Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 67 references

Origin-Destination Flow Maps in Immersive Environments

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-14 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper claims that in immersive VR, global origin-destination flows are read most accurately and quickly on a 3D globe with raised flow tubes whose height encodes distance, while regional data are best on a flat map with the same…

desk verdict A solid three-study evaluation of OD flow maps in VR with a consistent globe advantage, but the headline recommendation is built on one narrow task and unmatched visual parameters, so treat the design guidance as provisional. read the letter →

arxiv 1908.02089 v1 pith:CP6TXN43 submitted 2019-08-06 cs.HC cs.GRcs.MM

Yalong Yang , Tim Dwyer , Bernhard Jenny , Kim Marriott , Maxime Cordeil , Haohui Chen This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.HCcs.GRcs.MM
keywords origin-destinationflowmapsvirtualrealityimmersiveanalytics3Dglobemapdesignspaceheightencodingcartographicvisualizationuserstudy
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 paper asks how to draw origin-destination flow maps when the display is no longer a flat screen, as in virtual-reality headsets. Across three controlled user studies with up to 300 flows, it finds that a 3D globe with curved flow tubes whose height is proportional to the distance between origin and destination is the fastest, most accurate, and most preferred visualisation for global flow data. For flows within a region shown on a flat map, raised 3D tubes with distance-proportional height are significantly more accurate than traditional straight 2D lines, although not as fast. The general message is that the third dimension can declutter flow maps when height carries a meaningful spatial attribute, and that the usual blanket caution against 3D for abstract data does not hold in immersive environments.

What carries the argument

The central object is the flow tube: a cubic Bézier curve $B(t)=(1-t)^3P_0+3(1-t)^2tP_1+3(1-t)t^2P_2+t^3P_3$ connecting origin $P_0$ to destination $P_3$, with control points $P_1,P_2$ raised so the curve peaks at its midpoint. On flat maps the control-point height is set to $h_c=\frac{4}{3}h$ so the midpoint reaches height $h$; on the globe the tube follows a great-circle route and its height above the surface encodes the great-circle distance. This distance-proportional height is the design choice that carries the argument: it separates crossing flows vertically, and because the viewer can move their head or rotate the object in VR, an oblique view untangles what would otherwise overlap on a flat drawing. The paper also uses geo-rotation, an interaction that recentres the map by dragging, as an additional decluttering mechanism.

What would settle it

Run the same three visualisations (2D straight, 3D distance on a flat map, and the 3D globe) in VR with tasks that are not magnitude comparison—for example, trace one labelled flow from origin to destination, estimate the direction of a flow, or name the destination region receiving the most flow—at 200 and 300 flows. If a flat-map condition matches or beats the globe in accuracy or speed on any of these tasks, the paper's generalised design recommendation would not hold.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On its own terms, the paper's central claim is that in an immersive VR display the best way to show global origin-destination flows is an exocentric 3D globe with curved tubes raised above the surface, where tube height is proportional to the great-circle distance between origin and destination. In Study 2 this globe achieved 0.99 accuracy and was faster than the flat-map alternatives, and in Study 3 it remained significantly more accurate and faster than both flat-map conditions at 200 and 300 flows. For regional flow data, the paper concludes that a flat map with distance-proportional raised 3D flows is the most accurate representation, and that adding an interactive geo-rotation to a traditional 2D straight-line map improves its accuracy but does not make it the best choice. The paper also reports that a linked pair of flat maps, MapsLink, was by far the slowest condition and is not recommended for this task.

Load-bearing premise

All three studies use a single task—find two labelled flows and decide which has the greater magnitude—so the design recommendation assumes this task is representative of the wider range of flow-map tasks, such as tracing a specific route, judging direction, or grasping aggregate movement patterns.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • For global origin-destination data in immersive displays, use a 3D exocentric globe with flow tubes whose height is proportional to flow distance; this is the paper's recommended design.
  • For regional flow data, use a flat map with distance-proportional raised 3D tubes: more accurate than straight 2D lines, with a modest speed penalty.
  • Height encoding matters: constant-height and quantity-proportional-height tubes were less accurate and slower than distance-proportional height.
  • Geo-rotation measurably improves the accuracy of flat 2D straight-line maps, narrowing but not closing the gap with 3D representations.
  • The linked two-map design MapsLink is not viable for this task: participants spent most of their time repositioning the maps and were far slower.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the goal includes tasks other than comparing two labelled flows—tracing a single flow, estimating direction, or reading aggregate patterns—the globe's advantage might shrink or reverse; that is an open question the paper did not test.
  • The same distance-proportional height encoding could be combined with filtering or edge bundling to scale beyond 300 flows, a direction the paper does not explore.
  • Although the studies used VR headsets, the authors expect the results to transfer to AR as head-mounted displays improve; this transfer is an extrapolation, not a tested result.
  • The globe's success on flows more than 120 degrees apart hints that the benefit is not merely about avoiding projection distortion; exploring internal versus external viewpoints could clarify the mechanism.
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

