US 8,099,674 B2Grant
Computer systems and methods for automatically viewing multidimensional databases
Issue Date:2012-01-17
•202 Claims
•19 Drawing Sheets
Abstract
A method for automatically forming the clearest and most useful visual plot for a given dataset of tuples. A best view type is selected for a view that includes a subsequently added new field. The visual plot is populated with the data in the view and then automatically rendered for the user. A dataset that is retrieved from a storage is analyzed to identify all the data types found in the dataset, and to determine the best view type to assign to the dataset's views. The visual plot is then populated with the data according to this best view type, and is automatically rendered for the user.
Metadata
Assignee
- Tableau Software LLC
Inventors
- Jock Douglas Mackinlay
- Christopher Richard Stolte
- Patrick Hanrahan
Application Information
Application Number:US 11/223,658
Filing Date:2005-09-09
Priority Date:2005-09-09
Art Unit:2174
Classifications
IPC:
G06F3/048G06F3/00G06F17/22G06Q40/00
Patent Drawings (19 sheets)
Description
Field of the Invention
[0001] This invention relates generally to computer systems and methods for displaying data such as database information. The invention relates specifically to a computer system and method for displaying data clearly and effectively based upon the types of data found in a dataset.
Background of the Invention
[0002] Data is more than the numbers, values, or predicates of which it is comprised. Data resides in multi-dimensional spaces which harbor rich and variegated landscapes that are not only strange and convoluted, but are not readily comprehendible by the human brain. The most complicated data arises from measurements or calculations that depend on many apparently independent variables. Data sets with hundreds of variables arise today in many contexts, including, for example: gene expression data for uncovering the link between the genome and the various proteins for which it codes; demographic and consumer profiling data for capturing underlying sociological and economic trends; sales and marketing data for huge numbers of products in vast and ever-changing marketplaces; and environmental measurements for understanding phenomena such as pollution, meteorological changes and resource impact issues. International research projects such as the Human Genome Project and the Sloan Digital Sky Survey are also forming massive scientific databases. Furthermore, corporations are creating large data warehouses of historical data on key aspects of their operations. Corporations are also using desktop applications to create many small databases for examining specific aspects of their business.
[0003] One challenge with any of these databases is the extraction of meaning from the data they contain: to discover structure, find patterns, and derive causal relationships. Often, the sheer size of these data sets complicates this task and means that interactive calculations that require visiting each record are not plausible. It may also be infeasible for an analyst to reason about or view the entire data set at its finest level of detail. Even when the data sets are small, however, their complexity often makes it difficult to glean meaning without aggregating the data or creating simplifying summaries.
[0004] Among the principal operations that may be carried out on data, such as regression, clustering, summarization, dependency modeling, and classification, the ability to see patterns rapidly is of paramount importance. Data comes in many forms, and the most appropriate way to display data in one form may not be the best for another. In the past, where it has been recognized that many methods of display are possible, it has been a painstaking exercise to select the most appropriate one. However, identifying the most telling methods of display can be intimately connected to identifying the underlying structure of the data itself.
[0005] Business intelligence is one rapidly growing area that benefits considerably from tools for interactive visualization of multi-dimensional databases. A number of approaches to visualizing such information are known in the art. However, although software programs that implement such approaches are useful, they are often unsatisfactory. Such programs have interfaces that require the user to select the most appropriate way to display the information.
[0006] Visualization is a powerful tool for exploring large data, both by itself and coupled with data mining algorithms. However, the task of effectively visualizing large databases imposes significant demands on the human-computer interface to the visualization system. The exploratory process is one of hypothesis, experiment, and discovery. The path of exploration is unpredictable, and analysts need to be able to easily change both the data being displayed and its visual representation. Furthermore, the analyst should be able to first reason about the data at a high level of abstraction, and then rapidly drill down to explore data of interest at a greater level of detail. Thus, a good interface both exposes the underlying hierarchical structure of the data and supports rapid refinement of the visualization.
[0007] Currently, Tableau's software and Microsoft's Excel are examples of visualization software that create views of datasets. Specifically, Tableau Table Drop allows users to drag data fields onto a Tableau view to create a graphical views. When the view was a text table, the behavior was similar to the drags supported by Excel Pivot Tables. For example, dragging a quantitative data type (Q) onto a text table (X=O Y=O T=Q, where “O” stands for ordinal data), would extend the table to put the two measures next to each other (X=O Y=O,Om T=Qm, where “Om” stands for measure ordinal data and “Qm” stands for measure quantitative data). However, Tableu's Table Drop has functionality not found in Excel's Pivot Tables in that it may change the view type of a view when fields are dragged onto the view. For example, dragging a Q onto a bar chart (X=O Y=Q) created a stacked bar chart (X=O Y=Qm C=Om). Or, if there was already a field with a color encoding (X=O Y=Q C=F) in the view, then the software would transform the Q data into Qm data, and would place the measure names on the Level of Detail encoding (X=O Y=Qm C=F L=Om). With scatter plots, the logic was similar, except the transformation of Q to Qm and placement of measure names on the Level of Detail encoding would be triggered if an existing field already had a shape encoding.
[0008] In addition to various software programs, the known art further provides formal graphical presentations. Bertin's Semiology of Graphics, University of Wisconsin Press, Madison Wis. (1983), is an early attempt at formalizing graphic techniques. Bertin developed a vocabulary for describing data and techniques for encoding the data into a graphic. Bertin identified retinal variables (position, color, size, etc.) in which data can be encoded. Cleveland (The Elements of Graphing Data, Wadsworth Advanced Books and Software, (1985), Pacific Grove, Calif. and Visualizing Data, (1993), Hobart Press) used theoretical and experimental results to determine how well people can use these different retinal properties to compare quantitative variations.
[0009] Mackinlay's APT system (ACM Trans. Graphics, 5, 110-141, (1986)) was one of the first applications of formal graphical specifications to computer generated displays. APT uses a graphical language and a hierarchy of composition rules that are searched through in order to generate two-dimensional displays of relational data. The Sage system (Roth, et al., (1994), Proc. SIGCHI '94, 112-117) extends the concepts of APT, providing a richer set of data characterizations and forming a wider range of displays. The existing art also provides for the assignment of a mark based upon the innermost data column and row of a dataset (Hanrahan, et al., U.S. Pat. application Ser. No. 11/005,652, “Computer System and Methods for Visualizing Data with Generation of Marks”). Heuristically guided searches have also been used to generate visualizations of data (Agrawala, et al., U.S. Pat. No. 6,424,933, “System and Method for Non-Uniform Scaled Mapping”).
[0010] A drawback with the formal graphical specifications of the art is that they do not provide any guidance to a user as to useful and clear visual formats in which a set of data could be rendered. The rendering of the data is such that there is no analysis to examine the resulting visualization for clarity or usefulness. Further, in the use of heuristic searches (trial-and-error method), the searches fail, leaving the user with the problem of finding clear or useful views. Heuristic algorithms can have complex behavior that creates a poor user experience. When a user does not understand why a heuristic algorithm generates certain views, the algorithm becomes unpredictable to the user and the user will not be inclined to use the algorithm.
[0011] Based on the background state of the art, as described herein, what is needed are improved methods and graphical interfaces wherein the initial visualization of data has been determined to be a clear and useful visualization, and this visualization is then automatically presented to the user.
Summary of the Invention
[0012] The present invention provides improved methods for visualizing data.
[0013] A first aspect of the invention provides a computer implemented method for automatically and visually displaying a graphical representation of a dataset, comprising: receiving a user selected and ordered plurality of fields; selecting a resulting view for displaying the dataset based on the order of the user selected fields; and displaying the dataset or a transformation of the dataset according to the resulting view. In one embodiment, the dataset is retrieved from a remote database. In another embodiment, rules are used to select the resulting view. In yet another embodiment, the rules are predetermined. In other embodiments, the rules are determined by the user's preferences or usage. In a further embodiment, heuristics are used to select the resulting view.
[0014] A second aspect of the invention provides a computer implemented method for automatically and visually displaying a graphical representation of a dataset with a plurality of tuples, comprising: forming a plurality of rated alternative views, each alternative view showing all tuples, or a transformation of all tuples, in the dataset; selecting a resulting view from the plurality of alternative views, based upon a user selected option; and displaying the dataset according to the resulting view. In one embodiment, the dataset is retrieved from a remote database. In another embodiment, rules are used to select the resulting view. In yet another embodiment, the rules are predetermined. In other embodiments, the rules are determined by the user's preferences or usage. In a further embodiment, heuristics are used to select the resulting view. In yet a further embodiment, when the user selected option is a first option, the selecting step further comprises: ranking the plurality of alternative views according to a rating system; and assigning the resulting view as the highest ranked alternative view. In still another embodiment, when the user selected option is a second option, the selecting step further comprises: displaying a list of the alternative views; receiving the user's selection of an alternative view; and assigning the resulting view as the alternative view selected by the user.
[0015] A third aspect of the invention provides a computer program product for use in conjunction with a computer system, the computer program product comprising a computer readable storage medium and a computer program mechanism embedded therein, the computer program mechanism for automatically and visually displaying a graphical representation of a dataset, the computer program mechanism comprising: a field receiver for receiving a user selected and ordered plurality of fields; a resulting view selector for selecting a resulting view for displaying the dataset based on the order of the user selected fields; and a dataset displayer for displaying the dataset or a transformation of the dataset according to the resulting view. In one embodiment, the dataset is retrieved from a remote database. In another embodiment, rules are used to select the resulting view. In yet another embodiment, the rules are predetermined. In other embodiments, the rules are determined by the user's preferences or usage. In a further embodiment, heuristics are used to select the resulting view.
