Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Information visualization for selection in Design by Shopping

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Research in Engineering Design Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In Design by Shopping, designers explore the design space to gain an insight into trades, and feasible and impractical solutions, as well as to learn about alternatives before optimization and selection. The design space consists of multidimensional sets of data and, in order to select the best design from among numerous alternatives, designers may use several different graphs. In this study, we test to find the most appropriate graph to indicate the best solution corresponding to a set of objectives represented by a design scenario (1). A further constraint is that this must be done in the shortest possible time (2). Three graph types are tested in three different design scenarios where one car has to be chosen from a total of 40. A response quality index is proposed which computes the quality of a designer’s choice for any given scenario. In total, 90 tests with 30 participants were performed. The parallel coordinates plot proved to be the best graph for selection in Design by Shopping.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15
Fig. 16
Fig. 17

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abi Akle A, Minel S, Yannou B (2013) Change the visual alert display to improve the decision making time: industrial systems supervision case study, proceeding in CONFERE’13, Biarritz, France

  • Agrawal G, Lewis K, Chugh K, Huang CH, Parashar S, Bloebaum CL (2004). Intuitive visualization of Pareto frontier for multi-objective optimization in n-dimensional performance space. In: 10th AIAA/ISSMO multidisciplinary analysis and optimization conference, paper no. AIAA, vol 2004–4434, Albany, NY

  • Aloysius JA, Davis FD, Wilson DD, Ross Taylor A, Kottemann JE (2006) User acceptance of multi-criteria decision support systems: the impact of preference elicitation techniques. Eur J Oper Res 169(1):273–285

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Balling R (1999) Design by shopping: a new paradigm?. In: Proceedings of the Third World Congress of structural and multidisciplinary optimization (WCSMO-3), vol 1, pp 295–297

  • Barron K, Simpson TW, Rothrock L, Frecker M, Barton RR, Ligetti C (2004) Graphical user interfaces for engineering design: impact of response delay and training on user performance. In: ASME 2004 international design engineering technical conferences and computers and information in engineering conference, paper no. DETC2004/DTM-57085. ASME, Salt Lake City, UT

  • Boy J, Eveillard L, Detienne F, Fekete JD (2016) Suggested Interactivity: seeking Perceived Affordances for Information Visualization. IEEE Trans Vis Comput Graphics 22(1):639–648

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Canbaz B (2013) Preventing and resolving design conflicts for a collaborative convergence in distributed set-based design (Doctoral dissertation, Ecole Centrale Paris)

  • Canbaz B, Yannou B, Yvars PA (2012) Constraint programming simulation of a distributed set-based design framework with control indicators. In: ASME 2012 international design engineering technical conferences and computers and information in engineering conference, paper no. DETC2012-70857, Chicago, Illinois, USA, pp 1239–1248

  • Cook D, Hofmann H, Lee EK, Yang H, Nikolau B, Wurtele E (2007) Exploring gene expression data, using plots. J Data Sci 5(2):151–182

    Google Scholar 

  • Daskilewicz M, German B (2009) Aspects of effective visualization of multidimensional design spaces. In: 9th AIAA aviation technology, integration, and operations conference (ATIO), paper no. AIAA, vol 2009–6929. 21–23 Sept 2009, Hilton Head, South Carolina

  • Daskilewicz MJ, German BJ (2012) Rave: a computational framework to facilitate research in design decision support. J Comput Inf Sci Eng 12(2):021005

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eddy J, Lewis KE (2002) Visualization of multidimensional design and optimization data using cloud visualization. ASME 2002 international design engineering technical conferences and computers and information in engineering conference. American Society of Mechanical Engineers, Montreal, pp 899–908

    Google Scholar 

  • Eikenes JOH, Morrison A (2010) Navimation: exploring time, space & motion in the design of screen-based interfaces. Int J Des 4(1):1–16

    Google Scholar 

  • Feather MS, Cornford SL, Hicks KA, Kiper JD, Menzies T (2008) A broad, quantitative model for making early requirements decisions. IEEE Softw 25(2):49–56

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ferringer MP, Spencer DB, Reed P (2009) Many-objective reconfiguration of operational satellite constellations with the large-cluster epsilon non-dominated sorting genetic algorithm-II. In: IEEE congress on evolutionary computation, 2009. CEC’09. IEEE, pp 340–349