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper investigates how origin-destination (OD) flow maps should be presented in immersive virtual reality. It charts a design space with two orthogonal components (representation of flow and representation of geographic reference space), then reports three within-subjects user studies. Study 1 compares five flow encodings on a flat map: 2D straight, 2D curved, and 3D tubes with constant height, height proportional to quantity, and height proportional to distance. Studies 2 and 3 compare a flat map with 2D straight flows, a flat map with distance-proportional 3D flows, a 3D globe with distance-proportional raised tubes, and (in Study 2 only) a linked-pair design called MapsLink. The main findings are that distance-proportional raised 3D flows improve accuracy on flat maps, that the 3D globe is the fastest, most accurate, and most preferred representation for global OD data, and that MapsLink is markedly slower. The conclusion recommends globes for global flow data and flat maps with distance-proportional raised flows for regional data, and notes that geo-rotation can improve 2D straight-line maps.

Significance. If the findings hold, this is the first systematic evaluation of OD flow maps in immersive environments and provides practical guidance for immersive analytics, particularly by showing that a 3D globe can outperform flat maps for certain flow tasks. The paper's strengths include three carefully structured within-subjects studies, appropriate nonparametric and mixed-effects statistical analyses, and openly available experimental materials. However, the central design recommendation rests on a single task type, and several visual parameters differ across compared conditions, so the evidence is weaker than the paper's unqualified conclusions suggest. These concerns are addressable through additional experiments or by explicitly narrowing the scope of the claims.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section 7 and Section 4.2] The headline recommendation that a 3D globe with distance-proportional raised flows is 'the most accurate and preferred representation' for global OD flow data is supported by only one task type. Section 4.2 defines the task as finding two labelled flows and comparing their magnitudes, and this same task is reused unchanged in Studies 2 and 3. Because leader lines identify the endpoints and direction is not part of the task, these studies cannot distinguish whether the globe is better for the general class of OD-flow reading tasks or only for this specific magnitude-comparison operation. Tasks such as tracing a flow through clutter, reading direction, or estimating aggregate regional outflow are not tested, so the Sec. 7 'Further work' sentence acknowledging additional tasks does not license the unqualified abstract and conclusion claims. I recommend either testing at least one additional task or explicitly narrowing the recommendation to magnitude comparison.
  2. [Section 5.2 (and Section 6)] The key comparisons between globe and flat-map conditions are confounded by unmatched physical parameters. Flat-map line thickness is 2–16 mm, while globe and MapsLink tubes are 0.1–0.8 cm (1–8 mm); the globe has radius 0.4 m and is initially 1 m from the eye, whereas the flat map is 1 m × 0.5 m at 0.55 m from the eye, and MapsLink uses smaller maps offset by 0.8 m. These differences in stroke thickness, size, and viewing distance affect occlusion, apparent clutter, and stereo depth, so the observed advantages of the globe (accuracy, time, preference) are not attributable solely to the spatial encoding. The paper should either match these parameters across conditions or analyze and justify why they are inconsequential.
  3. [Section 7] The conclusion that 'for regional flow data the best view would be a flat map with distance-proportional raised 3D flows' is an extrapolation from Study 1, which used a global migration dataset on a world map with the Hammer projection, not a regional dataset. No regional or local-scale data appear in any study. If a regional claim is to be part of the central contribution, it needs direct evidence; otherwise it should be explicitly flagged as an unverified extension.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Throughout] The spelling of the linked-map condition is inconsistent: 'MapsLink' appears in most places but 'MapLink' appears in Sections 3 and 7. Please standardize.
  2. [Section 6] The participant description says '2 participant was between 30–40'; this should be '2 participants were between 30 and 40'.
  3. [Figure 3] The caption lists panel labels (a1, b1, c1, d1) that do not appear to match the described subfigures; please correct the caption or panel labels.
  4. [Section 4] The use of a red-green colour gradient for direction encoding may be problematic for users with colour-vision deficiency; since the studies do not test for or discuss this, please at least acknowledge the limitation.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: empirical user-study results are measured, not derived from inputs or self-citations.

