graphspergers - the graphs and quantitative visualization thread

It does look a bit vajayjay. Astrophysics is full of them. Here is another, which is called "the finger of god":

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v410/n6825/images/410169ab.2.jpg

Caek can you explain the Autistic Spectrum graph or gimme a link to the article it's from?

http://i22.tinypic.com/29ks9ys.jpg

That finger of god thing is what a perfectly spherical cluster of galaxies at a very large distance ends up looking like from Earth.

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v410/n6825/full/410169a0.html

This redshift-space anisotropy should cause two characteristic effects, operating respectively on small and large scales. On small scales, random orbital velocities within galaxy groups cause an apparent radial smearing, known as 'fingers of God'. Of greater interest is the large-scale effect; if cosmological structure forms by gravitational collapse, there should exist coherent infall velocities, and the effect of these is to cause an apparent flattening of structures along the line of sight.

bong hit time.

http://i21.tinypic.com/eq2gj7.png

nathan's famous contest winners:
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1019/1106150394_3084623ad6_o.jpg

my commute home by bicycle:
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2230/1638159993_528b8ae810.jpg

from tracer hand:
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2058/1839391132_d4c011e7e6.jpg

nathan's famous contest winners:
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1019/1106150394_3084623ad6_o.jpg

my commute home by bicycle:
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2230/1638159993_528b8ae810.jpg

from tracer hand:
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2058/1839391132_d4c011e7e6.jpg

xpost to NV, Found it on GIS. Taken from http://www.nature.com/mp/journal/v11/n1/full/4001750a.html (let me know if you don't have an institutional subscription and want to read the paper).

Suicides on the Golden Gate by location. There are three very clear Gaussian peaks on this, and one day I am going to fit them using Bayesian statistics and win the Nobel prize for trivializing mental illness.

http://www.sfgate.com/c/pictures/2005/10/30/mn_suicide30_loc_tt.gif

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/object/article?f=/c/a/2005/10/30/MNG2NFF7KI1.DTL&o=2

xp

Okay cheers - I'm guessing from the the magazine title its probably pitched at a level a bit beyond my needs/understanding tho.

this thread is more amazing than i even imagined

Strong peak in the centre facing toward the city, broad peak around the SF tower, secondary broad peak on the SF side for people too sad to walk out over the water : (, shadow peak facing out to the ocean, peak facing the city by Marin tower.

xpost, yes. Looks very technical. They seem to be looking for statistically significant genes for autism rather than talking about the psychology, which might be a bit more accessible.

Powerpoint Gettysburg Address:

http://norvig.com/Gettysburg/img005.gif

http://norvig.com/Gettysburg/

Nathan's Famous Graph is dope.

http://ej.iop.org/images/1742-5468/2006/02/P02006/Full/1773001.jpg

http://www.iop.org/EJ/abstract/-search=37150849.1/1742-5468/2006/02/P02006

Also on the arXiv pre-editing for IOP style if you want to read it and don't have an institutional sub: http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0511215

http://ej.iop.org/images/1742-5468/2006/02/P02006/Full/1773003.jpg

Figure 2. A collection of adjacent k = 3 k cliques centring on the rapper RZA found using the clique percolation method after the weighted edge disparity algorithm is run for X = 50. The community has red edges and sits over the network of all neighbours of the nodes in the community. All of the rappers with several exceptions such as Chuck D, Isaac Hayes, and Chris Rock are directly or indirectly affiliated with the Wu-Tang supergroup and their music labels. The highly clustered rappers in the middle of the diagram are the core members of the original Wu-Tang Clan group (GZA, RZA, Ol' Dirty Bastard, Method Man, Raekwon, Ghostface Killah, Inspectah Deck, Masta Killa, U-God). Plotted with the Kamada-Kawai graphing algorithm.