  • Gettinger J, Kiesling E, Stummer C, Vetschera R (2013) A comparison of representations for discrete multi-criteria decision problems. Decis Support Syst 54(2):976–985

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Inselberg A (2009) Parallel coordinates: visual multidimensional geometry and its applications. Springer, Dordrecht

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Kanukolanu D, Lewis KE, Winer EH (2006) A multidimensional visualization interface to aid in trade-off decisions during the solution of coupled subsystems under uncertainty. J Comput Inf Sci Eng 6(3):288–299

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keim DA (2000) Designing pixel-oriented visualization techniques: theory and applications. IEEE Trans Vis Comput Graphics 6(1):59–78

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kollat JB, Reed P (2007) A framework for visually interactive decision-making and design using evolutionary multi-objective optimization (VIDEO). Environ Model Softw 22(12):1691–1704

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ligetti C, Simpson TW, Frecker M, Barton RR, Stump G (2003) Assessing the impact of graphical design interfaces on design efficiency and effectiveness. J Comput Inf Sci Eng 3(2):144–154

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Long F (2009) Real or imaginary: the effectiveness of using personas in product design. In: Proceedings of the Irish ergonomics society annual conference. Irish Ergonomics Society Dublin, pp 1–10

  • Malak RJ Jr, Aughenbaugh JM, Paredis CJ (2009) Multi-attribute utility analysis in set-based conceptual design. Comput Aided Des 41(3):214–227

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miettinen K (2014) Survey of methods to visualize alternatives in multiple criteria decision making problems. OR Spectrum 36(1):3–37

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Miller SW, Simpson TW, Yukish MA, Bennett LA, Lego SE, Stump GM (2013) Preference construction, sequential decision making, and trade space exploration. In: ASME 2013 international design engineering technical conferences and computers and information in engineering conference, paper no. DETC2013-13098, Portland, Oregon, USA, pp V03AT03A014

  • Naim AM, Chiu PW, Bloebaum C, Lewis K (2008) Hyper-radial visualization for multi-objective decision-making support under uncertainty using preference ranges: the PRUF method. In: 12th AIAA/ISSMO multidisciplinary analysis and optimization conference, paper no. AIAA, Victoria, British Columbia Canada, vol 2008–6087

  • Nekolny B, Richardson T, Winer E (2010) Visual design space exploration using contextual self-organizing maps. In: 13th AIAA/ISSMO multidisciplinary analysis and optimization conference, paper no. AIAA Forth Worth, Texas, vol 2010–9326

  • Okabe T, Jin Y, Sendhoff B (2003) A critical survey of performance indices for multi-objective optimisation. In: The 2003 congress on evolutionary computation, 2003. CEC’03, IEEE, vol 2, pp 878–885

  • Otto KN, Antonsson EK (1993) The method of imprecision compared to utility theory for design selection problems. In: Design theory and methodology–DTM’93, pp 167–173

  • Pauzie A (2008) A method to assess the driver mental workload: the driving activity load index (DALI). IET Intell Transport Syst 2(4):315–322

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rangavajhala S (2007) Decision making in design under uncertainty with multiobjective robust design optimization. Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy 205p

    Google Scholar 

  • Rothrock L, Narayanan S (eds) (2011) Human-in-the-loop simulations. Springer, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Saary MJ (2008) Radar plots: a useful way for presenting multivariate health care data. J Clin Epidemiol 61(4):311–317

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scott MJ, Antonsson EK (2000) Using indifference points in engineering decisions. In: Proceedings of ASME design engineering technical conferences, paper no. DETC2000/DTM-14559, Baltimore, USA

  • Scott MJ, Antonsson EK (2005) Compensation and weights for trade-offs in engineering design: beyond the weighted sum. J Mech Des 127(6):1045–1055

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shanteau J (1992) Competence in experts: the role of task characteristics. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 53(2):252–266

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shneiderman B (1992) Tree visualization with tree-maps: 2-d space-filling approach. ACM Trans Graphics (TOG) 11(1):92–99

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Shocker AD, Ben-Akiva M, Boccara B, Nedungadi P (1991) Consideration set influences on consumer decision-making and choice: issues, models, and suggestions. Mark Lett 2(3):181–197

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simpson TW, Barron K, Rothrock L, Frecker M, Barton RR, Ligetti C (2007) Impact of response delay and training on user performance with text-based and graphical user interfaces for engineering design. Res Eng Design 18(2):49–65

