Ideas for Integrating Browsing and Search in the CDL

1
Ideas for Integrating Browsing and Search in the
CDL
Marti Hearst SIMS, UC Berkeley    
http//www.sims.berkeley.edu/hearst
2
Goals

• Seamlessly integrate browsing and searching
• Give users a browsing the shelves feeling
• Allow them to discover new things
• Mix and match different concepts in the query
• Do this in an intuitive, unconfusing interface
• Avoid empty search results

3
Faceted Metadata
4
There are many ways to do it wrong

• Examples
• Melvyl online catalog
• no way to browse enormous category listings
• Audible.com, BooksOnTape.com, and
  BrillianceAudio
• no way to browse a given category and
  simultaneosly select unabridged versions
• Amazon.com
• has finally gotten browsing over multiple kinds
  of features working this is a recent development
• but still restricted on what can be added into
  the query

5
(No Transcript)
6
(No Transcript)
7
(No Transcript)
8
(No Transcript)
9
(No Transcript)
10
(No Transcript)
11
(No Transcript)
12
(No Transcript)
13
(No Transcript)
14
(No Transcript)
15
(No Transcript)
16
(No Transcript)
17
(No Transcript)
18
(No Transcript)
19
The Flamenco Project

• Incorporating Faceted Hierarchical Metadata into
  Interfaces for Large Collections
• Key Goals
• Support integrated browsing and keyword search
• Provide an experience of browsing the shelves
• Add power and flexibility without introducing
  confusion or a feeling of clutter
• Allow users to take the path most natural to them
• Method
• User-centered design, including needs assessment
  and many iterations of design and testing

Yee, Swearingen, Li, Hearst, Faceted Metadata for
Image Search and Browsing, Proceedings of CHI
2003.
20
Some Challenges

• Users dont like new search interfaces.
• How to show lots more information without
  overwhelming or confusing?
• Our approach
• Integrate the search seamlessly into the
  information architecture.
• Use proper HCI methodologies.
• Use faceted metadata

21
Example of Faceted MetadataMedical Subject
Headings (MeSH)

• Facets
• 1. Anatomy A
• 2. Organisms B
• 3. Diseases C
• 4. Chemicals and Drugs D
• 5. Analytical, Diagnostic and Therapeutic
  Techniques and Equipment E
• 6. Psychiatry and Psychology F
• 7. Biological Sciences G
• 8. Physical Sciences H
• 9. Anthropology, Education, Sociology and
  Social Phenomena I
• 10. Technology and Food and Beverages J
• 11. Humanities K
• 12. Information Science L
• 13. Persons M
• 14. Health Care N
• 15. Geographic Locations Z

22
Each Facet Has Hierarchy

• 1. Anatomy A Body Regions A01
  
• 2. B
  Musculoskeletal System A02
• 3. C Digestive
  System A03
• 4. D Respiratory
  System A04
• 5. E Urogenital
  System A05
• 6. F
• 7. G
• 8. Physical Sciences H
• 9. I
• 10. J
• 11. K
• 12. L
• 13. M

23
Descending the Hierarchy

• 1. Anatomy A Body Regions A01
  Abdomen A01.047
• 2. B
  Musculoskeletal System A02 Back
  A01.176
• 3. C Digestive
  System A03 Breast A01.236
• 4. D Respiratory
  System A04 Extremities A01.378
  
• 5. E Urogenital
  System A05 Head A01.456
• 6. F
  Neck
  A01.598
• 7. G
  .
• 8. Physical Sciences H
• 9. I
• 10. J
• 11. K
• 12. L
• 13. M

24
Descending the Hierarchy

• 1. Anatomy A Body Regions A01
  Abdomen A01.047
• 2. B
  Musculoskeletal System A02 Back
  A01.176
• 3. C Digestive
  System A03 Breast A01.236
• 4. D Respiratory
  System A04 Extremities A01.378
  
• 5. E Urogenital
  System A05 Head A01.456
• 6. F
  Neck
  A01.598
• 7. G
  .
• 8. Physical Sciences H Electronics
• 9. I
  Astronomy
• 10. J
  Nature
• 11. K
  Time
• 12. L
  Weights and Measures
• 13. M .

25
The Approach

• Assign faceted metadata to content items
• Allow users to navigate through the faceted
  metadata in a flexible manner
• Organize search results according to the faceted
  metadata so navigation looks similar throughout
• Give previews of next choices
• Allow access to previous choices

26
The Flamenco Interface

• Hierarchical facets
• Chess metaphor
• Opening
• Middle game
• End game
• Tightly Integrated Search

27
(No Transcript)
28
(No Transcript)
29
(No Transcript)
30
(No Transcript)
31
(No Transcript)
32
(No Transcript)
33
(No Transcript)
34
(No Transcript)
35
(No Transcript)
36
What is Tricky About This?

• It is easy to do it poorly
• Yahoo directory structure
• It is hard to be not overwhelming
• Most users prefer simplicity unless complexity
  really makes a difference
• It is hard to make it flow
• Can it feel like browsing the shelves?

