This is a searchable database. Please use the following search form:
Keyword:

Updated on Sun Jan 21 1:18:43 1996

[1]
ACM. ACM Press, 1982.

[2]
ACM. ACM Press, 1983.

[3]
ACM. ACM Press, 1985.

[4]
ACM. ACM Press, 1987.

[5]
ACM. ACM Press, 1991.

[6]
ACM. ACM Press, 1992.

[7]
ACM. ACM Press, 1993.

[8]
ACM. Addison Wesley, April 1993.

[9]
ACM. ACM Press, November 1993.

[10]
A.H.Borning. ThingLab--A Constraint-Oriented Simulation Laboratory. Ph.d. thesis, stanford, 1979.

[11]
Bill Appelbe, Eileen Kraemer, Bala Lakshmanan, John Stasko, and Joe Wehrli. Graphical support for debugging parallel programs. In Proceedings of ACM/ONR Workshop on Parallel and Distributed Debugging, pages 172-174, San Diego, California, May 1993. [Extended abstract].

[12]
William F. Appelbe and John T. Stasko. Utilizing program visualization and animation techniques to aid parallel program development and debugging. In Proceedings of the ACM/ONR Workshop on Parallel and Distributed Debugging, pages 207-209, Santa Cruz, California, May 1991. [Extended abstract].

[13]
Ronald M. Baecker. Picture-driven animation. Proc. Joint Spring Computer Conf., 34, 1969.

[14]
Ronald M. Baecker. Sorting out sorting. Presented at ACM SIGGRAPH Conference, Dallas, Texas, 1981. 16mm color,sound film, commercially available from Morgan Kaufman.

[15]
Ronald M. Baecker. An application overview of program visualization. Computer Graphics, 20(4):325, July 1986.

[16]
J. L. Bentley and B. W. Kernighan. A system for algorithm animation. Computing Systems, 4(1):5-30, Winter 1991.
An algorithm or a program can be animated by a movie that graphically represents its dynamic execution. Such animations are useful for developing new programs, for debugging, and for explaining how programs work. This paper describes ANIM, a basic system for algorithm animation. The output is crude, but ANIM is easy to use; a novice user can animate a program in an hour or two. ANIM currently produces movies with the X window system, among others; it also renders movies into stills that can be included in TROFF or TeX documents. (15 Refs.)

[17]
Heinz-Dieter B"ocker, Gerhard Fischer, and Helga Nieper. The enhancement of understanding through visual representations. In Proceedings [103], pages 44-50.

[18]
Franz Brandenburg, editor. Proceedings of Graph Drawing'95, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Passau, September 1995. to appear.

[19]
M. Brayshaw and M. Eisenstadt. Adding data and procedure abstraction to the transparent prolog machine (TPM). In Robert A. Kowalski and Kenneth A. Bowen, editors, Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference and Symposium on Logic Programming, pages 532-547, Seattle, 1988. ALP, IEEE, The MIT Press.

[20]
Mike Brayshaw and Marc Eisenstadt. A practical graphical tracer for prolog. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 35(5):597-631, 1991.
We describe a practical and enhanced implementation of a graphical Prolog tracer which not only provides a faithful (slow-motion) representation of the inner workings of the Prolog interpreter, but also allows a high-speed visual overview of execution for rapidly homing in on buggy code. The current work extends our original "Transparent Prolog Machine" in the following ways: (a) complex unification histories for given variables can be displayed; (b) cross-variable dependencies (sharing) across widely-dispersed sections of code can be highlighted; (c) an earlier defect, wherein a given user could write code which defeated the speed/size of the current fastest/largest display capability (i.e. a "horizon effect") is dealt with; (d) users of textual (Byrd Box) tracers are provided with an upward-compatible migration pathway; (e) code can be traced either "live" or "retrospectively" at different grains of detail. We distinguish among four different ways of manipulating the "navigational space" produced by large Prolog programs: (a) by granularity i.e. coarse-grained vs fine-grained; (b) by scale, i.e. close-up vs far away (c) by compression, i.e. the use of a single compact display region or symbol to indicate "additional territory", at the same granularity and scale; (d) by abstraction, i.e. a movement away from the raw Prolog code and towards a representation closer to the programmer's own plans and intentions. The paper includes detailed examples of the tracer in action.