[0016] A fourth aspect of the invention provides a computer program product for use in conjunction with a computer system, the computer program product comprising a computer readable storage medium and a computer program mechanism embedded therein, the computer program mechanism for automatically and visually displaying a graphical representation of a dataset with a plurality of tuples, the computer program mechanism comprising: an alternative view former for forming a plurality of rated alternative views, each alternative view showing all tuples, or a transformation of all tuples, in the dataset; a resulting view selector for selecting a resulting view from the plurality of alternative views, based upon a user selected option; and a dataset displayer for displaying the dataset according to the resulting view. In one embodiment, the dataset is retrieved from a remote database. In another embodiment, rules are used to select the resulting view. In yet another embodiment, the rules are predetermined. In other embodiments, the rules are determined by the user's preferences or usage. In a further embodiment, heuristics are used to select the resulting view. In yet a further embodiment, when the user selected option is a first option, the resulting view selector further comprises: an alternative view ranker for ranking the plurality of alternative views according to a rating system; and a view assignor for assigning the resulting view as the highest ranked alternative view. In still another embodiment, when the user selected option is a second option, the resulting view selector further comprises: a list displayer for displaying a list of the alternative views; a selection receiver for receiving the user's selection of an alternative view; and a view assignor for assigning the resulting view as the alternative view selected by the user.
[0017] A fifth aspect of the invention provides a computer system for automatically and visually displaying a graphical representation of a dataset, the computer system comprising: a central processing unit; a memory, coupled to the central processing unit, the memory storing: the dataset; a programming module comprising, comprising: instructions for receiving a user selected and ordered plurality of fields; instructions for selecting a resulting view for displaying the dataset based on the order of the user selected fields; and instructions for displaying the dataset or a transformation of the dataset according to the resulting view. In one embodiment, the dataset is retrieved from a remote database. In another embodiment, rules are used to select the resulting view. In yet another embodiment, the rules are predetermined. In other embodiments, the rules are determined by the user's preferences or usage. In a further embodiment, heuristics are used to select the resulting view.
[0018] A sixth aspect of the invention provides a computer system for automatically and visually displaying a graphical representation of a dataset with a plurality of tuples, the computer system comprising: a central processing unit; a memory, coupled to the central processing unit, the memory storing: the dataset; a programming module comprising: instructions for forming a plurality of rated alternative views, each alternative view showing all tuples, or a transformation of all tuples, in the dataset; instructions for selecting a resulting view from the plurality of alternative views, based upon a user selected option; and instructions for displaying the dataset according to the resulting view. In one embodiment, the dataset is retrieved from a remote database. In another embodiment, rules are used to select the resulting view. In yet another embodiment, the rules are predetermined. In other embodiments, the rules are determined by the user's preferences or usage. In a further embodiment, heuristics are used to select the resulting view. In yet a further embodiment, when the user selected option is a first option, the instructions for selecting further comprises: instructions for ranking the plurality of alternative views according to a rating system; and instructions for assigning the resulting view as the highest ranked alternative view. In still another embodiment, when the user selected option is a second option, the instructions for selecting further comprises: instructions for displaying a list of the alternative views; instructions for receiving the user's selection of an alternative view; and instructions for assigning the resulting view as the alternative view selected by the user.
Brief Description of the Drawings
[0019] FIG. 1 is an illustration of a computer system that facilitates the visualization of a dataset in a clear and useful form.
[0020] FIG. 2 is a flowchart of the steps through which a system proceeds in one embodiment of the present invention.
[0021] FIGS. 3 a and 3b are illustrations of one way of presenting an embodiment of the present invention to a user.
[0022] FIGS. 4 a-4i are rules whereby a field may be added to an existing view or whereby a field may be used as the only field in a view.
[0023] FIGS. 5 a-5c are examples of different views of a single dataset.
[0024] FIGS. 6 a and 6b are flowcharts of the steps through which a system proceeds in another embodiment of the present invention.
[0025] FIG. 7 is a table showing the criteria for forming views of a dataset and a rating system for one embodiment of the present invention.
[0026] FIGS. 8 a-8l are resulting views, based upon an embodiment of the present invention.
[0027] Like reference numerals refer to corresponding parts throughout the several views of the drawings.
Detailed Description of the Invention
[0028] The present invention provides methods, computer program products, and computer systems for automatically providing a user with a clear and useful view of a dataset. In a typical embodiment, the present invention builds and displays a view of a dataset as a user adds fields to the dataset or as a dataset is accessed, such that the view is clear and useful, and is automatically presented to the user. An advantage of the present invention is that data is presented in a clear and useful form automatically.
[0029] The present invention operates on a set of data, called a dataset, that are made up of tuples. As one skilled in the art will realize, the dataset can be a relational database, a multidimensional database, a semantic abstraction of a relational database, or an aggregated or unaggregated subset of a relational database, multidimensional database, or semantic abstraction. Fields are categorizations of data in a dataset. A tuple is an item of data (such as a record) from a dataset, specified by attributes from fields in the dataset. A search query across the dataset will return one or more tuples. Fields contain data that are of particular types, and each field is of a particular type. These types include:
[0030]
Measure names may include an ordinal field whose domain is the name of one or more Qd fields. Measure values may include a dependent quantitative field whose domain and values are the blending of the Qd fields whose names appear in the domain of measure names.
| Data Type | Symbol | |
|---|---|---|
| Ordinal | O | |
| Ordinal time (date) | Ot | |
| Dependent ordinal | Od | |
| (categorical measure) | ||
| Measure names | Om | |
| Quantitative | Q | |
| Independent Quantitative | Qi | |
| (dimension) | ||
| Dependent Quantitative | Qd | |
| (measure) | ||
| Measure values | Qm | |
| Quantitative time | Qt | |
| Quantitative position | Qx | |
Measure names may include an ordinal field whose domain is the name of one or more Qd fields. Measure values may include a dependent quantitative field whose domain and values are the blending of the Qd fields whose names appear in the domain of measure names.
[0031] A view is a visual representation of a dataset or a transformation of that dataset. Text table, bar chart, and scatter plots are all examples of types of views. Views contain marks that represent one or more tuples in a dataset. In other words, marks are visual representations of tuples in a view. A mark is typically associated with a type of graphical display. Some examples of views and their associated marks are as follows:
[0032]
| View Type | Associated Mark | |
|---|---|---|
| Table | Text | |
| Scatter Plot | Shape | |
| Bar Chart | Bar | |
| Gantt Plot | Bar | |
| Line Graph | Line Segment | |
| Circle Graph | Circle | |
[0033] FIG. 1 is an illustration of a computer system that facilitates the visualization of a dataset in a clear and useful form. System 100 includes memory 102, CPU 180, user interface 184, storage unit 194, disk controller 192, and bus 182 that connects all of system 100's elements together. System 100 may also have network connection 196 for communication with other systems on a network. System 100 also includes memory 102, which stores operating system 104, file system 106, as well as various other modules related to the present invention. Additionally, memory 102 may also store dataset 140, which contains tuples. User interface 184 further includes display 186, mouse 188, and keyboard 190. System 100 may also be connected to database 150 where a dataset may be retrieved and stored in memory 102. Memory 102 also stores computer program mechanisms that are necessary to some embodiments of the present invention.
[0034] In FIG. 2 , flowchart 200 describes the steps through which a system proceeds in one embodiment of the invention. At step 202, ordered fields selected by a user are received. A resulting view is selected at step 204, and the dataset is displayed at step 206 according to the resulting view.
[0035] The computer system modules used to perform this embodiment of the invention are shown in FIG. 1 . Field receiver 108 performs step 202 by receiving ordered fields selected by the user. Resulting view selector 110 performs step 204 and selects a resulting view. Dataset displayer 112 performs step 206 and displays the dataset according to the resulting view.
[0036] According to one embodiment of the invention, resulting view selector 110 selects the resulting view by choosing rule(s) for adding the user selected ordered fields (step 208). This is accomplished by rule chooser 114. Rule applier 116 then applies the rule(s) to determine the resulting view's view type (step 210). In another embodiment of the invention, before rule chooser 114 chooses rule(s), view determiner 118 determines whether a first view exists (step 212). In yet another embodiment of the invention, the dataset is displayed in step 206 when mark chooser 126 chooses a mark for the resulting view (step 218), and dataset renderer 128 renders the dataset according to the mark (step 220).
[0037] FIGS. 4 a-4i show sets of rules that are associated with adding (or “dropping”) fields with particular data types. The field may be the only field in a view, or the field may be in addition to fields already in an existing view. When dropping a field, the field is added either as a column or a row, or it may be encoded. Encodings include color, size, and shape to represent a value. For example, red may represent all values between 1 and 10. The following convention is used for operators in the rules shown in FIGS. 4 a-4i (“E” designates encoding):
[0038]
| Operator | Limitations |
|---|---|
| = Assign field to a clause | Left hand side is a |
| += Add field to the end of the clause | column or row |
| (some rearrangements may occur) | Right hand side must be O |
| or Qd | |
| *= Blend field with column or row | Right hand side must be |
| (blend Qd with first E accepting/containing a | Qd |
| Qd). The blend will result in Qm being on | |
| column or row, and an Om being added to | |
| the view. | |
| ? Guard the action. Only add if the | Unary |
| column or row accepts the field and the | |
| cardinality of the field is less than the | |
| cardinality associated with the column or | |
| row. | |
[0039] The sets of rules are organized first by the type of the field that is dropped (e.g. O or Qd), and then by the type of the view that the field is being dropped onto. The rules are further broken down by the type of the view. The type of a view depends on their innermost row and column. For example, OO is a view with ordinal fields in the row and column; OQ is a view with an ordinal field in the row and a quantitative field in the column; and φ is an empty view with no fields. For each type of field being dropped, a rule table is shown containing the rules for each type of view into which the field is being dropped. The columns of the rule tables represent the contents of the innermost field on the column (X), and the rows of the rules table the innermost field on the row (Y).
[0040] In step 208, rule(s) for adding the user selected field's data type are chosen. For example, if a user selected field is an ordinal, then the set of rules in FIG. 4 a would be used. Or, if a user selected field is an independent quantitative, then the set of rules in FIG. 4 d would be used. If in step 212 view determiner 118 determines that no first view exists, then rule chooser 114 would choose the rule in row 1 column 1 of FIG. 4 a as the rule in step 208. If in step 212 view determiner 118 determines that a first view exists, and the first view contains an independent quantitative field in the innermost column and an independent quantitative field in the innermost row of the first view, then rule chooser 114 would select the rule in row 3 column 3 of FIG. 4 a as the rule in step 208. Finally, in step 210, rule applier 116 applies the rule selected by rule chooser 114. If no first view exists, then the resulting view will contain a single column (Y=O). If the first view was of the QiQi type, then the resulting view will contain an encoded field (E+=O).
