Phylomeny Go buy glasses.

of Deniz Cem Önduygu

Archive
Tag "information design"

This is a personal project that dates back to 2009; I’ve been postponing sharing it because I wasn’t sure it was finished. I still am not sure but I decided it waited too long in my computer and would better develop with comments from other people.

My challenge to myself was to map these different adjectives with yes/no questions that have the pronoun “you” as their subject. First, let me make it absolutely clear that I would easily admit that this whole thing is a gross oversimplification if pushed; I even deliberately went for the fun factor in some questions/answers. Secondly, I salute those who see the seriousness in it, and below the image are some explanations for them.

This chart was done with basic ontology and epistemology in mind – with some weight on modern philosophy of mind; it doesn’t include ethics or political philosophy because the adjectives for these areas of philosophy are not mutually exclusive with the ones that are on the chart: one can be a non-reductive physicalist and a Marxist at the same time. I realize that even some of the ones on the chart are not always mutually exclusive, but they at least deal with the same type of questions and therefore can be said to be “in competition” with each other. Maybe the most troubling in this respect are the nihilist/postmodernist categories: a nihilist can be a biological naturalist, but I expect a true nihilist/postmodernist to answer a question like “Can you be duplicated within a computer?” with “I don’t care” or “It doesn’t matter” or “It’s an invalid question” – they would have a unique indifferent stance towards those questions. That’s why I included them in this chart.

My apologies go to those who take this thing seriously enough to feel bad that they are excluded from it; I will do my best to include other adjectives (related to the concept of the chart) if you point them out to me. I know, for instance, that Hindus are missing, but their beliefs are too diverse for me to understand, generalize and transform into one question-answer. It should be obvious that, even though I did my research for the majority of the adjectives, I went deeper in areas I was most familiar with.

A final note: You don’t really get to be non-reducible just because you believe it and consider yourself a non-reductive physicalist. While the questions on this chart are about what you think you are, the answers in fact reveal what you are – the adjective you get in terms of your theories/beliefs.

This is a summary of the history of the universe, life on Earth and humanity, all belonging to the same picture shown in seven different time scales. It is in fact a reminder I made for my own use, like a summary of the course material a student prepares before an exam. (This was something I was particularly good at as a student, and I now realize that most of my personal work too is of that nature. I’ll remember this if I ever need an “artist’s statement”. If I ever become an artist.)

After publishing this, quite a lot of people have said that they want to hang a print of it on their wall. High-quality prints of different sizes and materials of The Big Picture in Seven Scales can be bought here, with worldwide shipping. (The png file you see on the web isn’t good for printing.)

The initial plan was to represent everything on one very lengthy line at one scale and produce a print to hang on some large enough wall so that the viewer can intuitively sense the amounts of time in question. For the screen medium – and for regular walls – this was not very practical so I did this version with seven scales, though I still plan to do the big version, at least 15 meters long.

My main purpose with this thing was to give a sense of how tiny our time scales are compared to the larger scheme of things, in one look. For this reason, the key feature of this visualization to me is the gray gradients relating the different scales to one another. And that’s why I stick with an oldschool flat-out one-image version instead of a fancy interactive one with zooming in and out. (It has nothing to do with my personal dislike for interaction.) By the way, I find the fact that all this immediate visual information is embedded in a 104 kilobyte image file terribly pleasing.

Dates are of course approximate. I first wanted to cite the sources for the information here but after some point of my research they became just too numerous to keep track of as I cross-checked everything in multiple sources. (When different dates were given at different sources, I chose to use something in between. Luckily there isn’t too much controversy; everybody agrees that Mayans came after the dawn of multicellular life.) In any case, I believe the information here is as public domain as can be. I will just hyperlink the sources of the linegraphs I included: the atmosphere oxygenation, the global mean temperature for 160.000 years, the world human population and the global mean temperature anomalies for 150 years.