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simpson TW, Spencer DB, Yukish MA, Stump G (2008) Visual steering commands and test problems to support research in trade space exploration. In: 12th AIAA/ISSMO multidisciplinary analysis and optimization conference, paper no. AIAA. Victoria, British Columbia Canada, vol 2008–6085

  • Stump G, Yukish M, Martin JD, Simpson TW (2004). The ARL trade space visualizer: An engineering decision-making tool. In: 10th AIAA/ISSMO multidisciplinary analysis and optimization conference, paper no. AIAA. Albany, NY, vol 2004–4568

  • Tang Y, Reed P, Wagener T (2005) How effective and efficient are multiobjective evolutionary algorithms at hydrologic model calibration? Hydrol Earth Syst Sci Discuss Discuss 2(6):2465–2520

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilson TD, Schooler JW (1991) Thinking too much: introspection can reduce the quality of preferences and decisions. J Pers Soc Psychol 60(2):181

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Winer EH, Bloebaum CL (2001) Visual design steering for optimization solution improvement. Struct Multidiscip Optim 22(3):219–229

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wolf D, Simpson TW, Zhang XL (2009) A preliminary study of novice and expert users’ decision-making procedures during visual trade space exploration. In: ASME 2009 international design engineering technical conferences and computers and information in engineering conference, paper no. DETC2009-87294, San Diego, California, USA, pp 1361–1371

  • Wolf D, Hyland J, Simpson TW, Zhang XL (2011) The importance of training for interactive trade space exploration: a study of novice and expert users. J Comput Inf Sci Eng 11(3):031009

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wu J, Azarm S (2001) Metrics for quality assessment of a multiobjective design optimization solution set. J Mech Des 123(1):18–25

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yan X, Qiao M, Simpson TW, Li J, Zhang XL (2011) LIVE: a work-centered approach to support visual analytics of multi-dimensional engineering design data with interactive visualization and data-mining. In: ASME 2011 international design engineering technical conferences and computers and information in engineering conference, paper no. DETC2011-48333, Washington, DC, USA, pp 825–834

  • Yan X, Qiao M, Li J, Simpson TW, Stump GM, Zhang X (2012) A work-centered visual analytics model to support engineering design with interactive visualization and data-mining. In: System science (HICSS), 2012 45th Hawaii international conference on IEEE, pp 1845–1854

  • Yannou B, Hamdi A (2004) Truss dimensioning with an uncertainty reduction paradigm. In: DS 32: Proceedings of DESIGN 2004, the 8th international design conference, Dubrovnik, Croatia

  • Yannou B, Moreno F, Thevenot HJ, Simpson TW (2005) Faster generation of feasible design points. In: ASME 2005 international design engineering technical conferences and computers and information in engineering conference, paper no. DETC2005-85449, Long Beach, California, USA, pp 355–363

  • Yannou B, Troussier N, Chateauneuf A, Boudaoud N (2009) Dimensioning a product in preliminary design through different exploration techniques. Int J Product Dev 9(1):140–163

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yannou B, Yvars PA, Hoyle C, Chen W (2013) Set-based design by simulation of usage scenario coverage. J Eng Des 24(8):575–603

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang XL, Simpson TW, Frecker M, Lesieutre G (2009) Supporting trade space exploration of multi-dimensional data with interactive multi-scale nested clustering and aggregation. In: ASME 2009 international design engineering technical conferences and computers and information in engineering conference, paper no. DETC2009-87045, San Diego, California, USA, pp 1341–1353

  • Zhang X, Simpson T, Frecker M, Lesieutre G (2012) Supporting knowledge exploration and discovery in multi-dimensional data with interactive multiscale visualisation. J Eng Des 23(1):23–47

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We wish to thank all those took part in our experiment.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. ESTIA, 64210, Bidart, France

    Audrey Abi Akle & Stéphanie Minel

  2. Laboratoire Genie Industriel, CentraleSupélec, Université Paris-Saclay, 92290, Châtenay-Malabry, France

    Audrey Abi Akle & Bernard Yannou

Authors
  1. Audrey Abi Akle
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Stéphanie Minel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Bernard Yannou
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Audrey Abi Akle.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Abi Akle, A., Minel, S. & Yannou, B. Information visualization for selection in Design by Shopping. Res Eng Design 28, 99–117 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00163-016-0235-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00163-016-0235-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation