skip to main content
OSTI.GOV title logo U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Scientific and Technical Information

Title: Bridging Theory with Practice: An Exploratory Study of Visualization Use and Design for Climate Model Comparison

Abstract

Evaluation methodologies in visualization have mostly focused on how well the tools and techniques cater to the analytical needs of the user. While this is important in determining the effectiveness of the tools and advancing the state-of-the-art in visualization research, a key area that has mostly been overlooked is how well established visualization theories and principles are instantiated in practice. This is especially relevant when domain experts, and not visualization researchers, design visualizations for analysis of their data or for broader dissemination of scientific knowledge. There is very little research on exploring the synergistic capabilities of cross-domain collaboration between domain experts and visualization researchers. To fill this gap, in this paper we describe the results of an exploratory study of climate data visualizations conducted in tight collaboration with a pool of climate scientists. The study analyzes a large set of static climate data visualizations for identifying their shortcomings in terms of visualization design. The outcome of the study is a classification scheme that categorizes the design problems in the form of a descriptive taxonomy. The taxonomy is a first attempt for systematically categorizing the types, causes, and consequences of design problems in visualizations created by domain experts. We demonstrate themore » use of the taxonomy for a number of purposes, such as, improving the existing climate data visualizations, reflecting on the impact of the problems for enabling domain experts in designing better visualizations, and also learning about the gaps and opportunities for future visualization research. We demonstrate the applicability of our taxonomy through a number of examples and discuss the lessons learnt and implications of our findings.« less

Authors:
 [1];  [1];  [2];  [2];  [1];  [1]
  1. New York Univ. (NYU), NY (United States)
  2. Oak Ridge National Lab. (ORNL), Oak Ridge, TN (United States)
Publication Date:
Research Org.:
Oak Ridge National Lab. (ORNL), Oak Ridge, TN (United States)
Sponsoring Org.:
USDOE
OSTI Identifier:
1335321
Grant/Contract Number:
AC05-00OR22725
Resource Type:
Journal Article: Accepted Manuscript
Journal Name:
IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics
Additional Journal Information:
Journal Volume: 21; Journal Issue: 9; Journal ID: ISSN 1077-2626
Publisher:
IEEE
Country of Publication:
United States
Language:
English
Subject:
54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES; Visualization; design principles; climate model; taxonomy; INFORMATION VISUALIZATION; WHITEBOARDS

Citation Formats

Dasgupta, Aritra, Poco, Jorge, Wei, Yaxing, Cook, Robert B., Bertini, Enrico, and Silva, Claudio. Bridging Theory with Practice: An Exploratory Study of Visualization Use and Design for Climate Model Comparison. United States: N. p., 2015. Web. doi:10.1109/TVCG.2015.2413774.
Dasgupta, Aritra, Poco, Jorge, Wei, Yaxing, Cook, Robert B., Bertini, Enrico, & Silva, Claudio. Bridging Theory with Practice: An Exploratory Study of Visualization Use and Design for Climate Model Comparison. United States. doi:10.1109/TVCG.2015.2413774.
Dasgupta, Aritra, Poco, Jorge, Wei, Yaxing, Cook, Robert B., Bertini, Enrico, and Silva, Claudio. Mon . "Bridging Theory with Practice: An Exploratory Study of Visualization Use and Design for Climate Model Comparison". United States. doi:10.1109/TVCG.2015.2413774. https://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/1335321.
@article{osti_1335321,
title = {Bridging Theory with Practice: An Exploratory Study of Visualization Use and Design for Climate Model Comparison},
author = {Dasgupta, Aritra and Poco, Jorge and Wei, Yaxing and Cook, Robert B. and Bertini, Enrico and Silva, Claudio},
abstractNote = {Evaluation methodologies in visualization have mostly focused on how well the tools and techniques cater to the analytical needs of the user. While this is important in determining the effectiveness of the tools and advancing the state-of-the-art in visualization research, a key area that has mostly been overlooked is how well established visualization theories and principles are instantiated in practice. This is especially relevant when domain experts, and not visualization researchers, design visualizations for analysis of their data or for broader dissemination of scientific knowledge. There is very little research on exploring the synergistic capabilities of cross-domain collaboration between domain experts and visualization researchers. To fill this gap, in this paper we describe the results of an exploratory study of climate data visualizations conducted in tight collaboration with a pool of climate scientists. The study analyzes a large set of static climate data visualizations for identifying their shortcomings in terms of visualization design. The outcome of the study is a classification scheme that categorizes the design problems in the form of a descriptive taxonomy. The taxonomy is a first attempt for systematically categorizing the types, causes, and consequences of design problems in visualizations created by domain experts. We demonstrate the use of the taxonomy for a number of purposes, such as, improving the existing climate data visualizations, reflecting on the impact of the problems for enabling domain experts in designing better visualizations, and also learning about the gaps and opportunities for future visualization research. We demonstrate the applicability of our taxonomy through a number of examples and discuss the lessons learnt and implications of our findings.},
doi = {10.1109/TVCG.2015.2413774},
journal = {IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics},
number = 9,
volume = 21,
place = {United States},
year = {Mon Mar 16 00:00:00 EDT 2015},
month = {Mon Mar 16 00:00:00 EDT 2015}
}

Journal Article:
Free Publicly Available Full Text
Publisher's Version of Record

Citation Metrics:
Cited by: 6works
Citation information provided by
Web of Science