While researching for the temperature data I had a chance to form a more informed opinion on the issue of global warming but here I won’t go into the discussions of whether it is real, human-induced or dangerous; I tried to stay as neutral as possible by showing temperature graphs at two different time scales, both accepted and used by people on both sides of the argument. If anything my visualization just says “Yes, the global mean temperature is fluctuating in every time scale, and yes, in the scale of the last 100 years we are seeing a warming trend.” – these two statements, I believe, are not debated. (This page by the University Corporation for Atmospheric Research is by far the most clear, concise and structured one I saw on the basics of global warming, and although it’s on the “warmist” side it could be a good starting point for any curious person no matter his/her inclination on this politically charged issue.)

Some of the information on The Big Picture is less conclusive than the majority and perhaps I should add a few explanations for those.

  • The RNA World hypothesis about the origin of life may be impossible to confirm but I observe that it’s the most popular one among scientists, and I was assured enough when I saw it favored in the prestigious Molecular Biology of the Cell (Fifth Edition).
  • The dates for the beginning of sexual reproduction are also vague, and I have nothing to say about that. I just wanted to give you a piece of advice based upon my experience: don’t ever google “sex” if you want information on the evolution of sexual reproduction. Just don’t. The world doesn’t work like that.
  • There’s some recent findings, published in Nature in 2010, that suggests that multicellular life may have begun as early as 2.1 billion years ago but I chose to stick with the status quo on that because the paper’s too fresh.
  • There’s also some new findings (Science, 2005) suggesting, contrary to what we knew, that grasses may have evolved before the end of dinosaurs. (Just a cool way of saying “They found grass in fossilized dinosaur dung”.) Here I was convinced enough to have it their way.
  • There are people who claim that the Moon landing was faked. There are also people who claim that everything popped into existence 6000 years ago. Just so you know.

One terminology note: The dinosaurs – that are extinct – are dubbed “non-avian dinosaurs” today by scientists because we’re sure that birds are technically dinosaurs too. So we mustn’t say that “dinosaurs”, in their entirety, are extinct. However, as Jack Horner reminds us, all the kids in the world know that birds are not really cool enough to be dinosaurs.

Please don’t hesitate to contact me via comments below or email if you think there are corrections to be made, very important things to add, etc. I’m sure it’ll need updating in future, thus the “v1.2″ in the title.

My thanks go to Bilge Kobaş, Amaç Herdağdelen and Eser Aygün for their useful and challenging comments, as always. Eser has suggested that I should also add the future of the universe and at first I loved the idea. However, when I did research for the future scenarios for humanity, the Earth and the universe, I realized that there are too many alternatives – nearly all of them speculative – and it would be misleading if I chose between them and omit the rest. The historical information displayed in this work is obviously much more conclusive compared to our predictions about the future, and adding those predictions here would unfairly diminish the reliability of the former. Maybe I can do another version just for the alternative future scenarios. In future. That’s one scenario.

I dedicate this piece to mom, who has made sure, recently and on many past occasions, that I stayed sane enough to be spending time on these things.

I had worked with scientists Cleva Ow Yang and Ayşe Turak on creating better visual communication of their research in the second Image of Science workshop in July 2011 but have been holding off sharing the outputs, waiting for them to publish their research. This is their manuscript in Nano Letters (one of the highest ranked journals in materials science), including more visuals that we produced together, and below is a piece that I’m quite proud of.

click to see larger

This is an examination of Metallica’s concert history from 1982 to 2012 with a focus on the numbers of songs played live and the albums that they belong to. I and my friends at Çilek Ağacı took the raw data from Setlist.fm (plus Last.fm in the last part), groomed it and visualized it with our own tools.

The colors of the albums – a key feature of the whole visualization – are chosen according to the album cover artworks; Metallica fans can easily understand which color corresponds to which album without reading their names. As a convenient surprise, new albums (Load, Reload and St. Anger) that are stylistically different from the old ones are all tints of orange-yellow and this provides a natural visual grouping in the charts. (Try to see this grouping when you look at the charts.) Death Magnetic, which is their newest album but musically much closer to the old ones, has its brownish gray shade (again, taken from the real album cover), and that separates it visually from the Load – St. Anger period.