full rationale

This paper is an empirical evaluation, not a derivation. Its central claims—that a 3D globe with distance-proportional raised flows is fastest, most accurate, and most preferred for global OD flow data, and that a flat map with distance-proportional 3D flows is best for regional data—are supported by three controlled within-subjects VR studies measuring accuracy, response time, preference, and confidence. No equation in the paper is defined in terms of the result it is supposed to support, and no fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction. The only self-referential element is citation [65] (Yang et al., Maps and Globes in Virtual Reality), which motivates including the 3D globe condition and the geo-rotation interaction, and which also provides a prior result that globes can outperform flat maps in VR. However, the present globe advantage in Studies 2 and 3 is explicitly described as unexpected and is measured independently of [65]; the prior work is used as a post-hoc explanation rather than as the evidence for the current findings. Similarly, the design space is derived from Dübel et al. [17] and the flow-map literature, not from the study outcomes. The acknowledged reliance on a single task (comparing the magnitude of two labelled flows) is a generalizability limitation, and the paper itself notes in Sec. 7 that further work should include additional tasks; this is a scope caveat, not a circular dependency. No step in the paper reduces by construction to its own inputs, and no load-bearing conclusion is forced by self-citation. Therefore the appropriate circularity score is 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claims rest on the experimental setup and task choice, not on mathematical derivation. The listed free parameters are design choices that could affect the relative performance; the axioms are domain assumptions about the representativeness of the task, projection, and hardware.

free parameters (4)
  • Height range for 3D quantity and 3D distance encodings = 5cm to 25cm
    Chosen in pilot studies (Sec. 4.1); the effectiveness of height encoding likely depends on this range.
  • Constant height for 3D constant condition = 15cm
    Set by experimenters (Sec. 4.1); a different height would change overlap and readability.
  • Thickness and diameter ranges = 2-16mm flat; 0.1-0.8cm globe and MapsLink
    Encoding of flow quantity; the mismatch across conditions is a potential confound (Sec. 5.2).
  • Globe radius and viewing distances = 0.4m radius at 1m; flat map 1x0.5m at 0.55m
    Physical setup chosen for the study (Sec. 5.2); affects visual angle and perceived clutter.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Hammer equal-area projection is an appropriate flat map baseline for global flow comparison.
    Used in all flat map conditions (Sec. 4.1) but never validated against other projections; if it distorts distances in a way that disadvantages flat maps, the globe advantage could be partly an artifact of projection choice.
  • domain assumption The single magnitude-comparison task is representative of OD flow map readability.
    All three studies use only the 'which is greater' task (Sec. 4.2); conclusions about preferable visualizations are drawn for OD flow maps generally in Sec. 7 without evidence for other tasks.
  • domain assumption Results from HTC Vive VR generalize to other HMDs and future AR headsets.
    Stated in Sec. 7; the paper does not test other displays and acknowledges AR should be tested.
  • ad hoc to paper Unmatched physical parameters (tube thickness, globe radius, viewing distances) do not confound the comparisons.
    Sec. 5.2 sets globe and MapsLink tube thickness to 0.1-0.8cm while flat map conditions use 2-16mm, and the globe is at 1m distance with 0.4m radius vs map at 0.55m; the paper does not test or discuss whether these differences affect performance.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Origin-Destination Flow Maps in Immersive Environments." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/CP6TXN43

@misc{pith2026190802089,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Origin-Destination Flow Maps in Immersive Environments},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/CP6TXN43}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1908.02089}
}
read the original abstract