[21]
Christopher P. Brown, Gretchen P. Brown, Richard T. Carling, Mark Friedell, David A. Kramlich, and Ronald M. Baecker. An Integrated Environment for Program Visualization. North Holland, New Orleans, LA, January 1982.

[22]
Marc H. Brown and John Hershberger. Animation of geometric algorithms: A video review. DEC SRC Technical Report 87a, Digital Systems Research Center, Digital Systems Research Center, 130 Lytton Avenue, Palo Alto, California 94301, June 1991.

[23]
Marc H. Brown and John Hershberger. Color and sound in algorithm animation. In Proc. IEEE Workshop on Visual Languages, pages 10-17, October 1991.

[24]
Marc. H. Brown and J. Hershberger. Color and sound in algorithm animation. DEC SRC Technical Report 76a, Digital Systems Research Center, Digital Systems Research Center, 130 Lytton Avenue, Palo Alto, California 94301, August 1992. Also appeared as citepBrown:92:Color2. There is an accompanying videotape citepBrown:92:Color3.

[25]
Marc. H. Brown and J. Hershberger. Color and sound in algorithm animation. IEEE Computer, 25(12):52-63, December 1992.

[26]
Marc H. Brown and John Hershberger. Animation of geometric algorithms: A video review. DEC SRC Technical Report 87b, Digital Systems Research Center, Digital Systems Research Center, 130 Lytton Avenue, Palo Alto, California 94301, June 1992. Color videotape accompanying citepBrown:92:Geometric.

[27]
Marc H. Brown and John Hershberger. Video review computational geometry 1993. DEC SRC Technical Report 101b, Digital Systems Research Center, Digital Systems Research Center, 130 Lytton Avenue, Palo Alto, California 94301, 1993. color videotape.

[28]
Marc H. Brown and Marc A. Najork. Algorithm animation using 3d interactive graphics. DEC SRC Technical Report 110a, Digital Systems Research Center, Digital Systems Research Center, 130 Lytton Avenue, Palo Alto, California 94301, September 1993.

[29]
Marc H. Brown and Marc A. Najork. Animating algorithms in 3d. In Proceedings of the 1993 ACM UIST Conference [9].

[30]
Marc H. Brown and Robert Sedgewick. The electronic classroom: A progress report. video tape, January 1984.

[31]
Marc H. Brown and Robert Sedgewick. A system for algorithm animation. Computer Graphics, 18(3):177-186, July 1984.

[32]
Marc H. Brown and Robert Sedgewick. Techniques for algorithm animation. IEEE Software, 2(1):28-39, January 1985.

[33]
Marc H. Brown. Algorithm Animation. The MIT Press, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02142, 1988. ISBN 0-262-02278-8.

[34]
Marc. H. Brown. Exploring algorithms using balsa-ii. IEEE Computer, 21(5):14-36, May 1988.

[35]
Marc. H. Brown. Zeus: A system for algorithm animation and multi-view editing. In Proceedings of the 1991 IEEE Workshop on Visual Languages [73].

[36]
Marc. H. Brown. An anthology of algorithm animations using zeus. DEC SRC Technical Report 76b, Digital Systems Research Center, Digital Systems Research Center, 130 Lytton Avenue, Palo Alto, California 94301, August 1992. Color videotape, time: 59:00.

[37]
Marc. H. Brown. Zeus: A system for algorithm animation and multi-view editing. DEC SRC Technical Report 75, Digital Systems Research Center, Digital Systems Research Center, 130 Lytton Avenue, Palo Alto, California 94301, February 1992. also appeared as citepBrown:91:Zeus.

[38]
Marc H. Brown. The 1992 SRC Algorithm Animation Festival. DEC SRC Technical Report 98, Digital Systems Research Center, Digital Systems Research Center, 130 Lytton Avenue, Palo Alto, California 94301, March 1993.

[39]
Marc H. Brown. The 1993 SRC Algorithm Animation Festival. DEC SRC Technical Report 126, Digital Systems Research Center, Digital Systems Research Center, 130 Lytton Avenue, Palo Alto, California 94301, July 1994.

[40]
Frank Buschmann, editor. Workshop Entwurfsmuster, December 1994.

[41]
Robert P. Cook and Rihard J. Auletta. StarLite, a visual simulation package for software prototyping. pages 102-110, 1987.

[42]
Robert P. Cook and Richard McDaniel. The StarLite algorithm animator. Software --- Concepts and Tools, 16:1-11, 1995.