[0041] The order in which fields are added affect the view type of the resulting view. For example, if a measure data type field is added to an empty view, and is subsequently followed by a dimension data type field, the resulting view will be a bar chart. However, if a measure data type field is added to an empty view subsequent to a dimension data type field, then the resulting view will be a text table. The resulting view's view type is thusly selected based upon a set of rules. The view type is then assigned to the resulting view and the view is then populated with data from the dataset. In one embodiment, the set of rules are predetermined. In another embodiment, the set of rules are based upon a user's preferences or actual usage. For example, a user may be given the opportunity to designate the best view type for various sequences of the addition of fields to views. Or, after the visual plot is populated and rendered for the user, the user is allowed to choose a different rendering. The user's choice as to the ultimate resulting view, if recorded, may indicate the user's preference for what view type the user considers the clear and/or useful. In yet another embodiment, heuristics may be used instead of a set of rules for selecting a resulting view.
[0042] In one embodiment, the cardinalities of the fields in the resulting view are computed and are considered in determining how the user selected fields are added. In set theory, cardinality is the size of a set. In the present invention, cardinality refers to the number of distinct instances that are associated with a field's type. For example, if a field type is “States of America”, then the cardinality of such a field would be 50.
[0043] In another embodiment, the functional dependency of the fields in the resulting view are computed and are considered in determining how the user selected fields are added. Functional dependency refers to the determination of one field by another field. For example, if one field is of the type “States of America,” and a second field is “Inches of Rainfall of the States of America,” then the second field depends upon the first. Another example is shown in FIGS. 5 a-5c. Referring to FIGS. 5 a-5c, there is a functional dependency from the Product field to the Product Type field because each product has a unique product type. This can be seen in FIG. 5 a because each product (in the column where the product field resides) has a single product type (in the column where the product type field resides) to its right. When the columns are reversed in FIG. 5 b, it is apparent that there is no functional dependency from the Product Type field to the Product Field because each product type has multiple products. Finally, when the fields that form a functional dependency are placed in both rows and columns (FIG. 5 c), the resulting view contains much empty space, which makes the resulting view less effective.
[0044] In yet another embodiment, in the application of the selected rule to populate the resulting view with data from the dataset, a mark is chosen for the resulting view's view type and the data from the dataset is rendered according to the mark. This is shown in FIG. 2 , where, in step 218, mark chooser 126 chooses a mark for the resulting view, and data renderer 128 renders the dataset according to the mark in step 220.
[0045] FIGS. 3 a and 3b show ways of operating an embodiment of the present invention. A user may drag a new field from a list of available fields and drop the field onto a view. Another way of operating an embodiment of the present invention is for the user to double click on a new field from a list of available fields. This automatically adds the new field to an existing view or automatically forms a new view if there is not an existing view. Other ways of adding or dropping fields include double clicking on a field, selecting fields, typing field names, and creating a specification for a set of fields using statistical analysis, historical analysis, or heuristic algorithms.
[0046] Now, referring to FIG. 6 a a flowchart is provided for the steps through which a system proceeds in another embodiment of the present invention. First, alternative view former 130 forms alternative views of the tuples of the dataset (step 602). Resulting view selector 110 then selects a resulting view from the alternative views (step 604). Finally, dataset displayer 112 displays the dataset according to the resulting view (step 606).
[0047] In another embodiment, alternative views are formed based upon a set of criteria. FIG. 7 is a table showing the criteria for forming alternative views of a dataset and a rating system for one embodiment of the present invention. For example, if all the data in a dataset is aggregated and does not contain any independent quantitative data, then one of the possible views is a text table as determined by the first rule. Its rating is 1 meaning that it will only be the highest ranking view if other views such as Line (Measure), which was a higher rating of 9, is not applicable to the selected fields. As one skilled in the art will realize, these ratings could also be based on other criteria such as user preference, usage patterns, and statistical analysis of the data.
[0048] In one embodiment, if the user selected a first option, then the alternative views are ranked according to a rating system by alternative view ranker 134 in step 608. View assignor 120 then assigns the resulting view as the highest ranked alternative view at step 610. Dataset displayer 112 then displays the dataset according to the resulting view in step 606. For example, if all the data in a dataset is aggregated and does not contain any independently quantitative data, then alternative views of all the view types listed in FIG. 7 are generated at step 602. Then, at step 604, the text table alternative view is selected to be the resulting view, and the dataset is displayed as a text table in step 606. In another embodiment, in accomplishing step 602 (forming rated alternative views showing all tuples), view determiner 118 determines applicable view types according to the dataset's data types. Mark chooser 126 then identifies an associated mark for each applicable view type at step 620, which is then used to form alternative views for each applicable view type at step 622.
[0049] In another embodiment, if the user selected a second option, then a list of alternative views would be displayed by list displayer 136 at step 612 for the user's selection. After the user's selection is received at step 614 by selection receiver 138, the resulting view is assigned as the alternative view that the user selected by view assignor 120 at step 616, and dataset displayer 112 then displays the dataset according to the resulting view in step 606.
[0050] In yet another embodiment of the invention, cardinality computer 122 computes the cardinality of the fields in the plurality of tuples when forming the alternative views. In a further embodiment, functional dependency computer 124 computes the functional dependency of the fields in the plurality of tuples when forming the alternative views.
[0051] FIG. 8 a shows a rendering of the data in a dataset in an resulting view where either the highest ranked view type was a text table, or the user selected the alternative text table view. The dataset must include only aggregated data and no independently quantitative data.
[0052] FIG. 8 b shows a rendering of the data in a dataset in an resulting view where either the highest ranked view type was a heat map, or the user selected the alternative heat map view. The dataset must include only aggregated data, at least one field of ordinal data, one to two fields of dependant quantitative data, and no independent quantitative data.
[0053] FIG. 8 c shows a rendering of the data in a dataset in an resulting view where either the highest ranked view type was a side-by-side bar chart, or the user selected the alternative side-by-side bar chart view. The dataset must include only aggregated data, at least one field of ordinal data, at least one field of dependant quantitative data, and no independent quantitative data.
[0054] FIG. 8 d shows a rendering of the data in a dataset in an resulting view where either the highest ranked view type was a stacked bar chart, or the user selected the alternative stacked bar chart view. The dataset must include only aggregated data, at least two fields of ordinal data, at least one dependent quantitative data, and no independent quantitative data.
[0055] FIG. 8 e shows a rendering of the data in a dataset in an resulting view where either the highest ranked view type was a measure bar chart, or the user selected the alternative measure bar chart view. The dataset must include only aggregated data, at least one field of ordinal data, at least two fields of dependent quantitative data, and no independent quantitative data.
[0056] FIG. 8 f shows a rendering of the data in a dataset in an resulting view where either the highest ranked view type was a dimension line graph, or the user selected the alternative dimension line graph view. The dataset must include only aggregated data, at least one field of dependent quantitative data, at least one field of dates, and no independent quantitative data.
[0057] FIG. 8 g shows a rendering of the data in a dataset in an resulting view where either the highest ranked view type was a measure line graph, or the user selected the alternative measure line graph view. The dataset must include only aggregated data, at least one field of dependent quantitative data, and at least one field of independent quantitative data or dates.
[0058] FIG. 8 h shows a rendering of the data in a dataset in an resulting view where either the highest ranked view type was a circle graph, or the user selected the alternative circle graph view. The dataset must not include any aggregated data or independent quantitative data, and must include at least one field each of ordinal and dependent quantitative data.
[0059] FIG. 8 i shows a rendering of the data in a dataset in an resulting view where either the highest ranked view type was a Gantt chart, or the user selected the alternative Gantt chart view. The dataset must include only aggregated data, at least one field of ordinal data, less than three fields of dependent quantitative data, and at least one field of independently quantitative data or of relational dates.
[0060] FIG. 8 j shows a rendering of the data in a dataset in an resulting view where either the highest ranked view type was a single scatter plot, or the user selected the alternative single scatter plot view. The dataset must include two to four fields of dependent quantitative data, and at least one field of independent quantitative data.
[0061] FIG. 8 k shows a rendering of the data in a dataset in an resulting view where either the highest ranked view type was a matrix scatter plot, or the user selected the alternative matrix scatter plot view. The dataset must include three to six fields of dependent quantitative data, and at least one field of independent quantitative data.
[0062] FIG. 8 l shows a rendering of the data in a dataset in an resulting view where either the highest ranked view type was a histogram, or the user selected the alternative histogram view. The dataset must include only aggregated and relational data, must have exactly one field of dependent quantitative data, and must have no independent quantitative data.
[0063] The present invention not only accepts datasets and databases as inputs, it also accepts views as inputs. A view can be used to represent a set of fields. Resulting views can also depend on the existing view. For example, rules or operators can take into account the current view to generate a new view that is related to the current view. Also, as one skilled in the art will realize, many other rules are possible, include ones to generate statistical, maps, pie charts, and three dimensional views of data.
[0064] The present invention can be implemented as a computer program product that comprises a computer program mechanism embedded in a computer readable storage medium. For instance, the computer program product could contain the program modules shown in FIG. 1 . These program modules may be stored on a CD-ROM, magnetic disk storage product, or any other computer readable data or program storage product. The software modules in the computer program product can also be distributed electronically, via the Internet or otherwise, by transmission of a computer data signal (in which the software modules are embedded) on a carrier wave.
[0065] Many modifications and variations of this invention can be made without departing from its spirit and scope, as will be apparent to those skilled in the art. The specific embodiments described herein are offered by way of example only, and the invention is to be limited only by the terms of the appended claims, along with the full scope of equivalents to which such claims are entitled.
[0066] All references cited herein are incorporated herein by reference in their entirety and for all purposes to the same extent as if each individual publication or patent or patent application was specifically and individually indicated to be incorporated by reference in its entirety for all purposes.