Immersive virtual- and augmented-reality headsets can overlay a flat image against any surface or hang virtual objects in the space around the user. The technology is rapidly improving and may, in the long term, replace traditional flat panel displays in many situations. When displays are no longer intrinsically flat, how should we use the space around the user for abstract data visualisation? In this paper, we ask this question with respect to origin-destination flow data in a global geographic context. We report on the findings of three studies exploring different spatial encodings for flow maps. The first experiment focuses on different 2D and 3D encodings for flows on flat maps. We find that participants are significantly more accurate with raised flow paths whose height is proportional to flow distance but fastest with traditional straight line 2D flows. In our second and third experiment, we compared flat maps, 3D globes and a novel interactive design we call MapsLink, involving a pair of linked flat maps. We find that participants took significantly more time with MapsLink than other flow maps while the 3D globe with raised flows was the fastest, most accurate, and most preferred method. Our work suggests that careful use of the third spatial dimension can resolve visual clutter in complex flow maps.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1908.02089 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. 3D Globe (left) was the fastest and most accurate of our tested visualisations. Flat maps with curves of height proportional to [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p001_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Study 1: Tested 2D and 3D flow maps. has two orthogonal components: the representation of flow and the representation of geographic region. 3.1 Representation of Flow Flow on 2D OD flow maps is commonly shown by a straight line from origin to destination with line width encoding magnitude of flow and an arrowhead showing direction. However, as discussed above, with this encoding visual clutter and line crossings are… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. (a) Demonstration of different view angles, (b) view angle distribu [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (6 more)
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Study 1: Accuracy score and response time for different flow [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Study 2: (a) 3D globe flow map, (b, c, d) MapsLink: flow tubes [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Study 2: (a1, b1, c1, d1) Average performance with 95% confi [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Study 2: Interaction time percentage with 95% confidence interval [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_7.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Study 3: Participants preference ranking ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_11.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Study 3: (a1, b1, c1) Average performance with 95% confidence [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_9.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

67 extracted references · 66 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    G. J. Abel and N. Sander. Quantifying Global International Migration Flows. Science, 343(6178):1520–1522, 2014

    work page 2014

  2. [2]

    B. Bach, M. Cordeil, T. Dwyer, B. Lee, B. Saket, A. Endert, C. Collins, and S. Carpendale. Immersive analytics: Exploring future visualization and interaction technologies for data analytics

    work page

  3. [3]

    B. Bach, N. H. Riche, C. Hurter, K. Marriott, and T. Dwyer. Towards unambiguous edge bundling: Investigating confluent drawings for network visualization. IEEE transactions on visualization and computer graphics, 23(1):541–550, 2017

    work page 2017

  4. [4]

    Boyandin, E

    I. Boyandin, E. Bertini, P. Bak, and D. Lalanne. Flowstrates: An Approach for Visual Exploration of Temporal Origin-Destination Data. Computer Graphics Forum, 30(3):971–980, 2011

    work page 2011

  5. [5]

    Buchin, B

    K. Buchin, B. Speckmann, and K. Verbeek. Flow Map Layout via Spi- ral Trees. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, 17(12):2536–2544, 2011

    work page 2011

  6. [6]

    Buschmann, M

    S. Buschmann, M. Trapp, and J. D¨ollner. Challenges and approaches for the visualization of movement trajectories in 3d geovirtual environments. In Proc. GIScience Workshop on GeoVisual Analytics–Time to Focus on Time, vol. 11, 2012

    work page 2012

  7. [7]

    Butscher, S

    S. Butscher, S. Hubenschmid, J. M¨uller, J. Fuchs, and H. Reiterer. Clus- ters, trends, and outliers: How immersive technologies can facilitate the collaborative analysis of multidimensional data. In Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, CHI’18, pp. 90:1–12. ACM, 2018

    work page 2018

  8. [8]

    Chandler, M

    T. Chandler, M. Cordeil, T. Czauderna, T. Dwyer, J. Glowacki, C. Goncu, M. Klapperstueck, K. Klein, K. Marriott, F. Schreiber, and E. Wilson. Immersive analytics. In Proceedings of 2015 Big Data Visual Analytics (BDVA), pp. 1–8, 2015

    work page 2015

Show all 67 references
  1. [9]

    Final Report, V ol I, Survey Findings, 1959

    Chicago Area Transportation Study. Final Report, V ol I, Survey Findings, 1959

    1959

  2. [10]

    Collins and S

    C. Collins and S. Carpendale. VisLink: Revealing Relationships Amongst Visualizations. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graph- ics, 13(6):1192–1199, 2007

    2007

  3. [11]

