ArticleVisual computing for industry, biomedicine, and art2025
Graph visualization efficiency of popular web-based libraries.
Article in Visual computing for industry, biomedicine, and art, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Web-based libraries, such as D3.js, ECharts.js, and G6.js, are widely used to generate node-link graph visualizations. These libraries allow users to call application programming interfaces (APIs) without identifying the details of the encapsulated techniques such as graph layout algorithms and graph rendering methods. Efficiency requirements, such as visualizing a graph with 3k nodes and 4k edges within 1 min at a frame rate of 30 fps, are crucial for selecting a proper library because libraries generally present different characteristics owing to the diversity of encapsulated techniques. However, existing studies have mainly focused on verifying the advantages of a new layout algorithm or rendering method from a theoretical viewpoint independent of specific web-based libraries. Their conclusions are difficult for end users to understand and utilize. Therefore, a trial-and-error selection process is required. This study addresses this gap by conducting an empirical experiment to evaluate the performance of web-based libraries. The experiment involves popular libraries and hundreds of graph datasets covering node scales from 100 to 200k and edge-to-node ratios from 1 to 10 (including complete graphs). The experimental results are the time costs and frame rates recorded using the libraries to visualize the datasets. The authors analyze the performance characteristics of each library in depth based on the results and organize the results and findings into application-oriented guidelines. Additionally, they present three usage cases to illustrate how the guidelines can be applied in practice. These guidelines offer user-friendly and reliable recommendations, aiding users in quickly selecting the desired web-based libraries based on their specific efficiency requirements for node-link graph visualizations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.