Claims
What is claimed:
1. A computer implemented method for displaying a graphical representation of a dataset, comprising:
at a computer having one or more processors and memory storing programs executed by the one or more processors:
displaying a graphical user interface window including a schema display region and a data visualization region, wherein the schema display region includes multiple terms corresponding to a plurality of fields of the dataset, wherein each field defines a respective category of the dataset;
receiving a user selection of at least a subset of the multiple terms in the schema display region and a user ordering of the user-selected terms in the data visualization region, each of the user-selected terms having an associated data type; and
in response to the user selection and the user ordering,
forming a plurality of alternative views using the dataset based on the user ordering of the user-selected terms;
determining a rank for each of the plurality of alternative views based on the user-specified order and the associated data types of the user-selected terms and a rating system;
selecting from among the plurality of alternative views a resulting view for displaying the dataset based on comparing the rank of the resulting view with the rank of at least another view of the plurality of alternative views; and
displaying the dataset or a transformation of the dataset in the data visualization region according to the resulting view.
2. The computer implemented method of claim 1, wherein the selecting step further comprises:
with no further user instruction:
choosing one or more rules that are associated with adding the user selected fields; and
applying the one or more rules to determine the resulting view's view type.
3. The computer implemented method of claim 2, further comprising, before the choosing step:
determining whether a first view exists;
wherein the one or more rules selected is also based upon the first view, if the first view is determined to exist.
4. The computer implemented method of claim 1, wherein the dataset is a database.
5. The computer implemented method of claim 4, wherein the database is remote.
6. The computer implemented method of claim 4, wherein the database is a relational database.
7. The computer implemented method of claim 4, wherein the database is a multidimensional database.
8. The computer implemented method of claim 4, wherein the database contains semantic extractions of another database.
9. The computer implemented method of claim 1, wherein the dataset is retrieved from a remote database.
10. The computer implemented method of claim 2, wherein the rules are predetermined.
11. The computer implemented method of claim 2, wherein the rules relate to user preference.
12. The computer implemented method of claim 2, wherein the rules relate to user usage.
13. The computer implemented method of claim 1, the selecting step further comprising:
computing the cardinalities of all the fields in the resulting view.
14. The computer implemented method of claim 2, wherein the rules relate to the cardinalities of all the fields in the resulting view.
15. The computer implemented method of claim 1, the selecting step further comprising:
computing the functional dependencies of all the fields in the resulting view, using an algorithm.
16. The computer implemented method of claim 2, wherein the rules relate to the functional dependency of all the fields in the resulting view.
17. The computer implemented method of claim 1, the displaying of the dataset step further comprising:
choosing a mark for the resulting view; and
rendering the dataset according to the mark.
18. The computer implemented method of claim 1, wherein the receiving step is accomplished when the user drags and drops a representation of a field.
19. The computer implemented method of claim 1, wherein the receiving step is accomplished when the user double clicks a representation of a field.
20. The computer implemented method of claim 1, wherein the receiving step is accomplished when the user right clicks a representation of a field and selects an option to drop or add the field.
21. The computer implemented method of claim 1, wherein the receiving step is accomplished when the user inputs text to designate the plurality of user selected fields and their order.
22. The computer implemented method of claim 2, wherein the one or more rules state that the resulting view is a text table when the resulting view's first field is of the dimension data type.
23. The computer implemented method of claim 2, wherein the one or more rules state that the resulting view is a bar chart when the resulting view's first field is of the measure data type, the resulting view's second field is of the dimension data type, and the resulting view has no field of the date dimension data type.
24. The computer implemented method of claim 2, wherein the one or more rules state that the resulting view is a line when the resulting view's first field is of the measure data type, the resulting view's second field is of the dimension data type, and the resulting view has at least one field of the date dimension data type.
25. The computer implemented method of claim 2, wherein the one or more rules state that the resulting view is a discrete line when the resulting view's first field is of the date dimension data type, and the resulting view's second field is of the measure data type.
26. The computer implemented method of claim 2, wherein the one or more rules state that the resulting view is a continuous line when the resulting view's first field is of the continuous dimension data type, and the resulting view's second field is of the measure data type.
27. The computer implemented method of claim 2, wherein the one or more rules state that the resulting view is a scatter plot when the resulting view's first and second fields are of the measure data type, and the resulting view's subsequent fields are of the dimension data type.
28. The computer implemented method of claim 2, wherein the one or more rules state that the resulting view is a scatter matrix when the resulting view's first, second, and a subsequent field is of the measure data type.
29. The computer implemented method of claim 17, wherein when the resulting view is a text table, the mark is text.
30. The computer implemented method of claim 17, wherein when the resulting view is a heat map, the mark is a square.
31. The computer implemented method of claim 17, wherein when the resulting view is a bar chart, the mark is a bar.
32. The computer implemented method of claim 17, wherein when the resulting view is a line graph, the mark is a line segment.
33. The computer implemented method of claim 17, wherein when the resulting view is a circle chart, the mark is a circle.
34. The computer implemented method of claim 17, wherein when the resulting view is a Gantt plot, the mark is a bar.
35. The computer implemented method of claim 17, wherein when the resulting view is a scatter plot, the mark is a point or shape.
36. The computer implemented method of claim 1, wherein the selecting step uses heuristics.
37. A computer implemented method for displaying a graphical representation of a dataset with a plurality of tuples, comprising:
at a computer having one or more processors and memory storing programs executed by the one or more processors:
displaying a graphical user interface window including a schema display region and a data visualization region, wherein the schema display region includes multiple terms corresponding to a plurality of fields of the dataset, wherein each field defines a respective category of the dataset;
receiving a user instruction for generating a graphical representation of the dataset, wherein the user instruction includes a user selection of at least a subset of multiple terms in the schema display region and a user ordering of the user-selected terms in the data visualization region, each of the user-selected terms having an associated data type; and
in response to the user selection and the user ordering,
forming a plurality of alternative views based on the user ordering of the user-selected terms, each alternative view showing all tuples, or a transformation of all tuples, in the dataset;
determining a rank for each of the plurality of alternative views based on the user-specified order and the associated data types of the user-selected terms and a rating system;
selecting a resulting view from the plurality of rated alternative views, based upon a user selected option and comparing the rank of the resulting view with the rank of at least another view of the plurality of alternative views; and
displaying the dataset or a transformation of the dataset in the data visualization region according to the resulting view.
38. The computer implemented method of claim 37, wherein the dataset is a database.
39. The computer implemented method of claim 38, wherein the database is remote.
40. The computer implemented method of claim 38, wherein the database is a relational database.
41. The computer implemented method of claim 38, wherein the database is a multidimensional database.
42. The computer implemented method of claim 38, wherein the database contains semantic extractions of another database.
43. The computer implemented method of claim 37, wherein the dataset is retrieved from a remote database.
44. The computer implemented method of claim 37, wherein the forming step further comprises:
computing the cardinality of the fields in the plurality of tuples.
45. The computer implemented method of claim 37, wherein the forming step further comprises:
computing the functional dependency on the plurality of tuples, using an algorithm.
46. The computer implemented method of claim 37, wherein, when the user selected option is a first option, the selecting step further comprises:
ranking the plurality of alternative views according to a rating system; and
assigning the resulting view as the highest ranked alternative view.
47. The computer implemented method of claim 46, wherein the rating system is predetermined.
48. The computer implemented method of claim 46, wherein the rating system relates to user preference.
49. The computer implemented method of claim 46, wherein the rating system relates to user usage.
50. The computer implemented method of claim 37, wherein, when the user selected option is a second option, the selecting step further comprises:
displaying a list of the alternative views;
receiving the user's selection of an alternative view; and
assigning the resulting view as the alternative view selected by the user.
51. The computer implemented method of claim 37, wherein the forming step further comprises:
determining the applicable view types according to the dataset's data types;
identifying the associated mark for each applicable view type; and
forming an alternative view for each applicable view type according to the associated mark.
52. The computer implemented method of claim 51, wherein the determining step is accomplished using a set of criteria.
53. The computer implemented method of claim 52, wherein the set of criteria is predetermined.
54. The computer implemented method of claim 52, wherein the set of criteria relates to user preference.
55. The computer implemented method of claim 52, wherein the set of criteria relates to user usage.
56. The computer implemented method of claim 52, wherein an applicable view type is a text table and the associated mark for such an applicable view type is text, if all the data contained in the dataset are aggregated according to their fields, and no data type is independently quantitative.
57. The computer implemented method of claim 52, wherein an applicable view type is a heat map and the associated mark for such an applicable view type is a colored shape, if all the data contained in the dataset are aggregated according to their fields, at least one data type is ordinal, no more than two data types are dependently quantitative, and no data type is independently quantitative.
58. The computer implemented method of claim 52, wherein an applicable view type is a Gantt plot and the associated mark for such an applicable view type is a bar, if all the data contained in the dataset are aggregated according to their fields, at least one data type is ordinal, less than three data types are dependently quantitative, and at least one data type is either independently quantitative or a date.
59. The computer implemented method of claim 52, wherein an applicable view type is a side-by-side bar chart and the associated mark for such an applicable view type is a bar, if all the data contained in the dataset are aggregated according to their fields, at least one data type is ordinal, at least one data type is dependently quantitative, and no data type is independently quantitative.
60. The computer implemented method of claim 52, wherein an applicable view type is a stacked bar chart and the associated mark for such an applicable view type is a bar, if all the data contained in the dataset are aggregated according to their fields, at least one data type is dependently quantitative, no more than two data types are ordinal, and no data types are independently quantitative.
61. The computer implemented method of claim 52, wherein an applicable view type is a measure bar chart and the associated mark for such an applicable view type is a bar, if all the data contained in dataset are aggregated according to their fields, at least one data type is ordinal, no more than two data types are dependently quantitative, and no data types are independently quantitative.
62. The computer implemented method of claim 52, wherein an applicable view type is a dimension line graph and the associated mark for such an applicable view type is a line, if all the data contained in the dataset are aggregated according to their fields, at least one data type is dependently quantitative, at least one data type is a date, and no data types are independently quantitative.
63. The computer implemented method of claim 52, wherein an applicable view type is a measure line graph and the associated mark for such an applicable view type is a line, if all the data contained in the dataset are aggregated according to their fields, at least one data type is dependently quantitative, and at least one data type is either independently quantitative or a date.
64. The computer implemented method of claim 52, wherein an applicable view type is a circle chart and the associated mark for such an applicable view type is a circle, if at least one data type is ordinal, at least one data type is dependently quantitative, and no data type can be aggregated or is independently quantitative.