[43]
A. Cypher. Watch what I do --- Programming by Demonstration. MIT Press, 1993.

[44]
S. Das, R. Fujimoto, and J. Stasko. Animating the Execution of Time Warp Programs. In rmcitepPADS92 6th Workshop on Parallel and Distributed Simulation (PADS92), pages 195-196, 1992.

[45]
M.S. Dionne and A.K. Mackworth. Antics: A system for animating lisp programs. Computer Graphics and Image Processing, 7:105-119, 1978.

[46]
John Domingue, Blaine A. Price, and Marc Eisenstadt. A framework for describing and implementing software visualization systems. In Proceedings of Graphics Interface '92, pages 53-60, May 1992.

[47]
Robert A. Duisberg. Animated graphical interfaces using temporal constraints. In Proceedings [103], pages 131-136.

[48]
Robert A. Duisberg. Visual programming of program visualizations --- a gestural interface for animating algorithms. In Proc. IEEE Workshop on Visual Languages, pages 55-66. IEEE Computer Society, August 1987. also appeared as CRL Technical Report 87-20.

[49]
Dominik Eichelberg and Philipp Ackermann. Integrating interactive 3d-graphics into an object-oriented application framework. In Proc. Vienna Workshop on Human-Computer Interaction VHCI'93, number 733 in LNCS. Springer.

[50]
M. Eisenstadt and M. Brayshaw. The transparent prolog machine (TPM): An execution model and graphical debugger for logic programming. Ou-hcrl-tr21a, HCRL, Open University, 1987.

[51]
M. Eisenstadt and M. Brayshaw. Adding data and procedure abstraction to the transparent prolog machine (TPM). Technical Report OU-HCRL-TR31, 1988.

[52]
Doris R. Entwisle. Computer animation for the academic community. pages 623-627. Proceedings of the Joint Spring Computer Conference, 1969.

[53]
Vikki Fix, Susan Wiedenbeck, and Jean Scholtz. Mental representations of programs by novices and experts. In Proceedings of InterCHI'93, pages 74-79. Addison-Wesley, 1993.
This paper presents five abstract characteristics of the mental representation of computer programs: hierarchical structure, explicit mapping of code to goals, foundation on recognition of recurring patterns, connection of knowledge, and grounding in the program text. An experiment is reported in which expert and novice programmers studied a Pascal program for comprehension and then answered a series of quiestions about it designed to show these characteristics if they existed in the mental represenations formed. Evidence for all of the abstract characteristics was found in the mental representations of expert programmers. Novices' representations generally lacked th characteristics, but there was evidence that they had the beginnings, although poorly developed.

[54]
George W. Furnas. Generalized fisheye views. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pages 16-23, 1986.

[55]
Galitz. User Interface Screen Design. QEDPublishing, 1993. 92E833.

[56]
Steven C. Glassman. A turbo environment for producing algorithm animations. In Proceedings of the 1993 IEEE Workshop on Visual Languages [75].

[57]
Peter Gloor, Scott Dynes, and Irene Lee. Animated algorithms --- a hypermedia learning environment for introduction to algorithms. CD-ROM für Apple MacIntosh Computer. Hypertext-Version von [Cormen:90:Algorithms], 1993.

[58]
Peter A. Gloor. Aace --- algorithm animation for computer science education. In Proceedings of the 1992 IEEE Workshop on Visual Languages [74], pages 25-31.

[59]
Peter A. Gloor. Hypermedia-lernumgebungen f"ur den informatik-unterricht. it+ti Informationstechnik und Technische Informatik, 35(3):18-26, 1993.

[60]
Roy Hall. Illumination and Color in Computer Generated Imagery. Springer Verlag, 1989.

[61]
Doug Hayes. The xtango environment and differences from tango. Begleitpapier zum XTANGO Animationssystem, 1990.

[62]
Michael T. Heath and Jennifer A. Etheridge. Visualizing the performance of parallel programs. IEEE Software, (9):29-39, September 1991.

[63]
Esa Helttula, Aulikki Hyrskykari, and Kari-Jouka Räihä. Graphical specification of algorithm animations using aladdin. In Proc. of the 22nd Hawaii Int'l Conf. on System Sciences, pages 892-901, January 1989.

