Specifying label layout style by example

ABSTRACT

Creating high-quality label layouts in a particular visual style is a time-consuming process. Although automated labeling algorithms can aid the layout process, expert design knowledge is required to tune these algorithms so that they produce layouts which meet the designer's expectations. We propose a system which can learn a labellayout style from a single example layout and then apply this style to new labeling problems. Because designers find it much easier to create example layouts than tune algorithmic parameters, our system provides a more natural workflow for graphic designers. We demonstrate that our system is capable of learning a variety of label layout styles from examples.

REFERENCES

• 1: Maneesh Agrawala , Chris Stolte, Rendering effective route maps: improving usability through generalization, Proceedings of the 28th annual conference on Computer graphics and interactive techniques, p.241-249, August 2001 [doi>10.1145/383259.383286]
• 2: K. Ali, K. Hartman, and T. Strothotte. Label Layout for Interactive 3D Illustrations. J. WSCG, 13(1):1--8, 2005.
• 3: Giuseppe Di Battista , Peter Eades , Roberto Tamassia , Ioannis G. Tollis, Graph Drawing: Algorithms for the Visualization of Graphs, Prentice Hall PTR, Upper Saddle River, NJ, 1998
• 4: Blaine Bell , Steven Feiner , Tobias Höllerer, View management for virtual and augmented reality, Proceedings of the 14th annual ACM symposium on User interface software and technology, November 11-14, 2001, Orlando, Florida [doi>10.1145/502348.502363]
• 5: Craig Boutilier, A POMDP formulation of preference elicitation problems, Eighteenth national conference on Artificial intelligence, p.239-246, July 28-August 01, 2002, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
• 6: Craig Boutilier , Relu Patrascu , Pascal Poupart , Dale Schuurmans, Constraint-based optimization and utility elicitation using the minimax decision criterion, Artificial Intelligence, v.170 n.8, p.686-713, June 2006 [doi>10.1016/j.artint.2006.02.003]
• 7: Urszula Chajewska , Daphne Koller , Dirk Ormoneit, Learning an Agent's Utility Function by Observing Behavior, Proceedings of the Eighteenth International Conference on Machine Learning, p.35-42, June 28-July 01, 2001
• 8: Jon Christensen , Joe Marks , Stuart Shieber, An empirical study of algorithms for point-feature label placement, ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG), v.14 n.3, p.203-232, July 1995 [doi>10.1145/212332.212334]
• 9: S. Edmondson, J. Christensen, J. Marks, and S. Shieber. A General Cartographic Labeling Algorithm. Cartographica, 33(4):13--23, 1997.
• 10: Jean-Daniel Fekete , Catherine Plaisant, Excentric labeling: dynamic neighborhood labeling for data visualization, Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems: the CHI is the limit, p.512-519, May 15-20, 1999, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, United States [doi>10.1145/302979.303148]
• 11: James Fogarty , Scott E. Hudson, GADGET: a toolkit for optimization-based approaches to interface and display generation, Proceedings of the 16th annual ACM symposium on User interface software and technology, p.125-134, November 02-05, 2003, Vancouver, Canada [doi>10.1145/964696.964710]
• 12: Krzysztof Gajos , Daniel S. Weld, Preference elicitation for interface optimization, Proceedings of the 18th annual ACM symposium on User interface software and technology, October 23-26, 2005, Seattle, WA, USA [doi>10.1145/1095034.1095063]
• 13: K. Hartmann, K. Ali, and T. Strothotte. Floating labels: Applying dynamic potential fields for label layout. Lecture notes in computer science, pages 101--113, 2004.
• 14: L. J. Heyer, S. Kruglyak, and S. Yooseph. Exploring Expression Data: Identification and Analysis of Coexpressed Genes. Genome Research, 9(11):1106--1115, 1999.
• 15: E. Imhof. Positioning Names on Maps. American Cartographer, 2(2):145--153, 1975.
• 16: Konstantinos G. Kakoulis , Ioannis G. Tollis, A unified approach to labeling graphical features, Proceedings of the fourteenth annual symposium on Computational geometry, p.347-356, June 07-10, 1998, Minneapolis, Minnesota, United States [doi>10.1145/276884.276923]
• 17: S. Kirkpatrick, C. D. Gellatt Jr., and M. P. Vecchi. Optimization by Simulated Annealing. Science, 220(4598):671--680, May 1983.
• 18: Y. LeCun, S. Chopra, R. Hadsell, F. J. Huang, and M. Ranzato. A Tutorial on Energy-Based Learning. In G. H. Bakir, T. Hofmann, B. Schölkopf, A. J. Smola, B. Taskar, and S. V. N. Vishwanathan, editors, Predicting Structured Data. MIT Press, 2006.
• 19: C. Karen Liu , Aaron Hertzmann , Zoran Popović, Learning physics-based motion style with nonlinear inverse optimization, ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG), v.24 n.3, July 2005
• 20: Toshiyuki Masui, Evolutionary learning of graph layout constraints from examples, Proceedings of the 7th annual ACM symposium on User interface software and technology, p.103-108, November 02-04, 1994, Marina del Rey, California, United States [doi>10.1145/192426.192468]
• 21: G. J. Romanes. Cunningham's Manual of Practical Anatomy. Oxford University Press, 14th edition, 1977.
• 22: Edward R. Tufte, Beautiful Evidence, Graphis Pr, 2006
• 23: Fan Zhang , Hanqiu Sun, Dynamic Labeling Management in Virtual and Augmented Environments, Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference on Computer Aided Design and Computer Graphics, p.397-402, December 07-10, 2005 [doi>10.1109/CAD-CG.2005.36]

INDEX TERMS

Primary Classification:
  I. Computing Methodologies
  I.2 ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE
      I.2.6 Learning
          Subjects: Parameter learning

Additional Classification:
  H. Information Systems
  H.1 MODELS AND PRINCIPLES
      H.1.2 User/Machine Systems

  I. Computing Methodologies
  I.3 COMPUTER GRAPHICS
      I.3.0 General

General Terms:
Algorithms, Design

Keywords:
design, labeling, learning, workflows