65. The computer implemented method of claim 52, wherein an applicable view type is a single scatter chart and the associated mark for such an applicable view type is a point, if the data contained in the dataset included between two to four dependently quantitative data types, and no independently quantitative data type.
66. The computer implemented method of claim 52, wherein an applicable view type is a matrix scatter chart and the associated mark for such an applicable view type is a point, if the dataset included at least three dependently quantitative data types, and no independently quantitative data type.
67. The computer implemented method of claim 52, wherein an applicable view type is a histogram and the associated mark for such an applicable view type is a bar, if all the data contained in the dataset are aggregated according to their fields, at least one data type is dependently quantitative, and no data types are independently quantitative.
68. The computer implemented method of claim 37, wherein the selecting step uses heuristics.
69. A computer program product including a computer readable storage medium and a computer program mechanism embedded therein, the computer program mechanism comprising instructions that are executed to display a graphical representation of a dataset, the instructions comprising:
a module for displaying a graphical user interface window including a schema display region and a data visualization region, wherein the schema display region includes multiple terms corresponding to a plurality of fields of the dataset, wherein each field defines a respective category of the dataset;
a field receiver for receiving a user selection of at least a subset of the multiple terms in the schema display region and a user ordering of the user-selected terms in the data visualization region, wherein each user-selected term has an associated data type;
a resulting view selector for, in response to the user selection and the user ordering,
forming a plurality of alternative views using the dataset based on the user ordering of the user-selected terms;
determining a rank for each of the plurality of alternative views based on the user-specified order and the associated data types of the user-selected terms and a rating system;
selecting a resulting view from the plurality of alternative views for displaying the dataset based on comparing the rank of the resulting view with the rank of at least another view of the plurality of alternative views; and
a dataset displayer for displaying the dataset or a transformation of the dataset according to the resulting view in the data visualization region.
70. The computer program product of claim 69, wherein the resulting view selector further comprises:
with no further user instruction:
a rule chooser for choosing one or more rules that are associated with adding the user selected fields; and
a rule applier for applying the one or more rules to determine the resulting view's view type.
71. The computer program product of claim 70, further comprising:
a view determiner for determining whether a first view exists;
wherein the one or more rules selected is also based upon the first view, if the first view is determined to exist.
72. The computer program product of claim 69, wherein the dataset is a database.
73. The computer program product of claim 72, wherein the database is remote.
74. The computer program product of claim 72, wherein the database is a relational database.
75. The computer program product of claim 72, wherein the database is a multidimensional database.
76. The computer program product of claim 72, wherein the database contains semantic extractions of another database.
77. The computer program product of claim 69, wherein the dataset is retrieved from a remote database.
78. The computer program product of claim 70, wherein the rules are predetermined.
79. The computer program product of claim 70, wherein the rules relate to user preference.
80. The computer program product of claim 70, wherein the rules relate to user usage.
81. The computer program product of claim 69, the resulting view selector further comprising:
a cardinality computer computing the cardinalities of all the fields in the resulting view.
82. The computer program product of claim 70, wherein the rules relate to the cardinalities of all the fields in the resulting view.
83. The computer program product of claim 69, the resulting view selector further comprising:
a functional dependency computer for computing the functional dependencies of all the fields in the resulting view, using an algorithm.
84. The computer program product of claim 70, wherein the rules relate to the functional dependency of all the fields in the resulting view.
85. The computer program product of claim 69, the dataset displayer further comprising:
a mark chooser for choosing a mark for the resulting view; and
a dataset renderer for rendering the dataset according to the mark.
86. The computer program product of claim 69, wherein the field receiver allows the user to drag and drop a representation of a field.
87. The computer program product of claim 69, wherein the field receiver allows the user to double click a representation of a field.
88. The computer program product of claim 69, wherein the field receiver allows the user to right click a representation of a field and selects an option to drop or add the field.
89. The computer program product of claim 69, wherein the field receiver allows the user to designate the plurality of user selected fields and their order.
90. The computer program product of claim 70, wherein the one or more rules state that the resulting view is a text table when the resulting view's first field is of the dimension data type.
91. The computer program product of claim 70, wherein the one or more rules state that the resulting view is a bar chart when the resulting view's first field is of the measure data type, the resulting view's second field is of the dimension data type, and the resulting view has no field of the date dimension data type.
92. The computer program product of claim 70, wherein the one or more rules state that the resulting view is a line when the resulting view's first field is of the measure data type, the resulting view's second field is of the dimension data type, and the resulting view has at least one field of the date dimension data type.
93. The computer program product of claim 70, wherein the one or more rules state that the resulting view is a discrete line when the resulting view's first field is of the date dimension data type, and the resulting view's second field is of the measure data type.
94. The computer program product of claim 70, wherein the one or more rules state that the resulting view is a continuous line when the resulting view's first field is of the continuous dimension data type, and the resulting view's second field is of the measure data type.
95. The computer program product of claim 70, wherein the one or more rules state that the resulting view is a scatter plot when the resulting view's first and second fields are of the measure data type, and the resulting view's subsequent fields are of the dimension data type.
96. The computer program product of claim 70, wherein the one or more rules state that the resulting view is a scatter matrix when the resulting view's first, second, and a subsequent field is of the measure data type.
97. The computer program product of claim 85, wherein when the resulting view is a text table, the mark is text.
98. The computer program product of claim 85, wherein when the resulting view is a heat map, the mark is a square.
99. The computer program product of claim 85, wherein when the resulting view is a bar chart, the mark is a bar.
100. The computer program product of claim 85, wherein when the resulting view is a line graph, the mark is a line segment.
101. The computer program product of claim 85, wherein when the resulting view is a circle chart, the mark is a circle.
102. The computer program product of claim 85, wherein when the resulting view is a Gantt plot, the mark is a bar.
103. The computer program product of claim 85, wherein when the resulting view is a scatter plot, the mark is a point or shape.
104. The computer program product of claim 69, wherein the selecting step uses heuristics.
105. A computer program product including a computer readable storage medium and a computer program mechanism embedded therein, the computer program mechanism comprising instructions that are executed to display a graphical representation of a dataset with a plurality of tuples, the instructions comprising:
a module for displaying a graphical user interface window including a schema display region and a data visualization region, wherein the schema display region includes multiple terms corresponding to a plurality of fields of the dataset, wherein each field defines a respective category of the dataset;
an alternative view former for forming a plurality of alternative views in response to a user instruction for generating a graphical representation of the dataset, each alternative view showing all tuples, or a transformation of all tuples, in the dataset, wherein the user instruction includes a user selection of at least a subset of multiple terms in the schema display region and a user ordering of the user-selected terms in the data visualization region, each of the user-selected terms having an associated data type, and determining a rank for each of the plurality of alternative views based on the user-specified order and the associated data types of the user-selected terms and a rating system, wherein the user instruction includes a user selection of at least a subset of multiple terms in the schema display region and a user ordering of the user-selected terms in the data visualization region, each of the user-selected terms having an associated data type;
a resulting view selector for selecting a resulting view from the plurality of rated alternative views in response to the user instruction, based upon a user selected option and comparing the rank of the resulting view with the rank of at least another view of the plurality of alternative views; and
a dataset displayer for displaying the dataset or a transformation of the dataset in the data visualization region according to the resulting view in response to the user instruction.
106. The computer program product of claim 105, wherein the dataset is a database.
107. The computer program product of claim 106, wherein the database is remote.
108. The computer program product of claim 106, wherein the database is a relational database.
109. The computer program product of claim 106, wherein the database is a multidimensional database.
110. The computer program product of claim 106, wherein the database contains semantic extractions of another database.
111. The computer program product of claim 105, wherein the dataset is retrieved from a remote database.
112. The computer program product of claim 105, wherein the alternative view former further comprises:
a cardinality computer for computing the cardinality of the fields in the plurality of tuples.
113. The computer program product of claim 105, wherein the alternative view former further comprises:
a functional dependency computer for computing the functional dependency on the plurality of tuples, using an algorithm.
114. The computer program product of claim 105, wherein, when the user selected option is a first option, the resulting view selector further comprises:
an alternative view ranker for ranking the plurality of alternative views according to a rating system; and
a view assignor for assigning the resulting view as the highest ranked alternative view.
115. The computer program product of claim 114, wherein the rating system is predetermined.
116. The computer program product of claim 114, wherein the rating system relates to user preference.
117. The computer program product of claim 114, wherein the rating system relates to user usage.
118. The computer program product of claim 105, wherein, when the user selected option is a second option, the resulting view selector further comprises:
a list displayer for displaying a list of the alternative views;
a selection receiver for receiving the user's selection of an alternative view; and
a view assignor for assigning the resulting view as the alternative view selected by the user.
119. The computer program product of claim 105, wherein the alternative view former forms an alternative view for each applicable view type according to an associated mark, the alternative view former further comprising:
a view type determiner for determining the applicable view types according to the dataset's data types; and
a mark chooser for choosing the associated mark for each applicable view type.
120. The computer program product of claim 119, wherein the view type determiner uses a set of criteria.
121. The computer program product of claim 120, wherein the set of criteria is predetermined.
122. The computer program product of claim 120, wherein the set of criteria relates to user preference.
123. The computer program product of claim 120, wherein the set of criteria relates to user usage.
124. The computer program product of claim 120, wherein an applicable view type is a text table and the associated mark for such an applicable view type is text, if all the data contained in the dataset are aggregated according to their fields, and no data type is independently quantitative.
125. The computer program product of claim 120, wherein an applicable view type is a heat map and the associated mark for such an applicable view type is a colored shape, if all the data contained in the dataset are aggregated according to their fields, at least one data type is ordinal, no more than two data types are dependently quantitative, and no data type is independently quantitative.
126. The computer program product of claim 120, wherein an applicable view type is a Gantt plot and the associated mark for such an applicable view type is a bar, if all the data contained in the dataset are aggregated according to their fields, at least one data type is ordinal, less than three data types are dependently quantitative, and at least one data type is either independently quantitative or a date.
127. The computer program product of claim 120, wherein an applicable view type is a side-by-side bar chart and the associated mark for such an applicable view type is a bar, if all the data contained in the dataset are aggregated according to their fields, at least one data type is ordinal, at least one data type is dependently quantitative, and no data type is independently quantitative.