    Cordeil, A

    M. Cordeil, A. Cunningham, T. Dwyer, B. H. Thomas, and K. Marriott. ImAxes: Immersive axes as embodied affordances for interactive multivari- ate data visualisation. In Proceedings of the 30th Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology, pp. 71–83. ACM, 2017

    2017

  4. [12]

    Cordeil, T

    M. Cordeil, T. Dwyer, K. Klein, B. Laha, K. Marriott, and B. H. Thomas. Immersive Collaborative Analysis of Network Connectivity: CA VE-style or Head-Mounted Display? IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, 23(1):441–450, 2016

    2016

  5. [13]

    K. C. Cox and S. G. Eick. Case study: 3D displays of Internet traffic. In Proceedings of Visualization 1995 Conference, pp. 129–131. IEEE, 1995

    1995

  6. [14]

    K. C. Cox, S. G. Eick, and T. He. 3D geographic network displays. ACM SIGMOD Record, 25(4):50–54, 1996

    1996

  7. [15]

    Debiasi, B

    A. Debiasi, B. Sim ˜oes, and R. De Amicis. Supervised force directed algorithm for the generation of flow maps. 2014

    2014

  8. [16]

    B. D. Dent, J. S. Torguson, and T. W. Hodler.Cartography: Tematic Map Design. Mc-Graw-Hill Higher Education, 2008

    2008

  9. [17]

    D¨ubel, M

    S. D¨ubel, M. R ¨ohlig, H. Schumann, and M. Trapp. 2D and 3D presen- tation of spatial data: A systematic review. In Proceedings of IEEE VIS International Workshop on 3DVis (3DVis), pp. 11–18. IEEE, 2014

    2014

  10. [18]

    Dwyer, N

    T. Dwyer, N. H. Riche, K. Klein, W. Stuerzlinger, and B. Thomas. Im- mersive Analytics (Dagstuhl Seminar 16231). Dagstuhl Reports, 6(6):1–9, 2016

    2016

  11. [19]

    S. G. Eick. Aspects of network visualization. IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications, 16:69–72, 1996

    1996

  12. [20]

    N. A. ElSayed, B. H. Thomas, K. Marriott, J. Piantadosi, and R. T. Smith. Situated analytics: Demonstrating immersive analytical tools with aug- mented reality. Journal of Visual Languages & Computing , 36:13–23, 2016

    2016

  13. [21]

    Feiner, B

    S. Feiner, B. Macintyre, and D. Seligmann. Knowledge-based augmented reality. Communications of the ACM, 36(7):53–62, 1993

    1993

  14. [22]

    Field, J

    A. Field, J. Miles, and Z. Field. Discovering statistics using R . Sage publications, 2012

    2012

  15. [23]

    Gilbert, A

    M. Gilbert, A. Mitchell, D. Bourn, J. Mawdsley, R. Clifton-Hadley, and W. Wint. Cattle movements and bovine tuberculosis in great britain. Nature, 435(7041):491, 2005

    2005

  16. [24]

    D. Guo. Visual analytics of spatial interaction patterns for pandemic decision support. International Journal of Geographical Information Science, 21(8):859–877, 2007

    2007

  17. [25]

    H¨agerstrand

    T. H¨agerstrand. What about people in regional science? In Papers of the Regional Science Association, vol. 24, pp. 6–21. Springer, 1970

    1970

  18. [26]

    Hollander and D

    M. Hollander and D. A. Wolfe. Nonparametric Statistical Methods. New York: Wiley-Interscience, 1999

    1999

  19. [27]

    Holten, P

    D. Holten, P. Isenberg, J. J. Van Wijk, and J.-D. Fekete. An extended eval- uation of the readability of tapered, animated, and textured directed-edge representations in node-link graphs. In 2011 IEEE Pacific Visualization Symposium (PacificVis), pp. 195–202. IEEE, 2011

    2011

  20. [28]

    Holten and J

    D. Holten and J. J. van Wijk. A user study on visualizing directed edges in graphs. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI), pp. 2299–2308. ACM, 2009

    2009

  21. [29]

    Hothorn, K

    T. Hothorn, K. Hornik, M. A. van de Wiel, and A. Zeileis. Implementing a Class of Permutation Tests: The coin Package. Journal of Statistical Software, 28(1):1–23, 2008

    2008

  22. [30]

    D. C. Howell. Statistical methods for psychology . Cengage Learning, 2012

    2012

  23. [31]