[64]
Esa Helttula, Aulikki Hyrskykari, and Kari-Jouka Räihä. Principles of aladdin and other algorithm animation systems. In Tadao Ichikawa, Erland Jungert, and Robert R. Korfhage, editors, Visual Languages and Applications, chapter 9, pages 175-187. Plenum Publishing Corporation, 1990.
Animation is a useful tool in teaching and developing algorithms. The idea of animating algorithm executions was suggested in the sixties, but the technology for producing real-time animatins with reasonable cost matured in the early eighties. Since then several animation systems have been developed. The most influential of these systems are surveyed in this paper. A closer look will be taken at the animation system Aladdin which is being developed in the University of Tampere.

[65]
R. Henry, K. Whaley, and B. Forstall. The university of washington illustrating compiler. In In Proceedings of the ACM SIGPLAN'90 Conference on Programming Language Design and Implementation, pages 223-246, June 1990.
The University of Washington illustrating compiler (UWPI) automatically illustrates the data structures used in simple programs written in a subset of Pascal. A UWPI user submits a program to UWPI, and can then watch a graphical display show time varying illustrations of the data structures and program source code. UWPI uses the information latent in the program to determine how to illustrate the program. UWPI infers the abstract data types directly from the declarations and operations used in the source program, and then lays out the illustration in a natural way by instantiating well-known layouts for the abstract types. UWPI solves program illustration using compile-time pattern matching and type inferencing to link anticipated execution events to display events, rather than relying on user assistance or specialized programming techniques. UWPI has been used to automatically illustrate didactic sorting and searching examples, and can be used to help teach basic data structures, or to help when debugging programs.

[66]
Allan Heydon and Greg Nelson. The juno-2 constraint-based drawing editor. DEC SRC Technical Report 131a, Digital Systems Research Center, Digital Systems Research Center, 130 Lytton Avenue, Palo Alto, California 94301, December 1994.

[67]
J.G. Hollands, T.T. Carey, M.L. Matthews, and C.A. McCann. Presenting a graphical network: A comparison of performance using fisheye and scrolling views. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction, pages 313-320, September 1989.

[68]
Christopher D. Hundhausen and Allen D. Maloney. Objectview: A software design architecture for breakpoint-based program visualization. unpublished, 1993.

[69]
James Hunt. Pyramiden-linsen zum sichten von graphiken. Jahresbericht 1993, 1993.

[70]
Aulikki Hyrskykari and Kari-Jouko Räihä. Aladdin: A tool for generating algorithm animations. Technical Report A-1987-6, University of Tampere, Department of Computer Science, P.O. Box 607, FIN-33101 Tampere, Finland, 1987. Appeared in citepVL:87:Proceedings.

[71]
Aulikki Hyrskykari. Development of program visualization systems. Technical Report A-1995-3, University of Tampere, Department of Computer Science, P.O. Box 607, FIN-33101 Tampere, Finland, 1995.
The last decade has been a very active period of designing systems for program visualization. Without proper means for describing and evaluating both existing and new systems further development may be delayed. Recently, several researchers have been working for creating taxonomies for program visualization systems. During the active period of system development benefits of visualization were often praised without criticism, and scientific references were rarely presented. What do we really know about the usefulness of program visualization? We first present the terminology and the state of the work for developing a taxonomy for the discipline. Moreover, we review the existing empirical studies on the benefits of graphical presentation of programs. We also give a reference list to the existing program visualization systems.

[72]
IEEE Computer Society. IEEE Computer Science Press, 1990.

[73]
IEEE Computer Society. IEEE Computer Science Press, October 1991.

[74]
IEEE Computer Society. IEEE Computer Science Press, September 1992.

[75]
IEEE Computer Society. IEEE Computer Science Press, August 1993.

[76]
Dean F. Jerding and John T. Stasko. Using visualization to foster object-oriented program understanding. Technical Report GIT-GVU-94-33, Georgia Institute of Technology, Graphics, Visualization and Usability Center, College of Computing, Atlanta, GA 30332-0280, 1994.
This paper identifies ways that visualization can increase program understanding, and presents a means for characterizing both static and dynamic aspects of an object-oriented program.

[77]
E. Kraemer and J. T. Stasko. The visualization of parallel systems: An overview. Journal of Parallel and Distributed Computing, 18(2):105-117, June 1993.

