Pith. sign in

REVIEW

Evaluation of Sampling Methods for Scatterplots

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2007.14666 v4 pith:DFL53RND submitted 2020-07-29 cs.HC

Evaluation of Sampling Methods for Scatterplots

classification cs.HC
keywords samplingdensityscatterplotstrategiesbluenoiseoutliersoverall
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
read the original abstract

Given a scatterplot with tens of thousands of points or even more, a natural question is which sampling method should be used to create a small but "good" scatterplot for a better abstraction. We present the results of a user study that investigates the influence of different sampling strategies on multi-class scatterplots. The main goal of this study is to understand the capability of sampling methods in preserving the density, outliers, and overall shape of a scatterplot. To this end, we comprehensively review the literature and select seven typical sampling strategies as well as eight representative datasets. We then design four experiments to understand the performance of different strategies in maintaining: 1) region density; 2) class density; 3) outliers; and 4) overall shape in the sampling results. The results show that: 1) random sampling is preferred for preserving region density; 2) blue noise sampling and random sampling have comparable performance with the three multi-class sampling strategies in preserving class density; 3) outlier biased density based sampling, recursive subdivision based sampling, and blue noise sampling perform the best in keeping outliers; and 4) blue noise sampling outperforms the others in maintaining the overall shape of a scatterplot.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.