Conjoint analysis to measure the perceived quality in volume rendering

IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics

Volumn 13, Issue 6, 2007, Pages 1664-1671

  Giesen, Joachim ^b   Mueller, Klaus ^a,c   Schuberth, Eva ^d   Lujin, Wang ^c   Zolliker, Peter ^a,e  

^a IEEE

^b MAX PLANCK INSTITUTE FOR INFORMATICS   (Germany)

^c STONY BROOK UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^d ETH ZURICH   (Switzerland)

^e EMPA Dübendorf ^*  (Switzerland)

Author keywords

Conjoint analysis; Parameterized algorithms; Volume visualization

Indexed keywords

CONJOINT ANALYSIS; PARAMETERIZED ALGORITHMS; VOLUME VISUALIZATION;

ALGORITHMS; DATA VISUALIZATION; PROBLEM SOLVING; QUALITY CONTROL; SYSTEMS ANALYSIS;

VOLUME RENDERING;

ALGORITHM; ARTICLE; COMPUTER ASSISTED DIAGNOSIS; COMPUTER GRAPHICS; HUMAN; IMAGE ENHANCEMENT; METHODOLOGY; QUALITY CONTROL; REPRODUCIBILITY; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; THREE DIMENSIONAL IMAGING; VISION;

ALGORITHMS; COMPUTER GRAPHICS; HUMANS; IMAGE ENHANCEMENT; IMAGE INTERPRETATION, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; IMAGING, THREE-DIMENSIONAL; QUALITY CONTROL; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; VISUAL PERCEPTION;

EID: 35948938014     PISSN: 10772626     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1109/TVCG.2007.70542     Document Type: Article

References (15)

1. www.sawtoothsoftware.com.
2. S. Bergner, T. Möller, D. Weiskopf, and D. J. Muraki. A spectral analysis of function composition and its implications for sampling in direct volume visualization. IEEE Transactions Visualization and Computer Graphics, 12(5):1353-1360, 2006.
3. S. Bruckner, S. Grimm, A. Kanitsar, and M. Gröller. Illustrative context-preserving exploration of volume data. IEEE Transactions Visualization and Computer Graphics, 12(6):1559-1569, 2006.
4. P. G. Engeldrum. Psychometric Scaling, A Toolkit for Imaging Systems Development. Imcotek Press, Winchester MA, USA, 2000.
5. A. Gustafsson, A. Herrmann, and F. Huber. Conjoint analysis as an instrument of market research practice. Conjoint Measurement. Methods and Applications. A. Gustaßson, A. Herrmann and F. Huber (editors), pages 5-45, 2000.
6. D. H. House, A. Bair, and C. Ware. An approach to the perceptual optimization of complex visualizations. IEEE Trans. Vis. Comput. Graph., 12(4):509-521, 2006.
7. S. Ishihara. Ishihara's tests for colour blindness. Isshinkai, 1962.
8. G. Ji and H. Shen. Dynamic view selection for time-varying volumes. IEEE Transactions Visualization and Computer Graphics, 12(5):1109-1116, 2006.
9. Y. Kim and A. Varshney. Saliency-guided enhancement for volume visualization. IEEE Transactions Visualization and Computer Graphics, 12(5):925-932, 2006.
10. J. Kniss, S. Premoze, M. Ikits, A. Lefohn, C Hansen, and E. Praun. Gaussian transfer functions for multi-field volume visualization. Proceedings of IEEE Visualization 2003, pages 497-504, 2003.
11. F. Mosteller. Remarks on the method of paired comparisons. Psychometrlka, 16:207, 1951.
12. P. Shanbhag, P. Rheingans, and M. desJardins. Temporal visualization of planning polygons for efficient partitioning of geo-spatial data. Proceedings of the 2005 IEEE Symposium on Information Visualization, page 28, 2005.
13. S. Takahashi, I. Fujishiro, Y. Takeshima, and T. Nishita. A feature-driven approach to locating optimal, viewpoints for volume visualization. Proceedings of IEEE Visualization 2005, pages 495-502, 2005.
14. L. L. Thurstone. A law of comparative judgement. Psychological Review, 34:273-286, 1927.
15. H.-C. Wong, H. Qu, U.-H. Wong, Z. Tang, and K. Mueller. A perceptual framework for comparisons of direct volume rendered images. IEEE Pacific-Rim Symposium on Image and Video Technology, 2006.