OK, this is starting to get like Boing Boing, so I am going to stop for now.

that one is v pretty

OK, two more. Complete map of the universe:

http://www.astro.princeton.edu/~mjuric/universe/all100.gif

http://www.astro.princeton.edu/~mjuric/universe/

and finally, the reason why I need to stop going through my bookmarks looking for graphs and get back to work: the physics job market.

http://scienceblogs.com/principles/5404physics.gif

The universe got resized : ( Click link for the full-resolution awesomeness.

whoaa

Individual sheets without horizontal axes plotted, suitable for printing and taping together

on the back of my bathroom door opposite the bog in my old house. Good pooping.

http://www.isi.edu/ant/address/it.15.all.16-subnet_stats.3px-per-point.annotated.png
census of the internet

(anybody who posts the xkcd drawing gets a slap)

also I think 114 and 115 got allocated to asia recently

Anything from xkcd on this thread gets a slap.

When I saw this thread title I thought of this thing that was on Metafilter the other day:

http://strangemaps.files.wordpress.com/2007/11/jpcurve.png

What is a negative unemployment rate? Unfilled jobs/people?

I think there's a negative correlation between inflation and the unemployment rate so they've reversed the unemployment axis for some reason: maybe to illustrate the similarity of the shape.

Ah, so by "(Minus) unemployment rate" they mean "unemployment rate x -1". In which case:

http://img235.imageshack.us/img235/6347/japanzl6.jpg

Hmm.

Actually the inflation axis looks a bit odd as well.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Featured_pictures/Engineering_and_technology

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Featured_pictures/Diagrams%2C_drawings%2C_and_maps

caek u do astrophysics? I work for ApJ.

I could post a lot of graphs and visuals but I would be breaking copyright big time.

will u accept my paper y/n? Actually, it's going to MNRAS because of page charges ; ) Are you in production or editorial or marketing? I used to work in editorial for IoP in Bristol.

Posting figures = fair use (probably), and most of them are on the arXiv anyway, surely.

lol IOP... they're taking our jobs! I work for the UofC Press, on peer review and production. My old boss just accepted a position at IOP in the states, I'm hoping to get headhunted by him eventually :D

You're probably right about the figures, but I'd rather not chance it. It'd be kind of a shitty thing to bring down the credibility of the AAS!

I was on peer review and development ("publishing editor") for Journal of Physics A. IoP in the US is in Philadelphia, right? I never got a trip there out of that job, but I did get ones to San Francisco, Pisa and Bangalore, so it wasn't all bad.

As far as I know they're mostly in Philly, but the story is a new office is opening in DC, which is where my former boss is going.

Think I can get away with this one, though I am no physicist so I have no idea what it's about beyond pretty colors...

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1122/653521560_09b57a1062.jpg

Isn't that the Great Wall/Coma Cluster thingy on the Map Of Universe jpg?

Might just be the Orion Nebula, mind.

analysis of stereolab riffs:
http://img124.imageshack.us/img124/6635/labrc1.gif

It's probably a galaxy cluster. Contours are probably the same object at another wavelength, e.g. X-ray, which is a good thing to look at clusters in. Distance scale is much too small for the Great Wall and too large for a nebula.

The graph I have been futzing with for two weeks. I want all 30 lines to flat and at y = 0.0.

This is what it looked like on Monday:

http://img170.imageshack.us/img170/9071/residualszp0.gif

Tuesday:

(link removed)

Today:

(link removed)

I'm here to tell you that this is the scientific enterprise. It's some bullshit.

What is your model made of? What is it supposed to be used for when it works?

I make models of disk galaxies. They are ones that happen to be oriented edge-on to us so they look more like http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sombrero_Galaxy (but even more edge-on) than http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Messier_81. This makes it harder to work out whether they have spiral structure or bars than ones that are face-on, which you can just look at.

The idea is I take an image of the edge-on galaxy, add up the mass along the line of sight and predict how the stars in a perfectly asymmetric galaxy with that mass distribution would move. I then compare this to measurements of the stars movement (I will show these soon). If I can't get, e.g. model and data velocity-radius curve to match in the central region then I can conclude that the galaxy is not perfectly axisymmetric and probably has a bar. Another product of this fitting process is the mass-to-light ratio. If M/L > 1 then we either have stars heavier than our sun for the amount of light they produce -- or dark matter.