High-quality prints of different sizes and materials of this poster can be bought here, with worldwide shipping. (The jpg file you see on the web isn’t good for printing.)

In the first chart, the number of concerts given each year is plotted. In the second chart, the bar heights represent the absolute numbers of songs played from each album. The album release dates are marked on the grid columns with the corresponding colors.

The years 1982–91 are a very intense period for Metallica; they write a vast majority of the songs that are played live even today, and are involved in extensive touring. We can see that in the eves of the first four albums, Metallica continues to play gigs. With the self-titled fifth album, the band starts to quit touring and takes more time for songwriting before releasing albums. Maybe this is one of the sources of the famous “problem” (according to the oldschool first-four-albums metalheads) with the new albums; maybe Metallica shouldn’t be left alone before albums. This idea is consistent with the case of Death Magnetic which is not written in absolute isolation according to the chart, and has largely won the hearts of oldschool fans.

The year 1992 sees the climax of touring in Metallica’s carrier where each album reaches their all-time maximum play counts (except Justice), all dominated by the “Black Album”s overwhelming numbers.

Looking at 1996–97 we observe that Load-Reload songs seem to go well with the Ride the Lightning songs in a way that the remaining of the first-four-albums don’t. Interestingly, Reload never reaches the explosive levels of playing of Load after its release but it enjoys a more stable carrier afterwards (thanks to Fuel and The Memory Remains) compared to Load, ultimately not falling too far behind it in total play count (1115, 696).

St. Anger comes after the longest break in Metallica’s touring history (for obvious reasons) and lives the short and brutal life of a monster. (It is seen as their worst album by the oldschool fans.) It’s clear that Metallica aren’t happy with playing St. Anger songs live. It seems like Death Magnetic songs arrive to put St. Anger out of its misery; this is the only case in Metallica’s history where a new album entirely cuts the play count of the previous one. It can also be seen that Death Magnetic songs enjoy the company of the older songs instead of Load-Reload.

In the second part of our examination is a map of the places where Metallica has played live. The opacity of the red outer circles correlates with the number of concerts given in that city. The details about the northern- and the southern-most gig venues where Metallica has played are given in trivia boxes.

In the third part we see the total play counts by albums and songs. As expected, the most played songs are from the old albums, and the least played are from the new ones. But what if there was a way to compare the real “performances” of the songs in concert setlists, independent from their release date? To address this question, in the next part, we introduce the concept of Power.

Song Power is calculated by dividing the total play count of the song by the number of concerts after its first playing date. Album Power is the total play count of the songs from the album divided by the number of all songs played in all concerts after the date when a song from that album was first played (which may be before the release of that album) and then divided by the number of songs on it. This is a normalization to eliminate the advantage that the old songs have (they had more time to be played) in order to create more neutral rankings. You can also say that a song with the Power value 0.945 has a 95% chance of being played in the next concert. The Album Powers are additionally normalized with respect to the numbers of songs on the albums. (The Album Power values on the chart are multiplied by 10 for presentation efficiency.)

We see that the rankings change when we eliminate the time factor. Enter Sandman takes the lead as the most Powerful song and Death Magnetic, their latest album, beats all the old albums in Power; this means that Death Magnetic had a greater share of setlists after its release than the other albums did in their own lifetimes in average. Two songs from Death Magnetic are already in the Top 10 Most Powerful Songs list, prevailing over classics like For Whom the Bell Tolls and Seek & Destroy. Another way of thinking about Power is this: given enough time, Death Magnetic may well be in the top ranks of the Total Count by Albums list whereas Load, Reload and St. Anger do not seem to be moving from where they are. (Note that if we did the same analysis in 1997 we would have been saying a similar thing about Load; time will tell whether Death Magnetic’s Power will subsist.) S&M with its two songs presents an interesting case as it moves on top of the “Orange Albums” thanks to the song number normalization.

This part also contains the complete list of Metallica songs never played live in their entirety; among them are songs that are played in part (for instance, until the second verse part) or have been featured as riffs in a jam. Here Reload sticks out as the album with the most songs that are never played live. Kill ‘Em All and Master of Puppets are albums that had all their songs played live at least once.