[78]
Eileen Kraemer and John T. Stasko. Toward flexible control of the temporal mapping from concurrent program events to animations. Technical Report 94-10, Georgia Institute of Technology, Graphics, Visualization and Usability Center, 1994.

[79]
Andrea W. Lawrence, Albert N. Badre, and John T. Stasko. Empirically evaluating the use of animations to teach algorithms. Technical Report GIT-GVU-94-07, Georgia Institute of Technology, Graphics, Visualization and Usability Center, College of Computing, Atlanta, GA 30332-0280, 1994.
This article describes a study involving the use of algorithm animations in classroom and laboratory settings. Results indicated that allowing students to create their own examples in a laboratory session led to higher accuracy on the post-test examination of understanding of the algorithm as compared to students who viewed prepared examples or no laboratory examples.

[80]
Ralph A. London and Robert A. Duisberg. Animating programs using smalltalk. IEEE Computer, 18(8):61-77, August 1985.

[81]
Nadia Magnenat-Thalmann and Daniel Thalmann. Synthetic Actors. 1985.

[82]
Nadia Magnenat-Thalmann and Daniel Thalmann. Image Synthesis --- Theory and Practice. Computer Science Workbench. Springer, 1987. Transformationen,Modellierung,Freiformflaechen, Sichtbarkeit,Beleuchtung,Anti-Aliasing,Schatten, Ray-Tracing.

[83]
Nadia Magnenat-Thalmann and Daniel Thalmann. Synthetic Actors. Computer Science Workbench. Springer, 1990. Marilyn, Bogart, Modelling of Synthetic Actors Animation, Synthetic Actors, Human Prototyping, Hand Animation, Object Grasping, Foot Animation, Facial Animation, Color, Reflectance, Transparency, Texture, Cameras, Light, Shadows, Choreography.

[84]
Sougata Mukherjea and John T. Stasko. Applying algorithm animation techniques for program tracing, debugging, and understanding. In Proceedings of the  15^th  International Conference on Software Engineering. IEEE Computer Society Press, April 1993.

[85]
Sougata Mukherjea and John T. Stasko. Lens: A visual debugging environment. Technical report, 1993. unpublished.

[86]
Sougata Mukherjea and John T. Stasko. Toward visual debugging: Integrating algorithm animation capabilities within a source level debugger. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction, 1(3):215-244, September 1994.

[87]
Jeyakumar Muthukumarasamy and John T. Stasko. Visualizing program executions on large data sets using semantic zooming. Technical Report GIT-GVU-95-02, Georgia Institute of Technology, Graphics, Visualization and Usability Center, College of Computing, Atlanta, GA 30332-0280, 1995.
Understanding and interpreting a large data source is an important but challenging operation in many technical disciplines. Computer visualization has become a valuable tool to help capture and portray characteristics of large data sets. In software visualization, illustrating the operation of very large programs or programs working on very large data sets has remained one of the key open problems. Here, we introduce an approach that uses semantic zooming to depict large program executions. Our method utilizes abstract, clustered graphics to portray program operations on the entire data set. Then, by interacting with the presentation, a viewer can zoom in to examine details and individual values. At this "magnified" level, the presentation adjusts to reflect displays common in existing algorithm animation and program visualization systems.

[88]
Brad A. Myers, Dario Giuse, Roger B. Dannenberg, Brad Vander Zanden, David Kosbie, Ed Previn, Andrew Mickish, and Philippe Marchal. Garnet: Comprehensive support for graphical highly-interactive user interfaces. IEEE Computer, 23(11), November 1990.

[89]
Brad A. Myers, Dario Giuse, Andrew Mickish, Brad Vander Zanden, David Kosbie, Richard McDaniel, James Landay, Matthew Goldberg, and Rajan Pathasarathy. The garnet user interface development environment. In Proceedings of ACM CHI'94 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, volume 2 of VIDEOS: Part III -- Programming and Collaboration, pages 457-458, 1994.
The Garnet User Interface Development Environment contains a comprehensive set of tools that make it significantly easier to design and implement highly-interactive, graphical, direct manipulation user interfaces. The toolkit layer of Garnet provides a prototype-instance object system, automatic constraint maintenance, an efficient retained-object graphics output model, a novel input model, two complete widget sets, and complete debugging tools. Garnet also contains a set of interactive user interface editors that aim to make it possible to create the user interface without programming. Instead, the user draws examples of the desired graphics and demonstrates their behaviors. The associated video provides an overview of the entire Garnet system.