128. The computer program product of claim 120, wherein an applicable view type is a stacked bar chart and the associated mark for such an applicable view type is a bar, if all the data contained in the dataset are aggregated according to their fields, at least one data type is dependently quantitative, no more than two data types are ordinal, and no data types are independently quantitative.
129. The computer program product of claim 120, wherein an applicable view type is a measure bar chart and the associated mark for such an applicable view type is a bar, if all the data contained in dataset are aggregated according to their fields, at least one data type is ordinal, no more than two data types are dependently quantitative, and no data types are independently quantitative.
130. The computer program product of claim 120, wherein an applicable view type is a dimension line graph and the associated mark for such an applicable view type is a line, if all the data contained in the dataset are aggregated according to their fields, at least one data type is dependently quantitative, at least one data type is a date, and no data types are independently quantitative.
131. The computer program product of claim 120, wherein an applicable view type is a measure line graph and the associated mark for such an applicable view type is a line, if all the data contained in the dataset are aggregated according to their fields, at least one data type is dependently quantitative, and at least one data type is either independently quantitative or a date.
132. The computer program product of claim 120, wherein an applicable view type is a circle chart and the associated mark for such an applicable view type is a circle, if at least one data type is ordinal, at least one data type is dependently quantitative, and no data type can be aggregated or is independently quantitative.
133. A computer system for automatically and visually displaying a graphical representation of a dataset, the computer system comprising:
a central processing unit;
a memory, coupled to the central processing unit, the memory storing:
the dataset;
a programming module comprising, comprising:
instructions for displaying a graphical user interface window including a schema display region and a data visualization region, wherein the schema display region includes multiple terms corresponding to a plurality of fields of the dataset, wherein each field defines a respective category of the dataset;
instructions for receiving a user selection of at least a subset of multiple terms in the schema display region and a user ordering of the user-selected terms in the data visualization region, wherein each field has an associated data type;
instructions for forming a plurality of alternative views using the dataset based on the user ordering of the user-selected terms;
instructions for determining a rank for each of the plurality of alternative views based on the user-specified order and the associated data types of the user-selected terms and a rating system and selecting a resulting view from the plurality of alternative views for displaying the dataset based on comparing the rank of the resulting view with the rank of at least another view of the plurality of alternative views; and
instructions for displaying the dataset or a transformation of the dataset in the data visualization region according to the resulting view.
134. The computer system of claim 133, wherein the instructions for selecting further comprises:
with no further user instruction:
instructions for choosing one or more rules that are associated with adding the user selected fields; and
instructions for applying the one or more rules to determine the resulting view's view type.
135. The computer system of claim 134, further comprising, before the instructions for choosing:
instructions for determining whether a first view exists;
wherein the one or more rules selected is also based upon the first view, if the first view is determined to exist.
136. The computer system of claim 133, wherein the dataset is a database.
137. The computer system of claim 136, wherein the database is remote.
138. The computer system of claim 136, wherein the database is a relational database.
139. The computer system of claim 136, wherein the database is a multidimensional database.
140. The computer system of claim 136, wherein the database contains semantic extractions of another database.
141. The computer system of claim 133, wherein the dataset is retrieved from a remote database.
142. The computer system of claim 134, wherein the rules are predetermined.
143. The computer system of claim 134, wherein the rules relate to user preference.
144. The computer system of claim 134, wherein the rules relate to user usage.
145. The computer system of claim 133, the instructions for selecting further comprising:
instructions for computing the cardinalities of all the fields in the resulting view.
146. The computer system of claim 134, wherein the rules relate to the cardinalities of all the fields in the resulting view.
147. The computer system of claim 133, the instructions for selecting further comprising:
instructions for computing the functional dependencies of all the fields in the resulting view, using an algorithm.
148. The computer system of claim 134, wherein the rules relate to the functional dependency of all the fields in the resulting view.
149. The computer system of claim 133, the instructions for displaying the dataset further comprising:
instructions for choosing a mark for the resulting view; and
instructions for rendering the dataset according to the mark.
150. The computer system of claim 133, wherein the instructions for receiving is accomplished when the user drags and drops a representation of a field.
151. The computer system of claim 133, wherein the instructions for receiving is accomplished when the user double clicks a representation of a field.
152. The computer system of claim 133, wherein the instructions for receiving is accomplished when the user right clicks a representation of a field and selects an option to drop or add the field.
153. The computer system of claim 133, wherein the instructions for receiving is accomplished when the user inputs text to designate the plurality of user selected fields and their order.
154. The computer system of claim 134, wherein the one or more rules state that the resulting view is a text table when the resulting view's first field is of the dimension data type.
155. The computer system of claim 134, wherein the one or more rules state that the resulting view is a bar chart when the resulting view's first field is of the measure data type, the resulting view's second field is of the dimension data type, and the resulting view has no field of the date dimension data type.
156. The computer system of claim 134, wherein the one or more rules state that the resulting view is a line when the resulting view's first field is of the measure data type, the resulting view's second field is of the dimension data type, and the resulting view has at least one field of the date dimension data type.
157. The computer system of claim 134, wherein the one or more rules state that the resulting view is a discrete line when the resulting view's first field is of the date dimension data type, and the resulting view's second field is of the measure data type.
158. The computer system of claim 134, wherein the one or more rules state that the resulting view is a continuous line when the resulting view's first field is of the continuous dimension data type, and the resulting view's second field is of the measure data type.
159. The computer system of claim 134, wherein the one or more rules state that the resulting view is a scatter plot when the resulting view's first and second fields are of the measure data type, and the resulting view's subsequent fields are of the dimension data type.
160. The computer system of claim 134, wherein the one or more rules state that the resulting view is a scatter matrix when the resulting view's first, second, and a subsequent field is of the measure data type.
161. The computer system of claim 149, wherein when the resulting view is a text table, the mark is text.
162. The computer system of claim 149, wherein when the resulting view is a heat map, the mark is a square.
163. The computer system of claim 149, wherein when the resulting view is a bar chart, the mark is a bar.
164. The computer system of claim 149, wherein when the resulting view is a line graph, the mark is a line segment.
165. The computer system of claim 149, wherein when the resulting view is a circle chart, the mark is a circle.
166. The computer system of claim 149, wherein when the resulting view is a Gantt plot, the mark is a bar.
167. The computer system of claim 149, wherein when the resulting view is a scatter plot, the mark is a point or shape.
168. The computer system of claim 133, wherein the selecting step uses heuristics.
169. A computer system for automatically and visually displaying a graphical representation of a dataset with a plurality of tuples, the computer system comprising:
a central processing unit;
a memory, coupled to the central processing unit, the memory storing:
the dataset;
a programming module comprising:
instructions for displaying a graphical user interface window including a schema display region and a data visualization region, wherein the schema display region includes multiple terms corresponding to a plurality of fields of the dataset, wherein each field defines a respective category of the dataset;
instructions for forming a plurality of alternative views in response to a user instruction for generating a graphical representation of the dataset, each alternative view showing all tuples, or a transformation of all tuples, in the dataset, wherein the user instruction includes a user selection of at least a subset of multiple terms in the schema display region and a user ordering of the user-selected terms in the data visualization region, each of the user-selected terms having an associated data type, and determining a rank for each of the plurality of alternative views based on the user-specified order and the associated data types of the user-selected terms and a rating system, wherein the user instruction includes a user selection of at least a subset of multiple terms in the schema display region and a user ordering of the user-selected terms in the data visualization region, each of the user-selected terms having an associated data type;
instructions for selecting a resulting view from the plurality of rated alternative views in response to the user instruction, based upon a user selected option and comparing the rank of the resulting view with the rank of at least another view of the plurality of alternative views; and
instructions for displaying the dataset or a transformation of the dataset in the data visualization region according to the resulting view in response to the user instruction.
170. The computer system of claim 169, wherein the dataset is a database.
171. The computer system of claim 170, wherein the database is remote.
172. The computer system of claim 170, wherein the database is a relational database.
173. The computer system of claim 170, wherein the database is a multidimensional database.
174. The computer system of claim 170, wherein the database contains semantic extractions of another database.
175. The computer system of claim 169, wherein the dataset is retrieved from a remote database.
176. The computer system of claim 169, wherein the instructions for forming further comprises:
instructions for computing the cardinality of the fields in the plurality of tuples.
177. The computer system of claim 169, wherein the instructions for forming further comprises:
instructions for computing the functional dependency on the plurality of tuples, using an algorithm.
178. The computer system of claim 169, wherein, when the user selected option is a first option, the instructions for selecting further comprises:
instructions for ranking the plurality of alternative views according to a rating system; and
instructions for assigning the resulting view as the highest ranked alternative view.
179. The computer system of claim 178, wherein the rating system is predetermined.
180. The computer system of claim 178, wherein the rating system relates to user preference.
181. The computer system of claim 178, wherein the rating system relates to user usage.
182. The computer system of claim 169, wherein, when the user selected option is a second option, the instructions for selecting further comprises:
instructions for displaying a list of the alternative views;
instructions for receiving the user's selection of an alternative view; and
instructions for assigning the resulting view as the alternative view selected by the user.
183. The computer system of claim 169, wherein the instructions for forming further comprises:
instructions for determining the applicable view types according to the dataset's data types;
instructions for identifying the associated mark for each applicable view type; and
instructions for forming an alternative view for each applicable view type according to the associated mark.
184. The computer system of claim 183, wherein the instructions for determining is accomplished using a set of criteria.
185. The computer system of claim 184, wherein the set of criteria is predetermined.
186. The computer system of claim 184, wherein the set of criteria relates to user preference.
187. The computer system of claim 184, wherein the set of criteria relates to user usage.
188. The computer system of claim 184, wherein an applicable view type is a text table and the associated mark for such an applicable view type is text, if all the data contained in the dataset are aggregated according to their fields, and no data type is independently quantitative.
189. The computer system of claim 184, wherein an applicable view type is a heat map and the associated mark for such an applicable view type is a colored shape, if all the data contained in the dataset are aggregated according to their fields, at least one data type is ordinal, no more than two data types are dependently quantitative, and no data type is independently quantitative.