That is the big idea, anyway. In practice I end up doing things like what I've been up to for the past fortnight, which is basically dealing with a shortcoming of my data, which is good in some regards, but poorly calibrated. This involves futzing around with numbers until my lines match the lines for the same objects published by the big, very accurately calibrated surveys.

(link removed)

^^^ example of comparing my the velocity curve of my mass models to the data. That's a pretty good fit. M/L is worryingly high, but I know why that is. I need to regenerate all these plots.

What do you use to make your figures, caek? I do a lot of work on graphics, mostly because it seems there is a sizable group of authors using plotting software that they wrote themselves, and the fonts and/or colorspace get messed up. Also, IDL can eat my balls.

I use IDL : (

http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2014/02/26/282132576/74-476-reasons-you-should-always-get-the-bigger-pizza

one problem with the circles (as used above) is that it can difficult to tell at a glance what the actual quantities are - is it the point at the middle of the circle? at the top edge? bottom edge? reasonable people could come to different conclusions, i think. it's really impossible to tell without labeling each of the individual circles, which you've done. but if you have to label each of the individual circles in order to communicate the quantities, then there's probably a better way to do it. also, Dan I otm about area vs radius vs diameter

And especially since some of the values are negative, it's better to just stick with the bar chart in your first image. Really feel like the human brain might have a problem interpreting the size of a thing on a plot as actually being the magnitude of the reduction in that thing.

you could implement a new system where you walk around the office giving tootsie rolls for every 1000 sq. ft. of net office space gained that quarter. if your company loses office space, then you take away an item on the person's desk for every 1000 sq. ft. lost. this simultaneously acts as an incentive system

You could change the unit from square feet to "# of john's houses" to point out to everyone how small your rival john's house is.

at the least there is a problem with the x positions of the circles. they are not regularly spaced in the x direction. is that real?

those plots are very hard to interpret imo. estimating areas of circles is something we are always terrible at. but in this case it's even harder because what you're trying to get across is conceptually complicated, and the range of point sizes you're using is colossal.

the bar chart in the first example is much clearer. i would stick with that tbh. if you want to explicitly include both the absolute value of SF and the change (i.e. net absorption) (which i don't think you need to, it's implicit, unless i've misunderstood net absorption), i would use two bar graph panels, one above the other, sharing an x axis

x = time
y1 = square feet
y2 = net absorption

These are really helpful, I mean it.

The circles do represent area, flat two-dimensional area. This is why I wanted to run with showing the different sizes.

I'm showing how little I know about algebra by not quite understanding the difference between diameter and area. I read the blog about the State of the Union address and didn't quite get what the fuss was about.

(Though if it means anything, I understand why there was a fuss and why I would want to avoid making that mistake even if I'm not sure what the mistake was. How's that for clarity?)

I based the circles off of the area in this way: I somehow did the calculations of what the square root of 448,568 would be. I then put those x,y coordinates into the "exact ratio" field of the circle selection tool, so it would be perfect circle. Then I based the ratios of the other circles on that. Is this voodoo economics?

And fwiw, these graphs never appeared together. Even if they weren't part of the slide, it would still bug me that the circles would be the same size despite one being 448K and the other being -64K.

then there's probably a better way to do it.

oh most indeed.

at the least there is a problem with the x positions of the circles. they are not regularly spaced in the x direction. is that real?

The x positions, the number of square feet, are accurately pinpointed by the white squares. If it was a bar graph, the bars would rise and fall exactly to those spots on the graph.

The circles are illustrations only.

I have no idea if I answered that question or not.

standard advice is don't use the size or area of symbols on the page to represent any important data, because people can't "read" it

your first bar chart has the same data in it and is familiar and easy to read.

why aren't the centres of the circles on the white points?

oh wait. i had totally been misreading your graphs. they are very confusing!

my points still stand. i think you need to get rid of the circles.

And fwiw, these graphs never appeared together. Even if they weren't part of the slide, it would still bug me that the circles would be the same size despite one being 448K and the other being -64K.

this is not a minor thing. it's a huge flaw in the approach.

if area of the circle represents the data, and you have positive and negative data, then negative changes should have circles with negative areas. this is not possible.

things you can't do when you have positive and negative data:

log plots
area plots

you could compare the area to the peak area, which you could show for scale, and never go negative. but you shouldn't.

I'm starting to think I'm bombing on these.

Another stat that I thought wasn't being illustrated correctly has to do with unemployment figures. Usually, those are in bar graph form from month to month or by region, pretty straight forward.

http://assets.inarkansas.com/47290/arkansas-unemployment-rate-2013-4q-general.jpg

But there's a weird anomaly that happens from month to month where the number of jobs/number of people changes. So you might have a month where there are more people working, but the unemployment rate goes up the number of jobs go up too.

I did my circle thing again and second-guessed later that I should've made the red unemployed figure go around the circumference of the blue ball so that it would match the green total ball.

But now, I feel like I should be working for Fox News or the Enquirer.

http://assets.inarkansas.com/51231/may-2014-employment-in-arkansas.jpg

bar graphs aren't really performing any role when you can't visually tell the difference between them

like it is a fox news graph in a sense "look the economy hasn't changed at all!!"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sz2mmM-kN1I

http://gecon.yale.edu/

cool data set with economic output on a 1 degree latitude by 1 degree longitude

http://oi58.tinypic.com/24en8kh.jpg
http://oi58.tinypic.com/inxu87.jpg
http://oi60.tinypic.com/k13skz.jpg

grid

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D6PtWdLXsAAgIht.jpg

- "Maybe we should get another usual suspect in the lineup besides the Indian woman."

- "But from where? Estonia? Venezuela? There aren't many other countries to choose from!"

Look at the difference between 5’4” and 5’5” on the y-axis, compares to between 5’0” and 5’1”

Other than that, great chart design!!

The Latvian woman is huge and the woman from India is tiny to visually convey the fact that Latvia has a female population at least ten times larger than the female population of India.

The sum of the height of all the Indian women will be more though. Is there a graph of that?

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D7K2CkyXkAAEJKT.jpg

that was so upsetting. Also needs the the n/2+7 line drawn on as well

is there a name for a visualization that would accomplish the following?

i want to compare two populations that each have two subsets--say one of them is 15M people total, then 4M of those people meet a specific condition, and 1.9M of those 4 meet a further specific condition. and the other population has the same conditions but completely different proportions.

so basically like a treemap but instead of the whole area adding up to the total it would have proportional smaller rectangles embedded within a big rectangle? is this even a thing?

would a simple stacked bar graph do the trick? here are two that meet your requirements:
https://i.imgur.com/me2obge.png
https://i.imgur.com/sW9m0c5.png

the first shows two populations of different sizes, the second shows two population of equal sizes.

or wait, i see what you're saying. subsets within subsets. if that's the case, you could just color code the results. 11M non-diarrhea, 6 million with diarrhea. non-diarrhea is a deep calm blue, diarrhea is an agitated warm color. 4.1 million of the 6 million have severe diarrhea, so make that deep red. the other 1.9 million have moderate diarrhea, so make that orange.

https://i.imgur.com/eZND3qv.png

or, to go to your op, a tree map, and just format the results to highlight the groupings you want

Karl I am gonna need seventeen more made up diarrhea graphs on my desk by COB tomorrow.

i'm glad i processed those extra participants' waivers during my lunch break yesterday, sunday, instead of eating

"Beginner's Diarhhea"!

What a wonderfully misleading diagram in the Times today 📈 pic.twitter.com/isQtZS6Mot

— Will Bailey-Watson (@mrwbw) June 27, 2022

loooooooool

An analysis looks at how defense spending among the nations with the highest expenditures has changed since 1992 and what may have driven the changes https://t.co/3ln08vOKAo pic.twitter.com/yqK6MqwQUm

— St. Louis Fed (@stlouisfed) January 22, 2023

https://i.redd.it/cxtoiiuy9l9b1.png

see you there in April!