TY - GEN
T1 - (In?)Extricable links between data and visualization
T2 - 24th International Conference on Scientific and Statistical DatabaseManagement, SSDBM 2012
AU - Cushing, Judith
AU - Hayduk, Evan
AU - Walley, Jerilyn
AU - Zeman, Lee
AU - Winters, Kirsten
AU - Bailey, Mike
AU - Bolte, John
AU - Bond, Barbara
AU - Lach, Denise
AU - Thomas, Christoph
AU - Stafford, Susan
AU - Stevenson-Molnar, Nik
PY - 2012
Y1 - 2012
N2 - Our initial survey of visualization tools for environmental science applications iden-tified sophisticated tools such as The Visualization and Analysis Platform for Ocean, Atmosphere, and Solar Researchers (VAPOR) [http://www.vapor.ucar.edu], and Man computer Interactive Data Access System (McIDAS)andThe Integrated Data Viewer (IDV) [http://www.unidata.ucar.edu/ software]. A second survey of ours (32,279 figures in 1,298 articles published between July and December 2011 in 9 environmental science (ES) journals) suggests a gap between extant visualization tools and what scientists actually use; the vast majority of published ES visualizations are statistical graphs, presenting evidence to colleagues in respective subdisciplines. Based on informal, qualitative interviews with collaborators, and communication with scientists at conferences such as AGU and ESA, we hypothesize that visualizations of natural phenomena that differ significantly from what we found in the journals would positively impact scientists' ability to tune models, intuit testable hypotheses, and communicate results. If using more sophisticated visualizations is potentially so desirable, why don't environmental scientists use the available tools?
AB - Our initial survey of visualization tools for environmental science applications iden-tified sophisticated tools such as The Visualization and Analysis Platform for Ocean, Atmosphere, and Solar Researchers (VAPOR) [http://www.vapor.ucar.edu], and Man computer Interactive Data Access System (McIDAS)andThe Integrated Data Viewer (IDV) [http://www.unidata.ucar.edu/ software]. A second survey of ours (32,279 figures in 1,298 articles published between July and December 2011 in 9 environmental science (ES) journals) suggests a gap between extant visualization tools and what scientists actually use; the vast majority of published ES visualizations are statistical graphs, presenting evidence to colleagues in respective subdisciplines. Based on informal, qualitative interviews with collaborators, and communication with scientists at conferences such as AGU and ESA, we hypothesize that visualizations of natural phenomena that differ significantly from what we found in the journals would positively impact scientists' ability to tune models, intuit testable hypotheses, and communicate results. If using more sophisticated visualizations is potentially so desirable, why don't environmental scientists use the available tools?
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84863496937&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84863496937&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1007/978-3-642-31235-9_45
DO - 10.1007/978-3-642-31235-9_45
M3 - Conference contribution
AN - SCOPUS:84863496937
SN - 9783642312342
T3 - Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics)
SP - 613
EP - 617
BT - Scientific and Statistical Database Management - 24th International Conference, SSDBM 2012, Proceedings
Y2 - 25 June 2012 through 27 June 2012
ER -