190. The computer system of claim 184, wherein an applicable view type is a Gantt plot and the associated mark for such an applicable view type is a bar, if all the data contained in the dataset are aggregated according to their fields, at least one data type is ordinal, less than three data types are dependently quantitative, and at least one data type is either independently quantitative or a date.
191. The computer system of claim 184, wherein an applicable view type is a side-by-side bar chart and the associated mark for such an applicable view type is a bar, if all the data contained in the dataset are aggregated according to their fields, at least one data type is ordinal, at least one data type is dependently quantitative, and no data type is independently quantitative.
192. The computer system of claim 184, wherein an applicable view type is a stacked bar chart and the associated mark for such an applicable view type is a bar, if all the data contained in the dataset are aggregated according to their fields, at least one data type is dependently quantitative, no more than two data types are ordinal, and no data types are independently quantitative.
193. The computer system of claim 184, wherein an applicable view type is a measure bar chart and the associated mark for such an applicable view type is a bar, if all the data contained in dataset are aggregated according to their fields, at least one data type is ordinal, no more than two data types are dependently quantitative, and no data types are independently quantitative.
194. The computer system of claim 184, wherein an applicable view type is a dimension line graph and the associated mark for such an applicable view type is a line, if all the data contained in the dataset are aggregated according to their fields, at least one data type is dependently quantitative, at least one data type is a date, and no data types are independently quantitative.
195. The computer system of claim 184, wherein an applicable view type is a measure line graph and the associated mark for such an applicable view type is a line, if all the data contained in the dataset are aggregated according to their fields, at least one data type is dependently quantitative, and at least one data type is either independently quantitative or a date.
196. The computer system of claim 184, wherein an applicable view type is a circle chart and the associated mark for such an applicable view type is a circle, if at least one data type is ordinal, at least one data type is dependently quantitative, and no data type can be aggregated or is independently quantitative.
197. The computer system of claim 184, wherein an applicable view type is a single scatter chart and the associated mark for such an applicable view type is a point, if the data contained in the dataset included between two to four dependently quantitative data types, and no independently quantitative data type.
198. The computer system of claim 184, wherein an applicable view type is a matrix scatter chart and the associated mark for such an applicable view type is a point, if the dataset included at least three dependently quantitative data types, and no independently quantitative data type.
199. The computer system of claim 184, wherein an applicable view type is a histogram and the associated mark for such an applicable view type is a bar, if all the data contained in the dataset are aggregated according to their fields, at least one data type is dependently quantitative, and no data types are independently quantitative.
200. The computer system of claim 169, wherein the selecting step uses heuristics.
201. The computer implemented method of claim 1, the selecting step further comprising:
displaying the plurality of alternative views; and
receiving a user selection of one of the plurality of alternative views as the resulting view.
202. The computer implemented method of claim 37, the selecting step further comprising:
displaying the plurality of alternative views; and
receiving a user selection of one of the plurality of alternative views as the resulting view.
Patent Citations (108)
| Patent | Date | Inventor | Cited By |
|---|---|---|---|
| US4800810(A) | 1989-01-01 | Masumoto | Applicant |
| US5036314(A) | 1991-07-01 | Barillari et al. | Applicant |
| US5060980(A) | 1991-10-01 | Johnson et al. | Applicant |
| US5143888(A) | 1992-09-01 | Olbrich | Applicant |
| US5144452(A) | 1992-09-01 | Abuyama | Applicant |
| US5169713(A) | 1992-12-01 | Kumurdjian | Applicant |
| US5265244(A) | 1993-11-01 | Ghosh et al. | Applicant |
| US5265246(A) | 1993-11-01 | Li et al. | Applicant |
| US5377348(A) | 1994-12-01 | Lau et al. | Applicant |
| US5383029(A) | 1995-01-01 | Kojima | Applicant |
| US5461708(A) | 1995-10-01 | Kahn | Examiner |
| US5560007(A) | 1996-09-01 | Thai | Applicant |
| US5577241(A) | 1996-11-01 | Spencer | Applicant |
| US5581677(A) | 1996-12-01 | Myers et al. | Examiner |
| US5664172(A) | 1997-09-01 | Antoshenkov | Applicant |
| US5664182(A) | 1997-09-01 | Nierenberg et al. | Applicant |
| US5668987(A) | 1997-09-01 | Schneider | Applicant |
| US5794246(A) | 1998-08-01 | Sankaran et al. | Applicant |
| US5864856(A) | 1999-01-01 | Young | Applicant |
| US5893088(A) | 1999-04-01 | Hendricks et al. | Applicant |
| US5933830(A) | 1999-08-01 | Williams | Applicant |
| US6031632(A) | 2000-02-01 | Yoshihara et al. | Applicant |
| US6032158(A) | 2000-02-01 | Mukhopadhyay et al. | Applicant |
| US6044374(A) | 2000-03-01 | Nesamoney et al. | Applicant |
| US6100901(A) | 2000-08-01 | Mohda et al. | Applicant |
| US6115744(A) | 2000-09-01 | Robins et al. | Applicant |
| US6154766(A) | 2000-11-01 | Yost et al. | Applicant |
| US6173310(B1) | 2001-01-01 | Yost et al. | Applicant |
| US6188403(B1) | 2001-02-01 | Sacerdoti et al. | Applicant |
| US6208990(B1) | 2001-03-01 | Suresh et al. | Applicant |
| US6222540(B1) | 2001-04-01 | Sacerdoti | Applicant |
| US6247008(B1) | 2001-06-01 | Cambot et al. | Applicant |
| US6253257(B1) | 2001-06-01 | Dundon | Applicant |
| US6260050(B1) | 2001-07-01 | Yost et al. | Applicant |
| US6269393(B1) | 2001-07-01 | Yost et al. | Applicant |
| US6300957(B1) | 2001-10-01 | Rao et al. | Applicant |
| US6301579(B1) | 2001-10-01 | Becker | Applicant |
| US6317750(B1) | 2001-11-01 | Tortolani et al. | Applicant |
| US6327628(B1) | 2001-12-01 | Anuff et al. | Applicant |
| US6339775(B1) | 2002-01-01 | Zamanian et al. | Applicant |
| US6377259(B1) | 2002-04-01 | Tenev et al. | Applicant |
| US6397195(B1) | 2002-05-01 | Pinard et al. | Applicant |
| US6400366(B1) | 2002-06-01 | Davies et al. | Applicant |
| US6405195(B1) | 2002-06-01 | Ahlberg | Applicant |
| US6405208(B1) | 2002-06-01 | Raghavan et al. | Applicant |
| US6424933(B1) | 2002-07-01 | Agrawala et al. | Applicant |
| US6490593(B2) | 2002-12-01 | Proctor | Applicant |
| US6492989(B1) | 2002-12-01 | Wilkinson | Applicant |
| US6505205(B1) | 2003-01-01 | Kothuri et al. | Examiner |
| US6522342(B1) | 2003-02-01 | Gagnon et al. | Applicant |
| US6529217(B1) | 2003-03-01 | Maguire et al. | Examiner |
| US6590577(B1) | 2003-07-01 | Yonts | Examiner |
| US6611825(B1) | 2003-08-01 | Billheimer et al. | Applicant |
| US6643646(B2) | 2003-11-01 | Su et al. | Applicant |
| US6701485(B1) | 2004-03-01 | Igra et al. | Examiner |
| US6707454(B1) | 2004-03-01 | Barg et al. | Examiner |
| US6714897(B2) | 2004-03-01 | Whitney et al. | Applicant |
| US6725230(B2) | 2004-04-01 | Ruth et al. | Applicant |
| US6750864(B1) | 2004-06-01 | Anwar | Applicant |
| US6763308(B2) | 2004-07-01 | Chu et al. | Applicant |
| US6768986(B2) | 2004-07-01 | Cras et al. | Applicant |
| US6867788(B1) | 2005-03-01 | Takeda | Examiner |
| US6906717(B2) | 2005-06-01 | Couckuyt et al. | Examiner |
| US6920608(B1) | 2005-07-01 | Davis | Examiner |
| US6928433(B2) | 2005-08-01 | Goodman et al. | Examiner |
| US6985905(B2) | 2006-01-01 | Prompt et al. | Examiner |
| US7009609(B2) | 2006-03-01 | Miyadai | Applicant |
| US7089266(B2) | 2006-08-01 | Stolte et al. | Examiner |
| US7117058(B2) | 2006-10-01 | Lin et al. | Examiner |
| US7168035(B1) | 2007-01-01 | Bell et al. | Examiner |
| US7181450(B2) | 2007-02-01 | Malloy et al. | Applicant |
| US7250951(B1) | 2007-07-01 | Hurley et al. | Examiner |
| US7315305(B2) | 2008-01-01 | Crotty et al. | Examiner |
| US7379601(B2) | 2008-05-01 | Yang et al. | Applicant |
| US7630971(B2) | 2009-12-01 | Arrouye et al. | Examiner |
| US7694278(B2) | 2010-04-01 | Pasumansky et al. | Examiner |
| US7725483(B2) | 2010-05-01 | Poyourow et al. | Examiner |
| US2002/0016699(A1) | 2002-02-01 | Hoggart et al. | Applicant |
| US2002/0118192(A1) | 2002-08-01 | Couckuyt et al. | Applicant |
| US2002/0123865(A1) | 2002-09-01 | Whitney et al. | Applicant |
| US2002/0154118(A1) | 2002-10-01 | McCarthy et al. | Applicant |
| US2003/0042928(A1) | 2003-03-01 | Tsai | Applicant |
| US2003/0200034(A1) | 2003-10-01 | Fellenberg et al. | Applicant |
| US2003/0204511(A1) | 2003-10-01 | Brundage et al. | Examiner |
| US2004/0183800(A1) | 2004-09-01 | Peterson | Applicant |
| US2004/0224577(A1) | 2004-11-01 | Kaji | Applicant |
| US2004/0227759(A1) | 2004-11-01 | McKnight et al. | Applicant |
| US2004/0243593(A1) | 2004-12-01 | Stolte et al. | Examiner |
| US2005/0035966(A1) | 2005-02-01 | Pasquarette et al. | Applicant |
| US2005/0035967(A1) | 2005-02-01 | Joffrain et al. | Applicant |
| US2005/0060300(A1) | 2005-03-01 | Stolte et al. | Examiner |
