : State of the art of visual analytics for explainable deep learning. Computer Graphics Forum (CGF) 42, 1 (2023), 319--355

    2023

  41. [49]

    Riedl M. O. : Human-centered artificial intelligence and machine learning. Human Behavior and Emerging Technologies 1, 1 (2019), 33--36

    2019

  42. [50]

    Rezwana J., Maher M. L. : Designing creative AI partners with COFI: A framework for modeling interaction in human-ai co-creative systems. ACM Trans. Comput. Hum. Interact. 30 , 5 (2023), 67:1--67:28

    2023

  43. [51]

    : Interactive machine teaching: a human-centered approach to building machine-learned models

    Ramos G., Meek C., Simard P., Suh J., Ghorashi S. : Interactive machine teaching: a human-centered approach to building machine-learned models. Human--Computer Interaction 35, 5-6 (2020), 413--451

    2020

  44. [52]

    : Artificial intelligence and the problem of control

    Russell S. : Artificial intelligence and the problem of control. In Perspectives on Digital Humanism. 2022, pp. 19--24

    2022

  45. [53]

    : The eyes have it: A task by data type taxonomy for information visualizations

    Shneiderman B. : The eyes have it: A task by data type taxonomy for information visualizations. In IEEE Symposium on Visual Languages (1996), IEEE Computer Society, pp. 336--343

    1996

  46. [54]

    : Tutorial: Human-centered AI: reliable, safe and trustworthy

    Shneiderman B. : Tutorial: Human-centered AI: reliable, safe and trustworthy. In International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces (2021), Hammond T., Verbert K., Parra D., (Eds.), ACM , pp. 7--8

    2021

  47. [55]

    : Human-centered AI: ensuring human control while increasing automation

    Shneiderman B. : Human-centered AI: ensuring human control while increasing automation. In Workshop on Human Factors in Hypertext (HUMAN (2022), ACM , pp. 1:1--1:2

    2022

  48. [56]

    : Co-adaptive visual data analysis and guidance processes

    Sperrle F., Jeitler A., Bernard J., Keim D., El-Assady M. : Co-adaptive visual data analysis and guidance processes. Computers & Graphics (2021)

    2021

  49. [57]

    A., Chen M

    Sacha D., Kraus M., Keim D. A., Chen M. : VIS4ML: an ontology for visual analytics assisted machine learning. IEEE Trans. Visualization & Computer Graphics (TVCG) 25, 1 (2019), 385--395

    2019

  50. [58]

    D., Munzner T

    Sedlmair M., Meyer M. D., Munzner T. : Design study methodology: Reflections from the trenches and the stacks. IEEE Trans. Visualization & Computer Graphics (TVCG) 18, 12 (2012), 2431--2440

    2012

  51. [59]

    C., Ellis G., Keim D

    Sacha D., Stoffel A., Stoffel F., Kwon B. C., Ellis G., Keim D. A. : Knowledge generation model for visual analytics. IEEE Trans. Visualization & Computer Graphics (TVCG) 20, 12 (2014), 1604--1613

    2014

  52. [60]

    : explainer: A visual analytics framework for interactive and explainable machine learning

    Spinner T., Schlegel U., Sch \" a fer H., El - Assady M. : explainer: A visual analytics framework for interactive and explainable machine learning. IEEE Trans. Visualization & Computer Graphics (TVCG) 26, 1 (2020), 1064--1074

    2020

  53. [61]

    A., Weiskopf D., North S

    Sacha D., Sedlmair M., Zhang L., Lee J. A., Weiskopf D., North S. C., Keim D. A. : Human-centered machine learning through interactive visualization: review and open challenges. In European Symposium on Artificial Neural Networks6 (2016)

    2016

  54. [62]

    A., Peltonen J., Weiskopf D., North S

    Sacha D., Sedlmair M., Zhang L., Lee J. A., Peltonen J., Weiskopf D., North S. C., Keim D. A. : What you see is what you can change: Human-centered machine learning by interactive visualization. Neurocomputing 268 (2017), 164--175

    2017

  55. [63]

    A., Buche C., Visser U

    Wondimu N. A., Buche C., Visser U. : Interactive machine learning: A state of the art review. CoRR abs/2207.06196 (2022)

    2022 arXiv

  56. [64]

    : Crisp-dm: Towards a standard process model for data mining

    Wirth R., Hipp J. : Crisp-dm: Towards a standard process model for data mining. In Proceedings of the 4th international conference on the practical applications of knowledge discovery and data mining (2000), vol. 1, Manchester, pp. 29--39

    2000

  57. [65]

    H., Dou W., Lee S., Ribarsky W., Chang R

    Wang X., Jeong D. H., Dou W., Lee S., Ribarsky W., Chang R. : Defining and applying knowledge conversion processes to a visual analytics system. Comput. Graph. 33, 5 (2009), 616--623

    2009

Pith tools

Reviewed August 15, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.