37
Using HCI Methodology

• Identify Target Population
• Architects, city planners
• Needs assessment.
• Interviewed architects and conducted contextual
  inquiries.
• Lo-fi prototyping.
• Showed paper prototype to 3 professional
  architects.
• Design / Study Round 1.
• Simple interactive version. Users liked metadata
  idea.
• Design / Study Round 2
• Developed 4 different detailed versions
  evaluated with 11 architects results somewhat
  positive but many problems identified. Matrix
  emerged as a good idea.
• Metadata revision.
• Compressed and simplified the metadata
  hierarchies

38
Using HCI Methodology

• Design / Study Round 3.
• New version based on results of Round 2
• Highly positive user response
• Identified new user population/collection
• Students and scholars of art history
• Fine arts images
• Study Round 4
• Compare the metadata system to a strong,
  representative baseline

39
Most Recent Usability Study

• Participants Collection
• 32 Art History Students
• 35,000 images from SF Fine Arts Museum
• Study Design
• Within-subjects
• Each participant sees both interfaces
• Balanced in terms of order and tasks
• Participants assess each interface after use
• Afterwards they compare them directly
• Data recorded in behavior logs, server logs,
  paper-surveys one or two experienced testers at
  each trial.
• Used 9 point Likert scales.
• Session took about 1.5 hours pay was 15/hour

40
The Baseline System

• Floogle
• Take the best of the existing keyword-based image
  search systems

41
Comparison of Common Image Search Systems
42
sword
sword
43
(No Transcript)
44
(No Transcript)
45
(No Transcript)
46
Evaluation Quandary

• How to assess the success of browsing?
• Timing is usually not a good indicator
• People often spend longer when browsing is going
  well.
• Not the case for directed search
• Can look for comprehensiveness and correctness
  (precision and recall)
• But subjective measures seem to be most
  important here.

47
Hypotheses

• We attempted to design tasks to test the
  following hypotheses
• Participants will experience greater search
  satisfaction, feel greater confidence in the
  results, produce higher recall, and encounter
  fewer dead ends using FC over Baseline
• FC will perceived to be more useful and flexible
  than Baseline
• Participants will feel more familiar with the
  contents of the collection after using FC
• Participants will use FC to create multi-faceted
  queries

48
Four Types of Tasks

• Unstructured (3) Search for images of interest
• Structured Task (11-14) Gather materials for an
  art history essay on a given topic, e.g.
• Find all woodcuts created in the US
• Choose the decade with the most
• Select one of the artists in this periods and
  show all of their woodcuts
• Choose a subject depicted in these works and find
  another artist who treated the same subject in a
  different way.
• Structured Task (10) compare related images
• Find images by artists from 2 different countries
  that depict conflict between groups.
• Unstructured (5) search for images of interest

49
Other Points

• Participants were NOT walked through the
  interfaces.
• The wording of Task 2 reflected the metadata not
  the case for Task 3
• Within tasks, queries were not different in
  difficulty (tslt1.7, p gt0.05 according to
  post-task questions)
• Flamenco is and order of magnitude slower than
  Floogle on average.
• In task 2 users were allowed 3 more minutes in FC
  than in Baseline.
• Time spent in tasks 2 and 3 were significantly
  longer in FC (about 2 min more).

50
Results

• Participants felt significantly more confident
  they had found all relevant images using FC (Task
  2 t(62)2.18, plt.05 Task 3 t(62)2.03, plt.05)
• Participants felt significantly more satisfied
  with the results
• (Task 2 t(62)3.78, plt.001 Task 3 t(62)2.03,
  plt.05)
• Recall scores
• Task2a In Baseline 57 of participants found all
  relevant results, in FC 81 found all.
• Task 2b In Baseline 21 found all relevant, in
  FC 77 found all.

51
Post-Interface Assessments
All significant at plt.05 except simple and
overwhelming
52
Perceived Uses of Interfaces
Baseline
FC
53
Post-Test Comparison
FC
Baseline
Which Interface Preferable For
Find images of roses Find all works from a given
period Find pictures by 2 artists in same media
Overall Assessment
More useful for your tasks Easiest to use Most
flexible More likely to result in dead
ends Helped you learn more Overall preference
54
Facet Usage

• Facets driven largely by task content
• Multiple facets 45 of time in structured tasks
• For unstructured tasks,
• Artists (17)
• Date (15)
• Location (15)
• Others ranged from 5-12
• Multiple facets 19 of time
• From end game, expansion from
• Artists (39)
• Media (29)
• Shapes (19)

55
Qualitative Observations

• Baseline
• Simplicity, similarity to Google a plus
• Also noted the usefulness of the category links
• FC
• Starting page well-organized, gave ideas for
  what to search for
• Query previews were commented on explicitly by 9
  participants
• Commented on matrix prompting where to go next
• 3 were confused about what the matrix shows
• Generally liked the grouping and organizing
• End game links seemed useful 9 explicitly
  remarked positively on the guidance provided
  there.
• Often get requests to use the system in future

56
Study Results Summary

• Overwhelmingly positive results for the faceted
  metadata interface.
• Somewhat heavy use of multiple facets.
• Strong preference over the current state of the
  art.
• This result not seen in similarity-based image
  search interfaces.
• Hypotheses are supported.

57
New Features

• Save groups of images and searches
• Find Similar Images

58
Advantages

• Users have a feeling of control
• Users can predict what will happen
• Not true of statistical ranking or clustering
• Adding new items to the system changes the
  behavior in understandable ways
• Users have flexibility
• In ordering of operations
• In combining of operations

59
Thank you!

• Marti Hearst
• flamenco.berkeley.edu
• www.sims.berkeley.edu/hearst