    W. Huang. Using eye tracking to investigate graph layout effects. In Proceedings of 2007 6th International Asia-Pacific Symposium on Visual- ization (APVIS’07), pp. 97–100. IEEE, 2007

    2007

  24. [32]

    Huang, P

    W. Huang, P. Eades, and S.-H. Hong. Larger crossing angles make graphs easier to read. Journal of Visual Languages & Computing, 25(4):452–465, 2014

    2014

  25. [33]

    Huang, T

    Y .-J. Huang, T. Fujiwara, Y .-X. Lin, W.-C. Lin, and K.-L. Ma. A gesture system for graph visualization in virtual reality environments. In Pro- ceedings of 2017 IEEE Pacific Visualization Symposium (PacificVis), pp. 41–45, 2017

    2017

  26. [34]

    T. Itoh, K. Marriott, F. Schreiber, and U. W¨ossner. Immersive Analytics: A new multidisciplinary initiative to explore future interaction technologies for data analytics. NII Shonan Meeting Report, (2016-2):1–9, 2016

    2016

  27. [35]

    Jenny, D

    B. Jenny, D. M. Stephen, I. Muehlenhaus, B. E. Marston, R. Sharma, E. Zhang, and H. Jenny. Force-directed layout of origin-destination flow maps. International Journal of Geographical Information Science, 31(8):1521–1540, 2017

    2017

  28. [36]

    Jenny, D

    B. Jenny, D. M. Stephen, I. Muehlenhaus, B. E. Marston, R. Sharma, E. Zhang, and H. Jenny. Design principles for origin-destination flow maps. Cartography and Geographic Information Science, 45(1):62–75, 2018

    2018

  29. [37]

    do-it-yourself

    N. Kadmon. Komplot “do-it-yourself” computer cartography. The Carto- graphic Journal, 8(2):139–144, 1971

    1971

  30. [38]

    E. Kaya, M. T. Eren, C. Doger, and S. Balcisoy. Do 3d visualizations fail? an empirical discussion on 2d and 3d representations of the spatio-temporal data. In Proceedings of EURASIA GRAPHICS, 2014

    2014

  31. [39]

    Kern and G

    R. Kern and G. Rushton. Mapit: A computer program for production of flow maps, dot maps and graduated symbol maps. The Cartographic Journal, 6(2):131–137, 1969

    1969

  32. [40]

    Koylu and D

    C. Koylu and D. Guo. Design and evaluation of line symbolizations for origin–destination flow maps. Information Visualization, 16(4):309–331, 2017

    2017

  33. [41]

    O.-H. Kwon, C. Muelder, K. Lee, and K.-L. Ma. A Study of Layout, Rendering, and Interaction Methods for Immersive Graph Visualization. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, 22(7):1802– 1815, 2016

    2016

  34. [42]

    T. Munzner. Visualization analysis and design. CRC Press, 2014

    2014

  35. [43]

    Munzner, E

    T. Munzner, E. Hoffman, K. Claffy, and B. Fenner. Visualizing the global topology of the MBone. In Proceedings IEEE Symposium on Information Visualization’96 (INFOVIS), pp. 85–92. IEEE, 1996

    1996

  36. [44]

    Nocaj and U

    A. Nocaj and U. Brandes. Stub Bundling and Confluent Spirals for Geo- graphic Networks. In Graph Drawing, pp. 388–399. Springer International Publishing, 2013

    2013

  37. [45]

    Paci and S

    R. Paci and S. Usai. Knowledge flows across European regions. The Annals of Regional Science, 43(3):669–690, 2009

    2009

  38. [46]

    D. Phan, L. Xiao, R. Yeh, and P. Hanrahan. Flow map layout. In Proceed- ings of IEEE Symposium on Information Visualization. INFOVIS 2005., pp. 219–224, 2005

    2005

  39. [47]

    H. C. Purchase, R. F. Cohen, and M. James. Validating graph drawing aesthetics. In International Symposium on Graph Drawing, pp. 435–446. Springer, 1995

    1995

  40. [48]

    A. Rae. From spatial interaction data to spatial interaction information? geovisualisation and spatial structures of migration from the 2001 UK census. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems , 33(3):161–178, 2009

    2001

  41. [49]