Save / Share:
  • There is growing support for the use of integrated assessments (IAs)/sustainability impact assessments (SIAs), at different government levels and geographic scales of policy-making and planning, both nationally and internationally. However, delivering good quality IAs/SIAs, in the near future, could be challenging. This paper mainly focuses upon one area of concern, differences between research and other technical contributions intended to strengthen assessment methodologies and the types of assessment methods considered usable by practitioners. To help in addressing this concern, the development of a common assessment framework is proposed, which is based on a shared, practitioner-researcher-stakeholder understanding of what constitutes a satisfactorymore » integrated/sustainability impact assessment. The paper outlines a possible structure for this framework, which contains three interconnected elements-the planning context in which the assessment is to be carried out; the process by which the assessment is to be undertaken and its findings used; and the methods, technical and consultative, by which impacts are to be assessed. It concludes with suggested 'next steps', addressed to researchers, practitioners and other stakeholders, by which the assessment framework might be tested and improved, and its subsequent use supported.« less
  • This study is a model comparison assessing the drivers and impacts of bioenergy production on the global land system and the interaction with other land use based mitigation options in the context of the EMF 27 project. We compare and evaluate results from three integrated assessment models (GCAM, IMAGE, and ReMIND/MAgPIE). All three models project that dedicated bioenergy crops and biomass residues are a potentially important and cost-effective component of the energy system. But bioenergy deployment levels and feedstock composition vary notably across models as do the implications for land-use and greenhouse gas emissions and the interaction with other landmore » use based mitigation measures. Despite numerous model differences, we identify a few that are likely contributing to differences in land-use and emissions attributable to energy crop deployment.« less
  • The solid-state structure of Fe/sub 3/(..mu..-H)/sub 3/(CO)/sub 9/(..mu../sub 3/-CCH/sub 3/) (II) consists of a triangular M/sub 3/ base constructed of three Fe(CO)/sub 3/ fragments with hydrogens symmetrically bridging the M-M edges and with a C-CH/sub 3/ fragment symmetrically capping the metal triangle. The molecule has C/sub 3..nu../ symmetry, each iron being six-coordinate (three carbonyl ligands, two bridging hydrogens, and the methylidyne carbon) and the capping carbon four-coordinate (three irons and the methyl carbon). The comparison of the geometry of II with that of isoelectronic Co/sub 3/(CO)/sub 9/(..mu../sub 3/-CCH/sub 3/) (I) reveals several changes that are interpreted in terms of themore » bridging hydrogens acting as hydride-like ligands. It is demonstrated that the geometries of main-group model compounds for I and II (CH/sub 3/CC/sub 3/H/sub 3/ and CH/sub 3/CB/sub 3/H/sub 6/) as generated by ab initio calculations reproduce the structural differences of I and II. Hence, in I and II the representation of the Co(CO)/sub 3/ and Fe(CO)/sub 3/ fragments with CH and BH provides much more than a simple, descriptive analogy of the cluster bonding. Crystals of II form in the triclinic space group P anti 1 with the following unit cell parameters: a = 7.979 (2), b = 9.478 (3), c = 12.714 (4) A; ..cap alpha.. = 93.45 (3), ..beta.. = 106.94 (3), ..gamma.. = 60.79 (3)/sup 0/; V = 799 A/sup 3/; Z = 2. The x-ray structure was solved as described in the text and refined to R/sub 1/ = 0.076 and R/sub 2/ = 0.075 for 2496 independent reflections. 4 figures, 6 tables.« less
  • The land surface has been shown to form strong feedbacks with climate due to linkages between atmospheric conditions and terrestrial ecosystem exchanges of energy, momentum, water, and trace gases. Although often ignored in modeling studies, land management itself may form significant feedbacks. Because crops are harvested earlier under drier conditions, regional air temperature, precipitation, and soil moisture, for example, affect harvest timing, particularly of rain-fed crops. This removal of vegetation alters the land surface characteristics and may, in turn, affect regional climate. We applied a coupled climate(MM5) and land-surface (LSM1) model to examine the effects of early and late wintermore » wheat harvest on regional climate in the Department of Energy Atmospheric Radiation Measurement (ARM) Climate Research Facility in the Southern Great Plains, where winter wheat accounts for 20 percent of the land area. Within the winter wheat region, simulated 2 m air temperature was 1.3 C warmer in the Early Harvest scenario at mid-day averaged over the two weeks following harvest. Soils in the harvested area were drier and warmer in the top 10 cm and wetter in the 10-20 cm layer. Midday soils were 2.5 C warmer in the harvested area at mid-day averaged over the two weeks following harvest. Harvest also dramatically altered latent and sensible heat fluxes. Although differences between scenarios diminished once both scenarios were harvested, the short-term impacts of land management on climate were comparable to those from land cover change demonstrated in other studies.« less
  • Model calibration (or tuning) is a necessary part of developing and testing coupled ocean–atmosphere climate models regardless of their main scientific purpose. There is an increasing recognition that this process needs to become more transparent for both users of climate model output and other developers. Knowing how and why climate models are tuned and which targets are used is essential to avoiding possible misattributions of skillful predictions to data accommodation and vice versa. This paper describes the approach and practice of model tuning for the six major US climate modeling centers. While details differ among groups in terms of scientificmore » missions, tuning targets, and tunable parameters, there is a core commonality of approaches. Furthermore, practices differ significantly on some key aspects, in particular, in the use of initialized forecast analyses as a tool, the explicit use of the historical transient record, and the use of the present-day radiative imbalance vs. the implied balance in the preindustrial era as a target.« less