| US2005/0099423(A1) | 2005-05-01 | Brauss | Applicant |
| US2005/0234688(A1) | 2005-10-01 | Pinto et al. | Applicant |
| US2005/0234920(A1) | 2005-10-01 | Rhodes | Applicant |
| US2006/0020586(A1) | 2006-01-01 | Prompt et al. | Examiner |
| US2006/0031187(A1) | 2006-02-01 | Pyrce et al. | Examiner |
| US2006/0053363(A1) | 2006-03-01 | Bargh et al. | Applicant |
| US2006/0100873(A1) | 2006-05-01 | Bittner et al. | Applicant |
| US2006/0101391(A1) | 2006-05-01 | Ulke et al. | Examiner |
| US2006/0129913(A1) | 2006-06-01 | Vigesaa et al. | Applicant |
| US2006/0136825(A1) | 2006-06-01 | Cory et al. | Examiner |
| US2006/0206512(A1) | 2006-09-01 | Hanrahan et al. | Examiner |
| US2007/0055487(A1) | 2007-03-01 | Habitz et al. | Applicant |
| US2007/0061344(A1) | 2007-03-01 | Dickerman et al. | Applicant |
| US2007/0112844(A1) | 2007-05-01 | Tribble et al. | Examiner |
| US2008/0133573(A1) | 2008-06-01 | Haft et al. | Applicant |
| HU215657(B) | 1994-01-01 | Applicant | |
| WO2006/-060773 | 2006-06-01 | Examiner |
Non-Patent Literature (67)
- Screen Dumps for Microsoft Office Excel 2003 SP2, figures 1-24, 10 pp. 1-19.Examiner
- Becker et al., “Trellis Graphics Displays: A Multi-Dimensional Data Visualization Tool for Data Mining,” Third Annual Conference on Knowledge Discovery in Databases, Aug. 1997.Applicant
- Becker, “Visualizing Decision Table Classifiers”, Proceedings IEEE Symposium on Information Visualization, pp. 102-105, 1998.Applicant
- Bosch et al., “Performance Analysis and Visualization of Parallel Systems Using SimOS and Rivet: A Case Study,” Proceedings of the Sixth IEEE International Symposium on High-Performance Computer Architecture, pp. 360-371, Jan. 2000.Applicant
- Bosch et al., “Rivet: A Flexible Environment for Computer Systems Visualization,” Computer Graphics.34, pp. 68-73, Feb. 2000.Applicant
- Brunk et al., “MineSet: An Integrated System for Data Mining,” Proceeding of the 3rd International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, pp. 135-138, AAA1 Press, 1997.Applicant
- Derthick et al., “An Interactive Visual Query Environment for Exploring Data,” Proceedings of ACM SIGGRAPH Symposium on User Interface Software & Technology, pp. 189-198, 1997.Applicant
- Freeze, Unlocking OLAP with Microsoft SQL Server and Excel 2000, IDG Books Worldwide, Foster City, CA, pp. 155-332 and 379-422.Applicant
- Fua et al., “Navigating Hierarchies with Structure-Based Brushes,” Proc. of Infovis '99 (San Francisco, CA, USA, 1999), IEEE Computer Soc Press.Applicant
- Goldstein et al., “A Framework for Knowledge-Based Interactive Data Exploration,” Journal of Visual Languages and Computing 5, pp. 339-363, Dec. 1994.Applicant
- Gray et al., “Data Cube: A Relational Aggregation Operator Generalizing Group-By, Cross-Tab, and Sub-Total,” Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery 1, pp. 29-53, 1997.Applicant
- Healey, “On the Use of Perceptual Cues and Data Mining for Effective Visualization of Scientific Datasets,” Proceedings Graphics Interface '98, pp. 177-187.Applicant
- Kohavi, “Data Mining and Visualization,” Frontiers of Engineering: Reports of leading-Edge Engineering from the 200 NAE Sym.Applicant
- Livny et al., “DEVise: Integrated Querying and Visual Exploration of Large Datasets,” Proceedings of ACM SIGMOD, pp. 301-312, May 1997.Applicant
- MacDonald, “Creating Basic Charts,” Excel 2003, Chapter 9, pp. 298-342, 2006.Applicant
- MacKinlay, J., “Automating the Design of Graphical Presentations of Relational Information,” ACM Transactionss on Graphics 5(2), pp. 110-141, 1986.Applicant
- Perlin et al., “An Alternative Approach to the Computer Interface,” Proc. of the 20th International Conference on Computer Graphics and Interactive Techniques, pp. 57-64, 1993.Applicant
- Rao et al., “The Table Lens: Merging Graphical and Symbolic Representations in an Interactive Focus+Context Visualization for Tabular Information,” Proc. of ACM SIGCHI, Apr. 1994, pp. 318-322.Applicant
- Roth et al., “Interactive Graphics Design Using Automatic Presentation Knowledge,” Proceedings of the Conference on Human Factors in Computer Systems, Proc. SIGCHI '94, pp. 112-117, 1994.Applicant
- Roth et al., “Visage: A User Interface Environment for Exploring Information” Proceedings of Information Visualization Symposium 1996, pp. 3-12, Mar. 12, 1999.Applicant
- Spenke et al., Focus: The Interactive Table for Product Comparison and Selection, Proc. of ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology, Nov. 1996.Applicant
- Stevens, “On the Theory of Scales of Measurement,” Science vol. 103, No. 2684 pp. 677-680, Jun. 7, 1946.Applicant
- Stolte et al, “Query, Analysis, and Visualization of Hierarchically Structured Data Using Polaris,” Proceedings of the Eight ACM SIGKDD '02, International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, Jul. 2002.Applicant
- Stolte et al., “Multiscale Visualization Using Data Cubes,” Proceedings of the Eighth IEEE Symposium on Information Visualization, 2002.Applicant
- Stolte et al., “Polaris: A System for Query, Analysis, and Visualization of Multidimensional Relational Databases,” IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 8(1), pp. 52-65, Jan. 2002.Applicant
- Stolte et al., “Visualizing Application Behavior on Superscalar Processors,” Proceedings of the IEEE Symposium on Information Visualization, pp. 10-17, 1999.Applicant
- Thearling et al., “Visualizing Data Mining Models,” Pub. in Information Visualization in Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery, Fayyad, Grinstein and Wierse, eds., Morgan Kaufman, 2001.Applicant
- Welling et al., “Visualization of Large Multi-Dimensional Datasets,” arXiv: astro-ph/0008186, Aug. 11, 2000.Applicant
- Wilkinson et al., “nViZn: An Algebra-Based Visualization System,” Smart Graphics Symposium UK, Mar. 21-23, 2001, Hawthorne, NY USA.Applicant
- Wilkinson, “Statistics and Computing—The Grammar of Graphics,” Springer-Verlag, Inc., New York, 1999.Applicant
- Notice of Allowance for U.S. Appl. No. 10/453,834 dated Mar. 27, 2006.Applicant
- Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 10/667,194 dated Jun. 26, 2006.Applicant
- Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 10/667,194 dated Jan. 18, 2007.Applicant
- Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 10/667,194 dated Aug. 14, 2007.Applicant
- Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 10/667,194 dated Jan. 7, 2008.Applicant
- Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 10/667,194 dated Aug. 14, 2008.Applicant
- Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 10/667,194 dated Feb. 9, 2009.Applicant
- Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 11/005,652 dated Dec. 27, 2007.Applicant
- Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 11/005,652 dated Jul. 24, 2008.Applicant
- Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 11/005,652 dated Feb. 20, 2009.Applicant
- Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 11/488,407 dated Apr. 3, 2009.Applicant
- Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 11/787,761 dated Jun. 12, 2008.Applicant
- Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 11/787,761 dated Dec. 17, 2008.Applicant
- International Search Report and Written Opinion for PCT/US2004/30396 dated Aug. 24, 2006.Applicant
- International Preliminary Report on Patentability for PCT/US2004/30396 dated Apr. 19, 2007.Applicant
- International Search Report and Written Opinion for PCT/US2005/043937 dated Apr. 18, 2007.Applicant
- International Preliminary Report on Patentability for PCT/US2005/043937 dated Jun. 14, 2007.Applicant
- International Search Report and Written Opinion for PCT/US2007/009810 dated Jul. 7, 2008.Applicant
- International Preliminary Report on Patentability for PCT/US2007/009810 dated Oct. 30, 2008.Applicant
- International Search Report and Written Opinion for PCT/US2006/35300 dated Jul. 7, 2008.Applicant
- International Search Report and Written Opinion for PCT/US04/18217 dated Feb. 7, 2006.Applicant
- International Preliminary Report on Patentability for PCT/US04/18217 dated Oct. 19, 2006.Applicant
- Hungarian Search Report for HU P0700460 dated Oct. 9, 2007.Applicant
- Supplementary European Search Report for EP 04754739.3, dated Dec. 17, 2007.Applicant
- Specification for U.S. Appl. No. 10/453,834, filed Jun. 2, 2003.Applicant
- Specification for U.S. Appl. No. 11/005,652, filed Dec. 2, 2004.Applicant
- Specification for U.S. Appl. No. 11/223,658, filed Sep. 5, 2005.Applicant
- Notice of Allowance, U.S. Appl. No. 11/488,407, Dec. 29, 2009, 8 pages.Applicant
- Notice of Allowance, U.S. Appl. No. 11/005,652, May 18, 2010, 4 pages.Applicant
- Notice of Allowance, U.S. Appl. No. 10/667,194, Mar. 5, 2010, 4 pages.Applicant
- Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 10/667,194, Sep. 25, 2009, 10 pages.Applicant
- Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 11/005,652, Oct. 23, 2009, 14 pages.Applicant
- Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 11/787,761, Jul. 8, 2009, 14 pages.Applicant
- Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 11/787,761, Nov. 30, 2009, 14 pages.Applicant
- Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 11/787,761, Apr. 28, 2010, 10 pages.Applicant
- Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 11/787,761, Sep. 14, 2010, 12 pages.Applicant
- International Preliminary Report on Patentability, PCT/US2006/035300, Mar. 24, 2009, 5 pages.Applicant