    N. H. Riche, T. Dwyer, B. Lee, and S. Carpendale. Exploring the design space of interactive link curvature in network diagrams. In Proceedings of the International Working Conference on Advanced Visual Interfaces, pp. 506–513. ACM, 2012

    2012

  42. [50]

    A. H. Robinson. The 1837 Maps of Henry Drury Harness. The Geograph- ical Journal, 121(4):440–450, 1955

    1955

  43. [51]

    A. H. Robinson. The Thematic Maps of Charles Joseph Minard. Imago Mundi, 21:95–108, 1967

    1967

  44. [52]

    Scheepens, N

    R. Scheepens, N. Willems, H. Van de Wetering, G. Andrienko, N. An- drienko, and J. J. Van Wijk. Composite density maps for multivariate trajectories. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, 17(12):2518–2527, 2011

    2011

  45. [53]

    D. M. Stephen and B. Jenny. Automated layout of origin–destination flow maps: US county-to-county migration 2009–2013. Journal of Maps, 13(1):46–55, 2017

    2009

  46. [54]

    S. Sun. A spatial one-to-many flow layout algorithm using triangula- tion, approximate Steiner trees, and path smoothing. Cartography and Geographic Information Science, 11(1):1–17, 2018

    2018

  47. [55]

    W. Tobler. Depicting Federal Fiscal Transfers. The Professional Geogra- pher, 33(4):419–422, 1981

    1981

  48. [56]

    W. R. Tobler. Experiments In Migration Mapping By Computer. Cartog- raphy and Geographic Information Science, 14(2):155–163, 1987

    1987

  49. [57]

    van den Elzen and J

    S. van den Elzen and J. J. van Wijk. Multivariate network exploration and presentation: From detail to overview via selections and aggregations. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, 20(12):2310– 2319, 2014

    2014

  50. [58]

    Vrotsou, G

    K. Vrotsou, G. Fuchs, N. Andrienko, and G. Andrienko. An Interactive Approach for Exploration of Flows Through Direction-Based Filtering. Journal of Geovisualization and Spatial Analysis, 1(1-2):205, 2017

    2017

  51. [59]

    Ware and P

    C. Ware and P. Mitchell. Reevaluating stereo and motion cues for visualiz- ing graphs in three dimensions. In Proceedings of the 2nd Symposium on Applied Perception in Graphics and Visualization, pp. 51–58. ACM, 2005

    2005

  52. [60]

    Willett, B

    W. Willett, B. Jenny, T. Isenberg, and P. Dragicevic. Lightweight Re- lief Shearing for Enhanced Terrain Perception on Interactive Maps. In Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI), pp. 3563–3572. ACM, 2015

    2015

  53. [61]

    R. I. Wittick. A computer system for mapping and analyzing transportation networks. Southeastern Geographer, 16(1):74–81, 1976

    1976

  54. [62]

    N. Wong, S. Carpendale, and S. Greenberg. Edgelens: An interactive method for managing edge congestion in graphs. In IEEE Symposium on Information Visualization, 2003. INFOVIS 2003, pp. 51–58. IEEE, 2003

    2003

  55. [63]

    J. Wood, J. Dykes, and A. Slingsby. Visualisation of origins, destinations and flows with od maps. The Cartographic Journal, 47(2):117–129, 2010

    2010

  56. [64]

    Y . Yang, T. Dwyer, S. Goodwin, and K. Marriott. Many-to-Many Geographically-Embedded Flow Visualisation: An Evaluation. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, 23(1):411–420, 2017

    2017

  57. [65]

    Y . Yang, B. Jenny, T. Dwyer, K. Marriott, H. Chen, and M. Cordeil. Maps and Globes in Virtual Reality. Computer Graphics Forum, 37(3):427–438, 2018

    2018

  58. [66]

    Zhang, J

    M.-J. Zhang, J. Li, and K. Zhang. An immersive approach to the vi- sual exploration of geospatial network datasets. In Proceedings of the 15th ACM SIGGRAPH Conference on Virtual-Reality Continuum and Its Applications in Industry, VRCAI ’16, pp. 381–390. ACM, 2016

    2016

  59. [67]

    Zhang, K

    M.-J. Zhang, K. Zhang, J. Li, and Y .-N. Li. Visual Exploration of 3D Geospatial Networks in a Virtual Reality Environment. The Computer Journal, 61(3):447–458, 2018

    2018

Pith tools

Reviewed August 14, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.