arXivDaily arXiv每日学术速递 周一至周五更新
arXiv周末暂无论文更新,休息一下吧,周末愉快~~
arXiv 2105.09275cs.LGcs.HC
收藏

DumbleDR:预测用户对投影质量的模糊性降低偏好

DumbleDR: Predicting User Preferences of Dimensionality Reduction Projection Quality

University of Stuttgart(斯图加特大学);TU Wien(维也纳工业大学);University of Namur(那慕尔大学)

Cristina Morariu, Adrien Bibal, Rene Cutura, Benoît Frénay, Michael Sedlmair

摘要:

在过去的几十年里,出现了大量的降维技术,给研究人员和分析人员提供了各种各样的选择来减少他们的数据,尤其是考虑到一些技术带有额外的参数化(例如t-SNE,UMAP等)。最近的研究表明,人们经常使用降维作为一个黑盒子,而不管方法本身保留的特定属性。因此,评估和比较2D投影通常是定性决定的,通过并排设置投影并让人类判断决定哪个投影是最好的。在这项工作中,我们提出了一种定量的方法来评估预测,但仍将人类的感知置于中心。我们进行了一项比较研究,我们要求人们在图像数据集的低级别投影散点图之间选择“好”和“误导”的视图,模拟人们通常选择投影的方式。我们使用研究数据作为一组质量指标的标签,其目的是发现和量化人们在决定预测时到底在寻找什么。有了这个人类判断的代理,我们用它来对新数据集上的投影进行排名,解释它们为什么相关,并量化所选投影的主观程度。

英文摘要:

A plethora of dimensionality reduction techniques have emerged over the past decades, leaving researchers and analysts with a wide variety of choices for reducing their data, all the more so given some techniques come with additional parametrization (e.g. t-SNE, UMAP, etc.). Recent studies are showing that people often use dimensionality reduction as a black-box regardless of the specific properties the method itself preserves. Hence, evaluating and comparing 2D projections is usually qualitatively decided, by setting projections side-by-side and letting human judgment decide which projection is the best. In this work, we propose a quantitative way of evaluating projections, that nonetheless places human perception at the center. We run a comparative study, where we ask people to select 'good' and 'misleading' views between scatterplots of low-level projections of image datasets, simulating the way people usually select projections. We use the study data as labels for a set of quality metrics whose purpose is to discover and quantify what exactly people are looking for when deciding between projections. With this proxy for human judgments, we use it to rank projections on new datasets, explain why they are relevant, and quantify the degree of subjectivity in projections selected.

机构、总结、中文摘要均由AI分析而来,可能存在错误,请以论文正文为准。

↑