In the fifth part we plot the Song Power on the y-axis with song durations on the x-axis. Here the first thing that strikes us is a pattern of orange-yellow squares tiling the lower part of a diagonal line between the upper left and the lower right corners. This tells us that songs from the Orange Albums tend to lose their Power as they get longer in duration; there isn’t one song from Load, Reload or St. Anger among the 19 songs located above that diagonal. This plot also gives insight about the natures of the individual albums thanks to the color-coding; for instance, it is easy to see that the black squares are grouped in the left half of the plot, meaning that the album Metallica consists of shorter songs in average.

Finally we make a comparison between the personal listening statistics taken from Last.fm and the concert setlists (after 2002 when Last.fm was founded). On the left are songs that have a greater share within Last.fm than within setlists in total, and the songs with greater share within setlists are on the right of the axis. This chart suggests that the band may further please the audience by playing songs from the left end (The Unforgiven, The Unforgiven II, etc.) more in concerts. The fact that there are fewer songs on the right side and their bars are much higher than the ones on the left side tells us that the setlist and Last.fm statistics have different distributions: there are songs that Metallica plays on almost every show and there are songs that they have never played live whereas Last.fm listening statistics are much more homogeneous.

[Personal addendum: In addition to all the objective analysis above, I would like to state as a fan that I love the Orange Albums as much as I love the old ones, and I am thrilled to see them played live.]

Praise on Social Media

  • andypotter (Andrew Potter) Lustig and also insane :)
  • jmlacroix (Jean-Michel Lacroix) L’infographique le plus intéressant de 2011.
  • nag_acharya (Nagaraj Acharya) Whoa! This is for those of you who are doing a PhD on Metallica.
  • tmbrntt (Tom Barnett) not exactly a metallica fan but this is an all-time favourite infographic.
  • bquarant (Brian Quaranto) The infographic bar has been raised again.
  • clipperhouse (Matt ☼ Sherman) OK, this is actually an infographic. (Most “inforgraphics” are just lists done in Illustrator.)
  • DannyJWillis (Danny Willis) My new favorite data visualization ever.
  • dkastner (Derek Kastner) Here’s an infographic that’s actually informative, novel, and presents data effectively.
  • Fitoria (Adolfo Fitoria) La mejor infografía de todos los tiempos.
  • Brian Fitzhugh An infographic that is actually interesting.
  • Leah Root Wow! This guy put more research and effort into this than most people do for research papers or companies do for financial statements. He needs to be a CEO of something. A real ‘Master of Puppets’ ;)

I recently put the outputs of Image of Science 2010 on my website, and I’m happy to announce that the second workshop is happening between July 11–15 in Sabancı University, this time open to outside participation. Image of Science seeks to bring researchers and designers together in order to depict complex research methodologies and findings. This is the formal announcement:

Sabanci University’s interest in supporting research output has been one of the primary initiatives of Image of Science, which will now run its second season July 11–15 on campus.  Image of Science is a university wide collaboration organized by visiting faculty Gokhan Ersan (School of the Art Institute of Chicago), Melih Papila (FENS), VAVCD teaching assistants, and Nancy Karabeyoglu (SUWC).

Image of Science seeks to familiarize researchers with design tools that can comprehensively depict complex research methodologies and findings.

This year’s week long program of workshops and design tutorials focuses on creating interactive slide shows and presentations of completed or ongoing research. Two days of workshops on implementing design strategies open the program; three days of design work to produce interactive slide shows/presentation of selected submissions follow. All are welcome.

If you have a visual image of a particular ongoing/completed research project and/or would like to learn more of design’s ability to serve as a powerful information source, please consider attending either the workshops or design production; both are free.

The links below are the formal invitation to Image of Science.

Website

http://iscience.sabanciuniv.edu

Registration/Submissions

http://iscience.sabanciuniv.edu/workshop-apply/apply-ws2.html

Pages containing the work of last year’s projects

http://iscience.sabanciuniv.edu/projects/projects-emrah-p1-intro.html