Graph drawing using Jaya
PLoS ONE, ISSN: 1932-6203, Vol: 18, Issue: 6 June, Page: e0287744
2023
- 5Captures
- 1Mentions
Metric Options: Counts1 Year3 YearSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Captures5
- Readers5
- Mentions1
- News Mentions1
- 1
Most Recent News
New research explores innovative methods in data visualization with Jaya algorithm
Graphs are essential tools for visualizing complex information, from social networks to biological pathways. However, designing these graphs can be challenging, as it involves balancing aesthetics with the practicality of automatic generation.
Article Description
Graph drawing, involving the automatic layout of graphs, is vital for clear data visualization and interpretation but poses challenges due to the optimization of a multi-metric objective function, an area where current search-based methods seek improvement. In this paper, we investigate the performance of Jaya algorithm for automatic graph layout with straight lines. Jaya algorithm has not been previously used in the field of graph drawing. Unlike most population-based methods, Jaya algorithm is a parameter-less algorithm in that it requires no algorithm-specific control parameters and only population size and number of iterations need to be specified, which makes it easy for researchers to apply in the field. To improve Jaya algorithm’s performance, we applied Latin Hypercube Sampling to initialize the population of individuals so that they widely cover the search space. We developed a visualization tool that simplifies the integration of search methods, allowing for easy performance testing of algorithms on graphs with weighted aesthetic metrics. We benchmarked the Jaya algorithm and its enhanced version against Hill Climbing and Simulated Annealing, commonly used graph-drawing search algorithms which have a limited number of parameters, to demonstrate Jaya algorithm’s effectiveness in the field. We conducted experiments on synthetic datasets with varying numbers of nodes and edges using the Erdős–Rényi model and real-world graph datasets and evaluated the quality of the generated layouts, and the performance of the methods based on number of function evaluations. We also conducted a scalability experiment on Jaya algorithm to evaluate its ability to handle large-scale graphs. Our results showed that Jaya algorithm significantly outperforms Hill Climbing and Simulated Annealing in terms of the quality of the generated graph layouts and the speed at which the layouts were produced. Using improved population sampling generated better layouts compared to the original Jaya algorithm using the same number of function evaluations. Moreover, Jaya algorithm was able to draw layouts for graphs with 500 nodes in a reasonable time.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85163957828&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0287744; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37368896; https://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0287744; https://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0287744; https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0287744
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know