[90]
Brad A. Myers. Displaying data structures for interactive debugging. Csl-80-7, Palo Alto,CA, 1980.

[91]
Brad A. Myers. Incense:a system for displaying data structures. Computer Graphics, 17(3):115-125, July 1983.

[92]
Brad A. Myers. Visual programming, programming by example, and program visualization: A taxonomy. In Proceedings [103], pages 59-66.

[93]
Brad A. Myers. A new model for handling input. ACM Transaction on Information Systems, 8(3):289-320, 1990.
Although there has been important progress in models and packages for the output of graphics to computer screens, there has been little change in the way that input from the mouse, keyboard, and other input devices is handled. New graphics standards are still using a fifteen-year-old model even though it is widely accepted as inadequate, and most modern window managers simply return a stream of low-level, device-dependent input events. This paper presents a new model that handles input devices for highly interactive, direct manipulation, graphical user interfaces, which could be used in future toolkits, window managers, and graphics standards. This model encapsulates interactive behaviors into a few ``Interactor'' object types. Application programs can then create instances of these Interactor objects which hide the details of the underlying window manager events. In addition, Interactors allow a clean separation between the input handling, the graphics, and the application programs. This model has been extensively used as part of the Garnet system and has proven to be convenient, efficient, and easy to learn. Myers provides a well-written discussion of a model for describing interactions with highly interactive, graphical, direct manipulative input devices. This model has been implemented as part of the Garnet user interface development environment at CMU. It allows for the specification and implementation of interactive behaviors separate from considerations of graphics and application programs. The key idea is that interactive behaviors are categorized by, and encapsulated in, a set of ``interactor'' object types. The six types of interactors are menu interactor, move-grow interactor, new-point interactor, angle interactor, text interactor, and trace interactor. Although no widely accepted taxonomy of input operations is extant, these six interactors seem to cover most input operations that are possible with a keyboard and a mouse. Interactor parameters (described in the paper) allow the interactions to be customized for many purposes. Default parameters handle common uses; a constraint-driven interface to application programs is provided for more complex behaviors. One of the best features of this paper is that Myers's description of this model for handling input is well illustrated and therefore quite understandable. It is replete with examples and sample screens. This paper would be useful for researchers in computer system interfaces as well as professional developers of such interfaces. The reference list provides a useful summary of related work.

[94]
Brad A. Myers. Taxonomies of Visual Programming and Program Visualization. Journal of Visual Languages and Computing, 1(1):97-123, 1990.

[95]
Brad Myers. The garnet user interface development environment. In Proceedings of ACM CHI'91 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Special Interest Groups, page 486, 1991.

[96]
Brad A. Myers. The garnet user interface development environment. In Proceedings of ACM INTERCHI'93 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems -- Adjunct Proceedings, Special Interest Groups (SIGs), page 223, 1993.
Garnet helps to implement highly-interactive, graphical, direct manipulation applications for X Windows in CommonLisp. The system is in the public domain, and there are over 40 projects involving over 100 people actively using Garnet today, including many in Europe. An Usenet newsgroup, comp.windows.garnet, allows discussion of Garnet issues. This meeting will allow developers, users and people interested in the Garnet technology to meet, exchange information, and discuss future directions.

[97]
Brad A. Myers. State of the Art in User Interface Software Tools, volume 4, chapter pp110-150. Ablex Publishing, 1993.

[98]
Marc A. Najork and Marc H. Brown. A library for visualizing combinatorial structures. DEC SRC Technical Report 128a, Digital Systems Research Center, Digital Systems Research Center, 130 Lytton Avenue, Palo Alto, California 94301, September 1994. A preliminary version appears in citepVisualization:94:Proceedings.
This report describes textscAnim3D, a 3D animation library targeted at visualizing combinatorial structures. In particular, we are interested in algorithm animation. Constructing a new view for an algorithm typically takes dozens of design iterations, and can be very time-consuming. Our library eases the programmer's burden by providing high-level constructs for performing animations, and by offering an interpretive environment that eliminates the need for recompilations. This report also illustrates textscAnim3D's expressiveness by developing a 3D animation of Dijkstra's shortest-path algorithm in just 70 lines of code. An accompanying videotape shows the library in use.

[99]
Jurg Nievergelt, Peter Schorn, Michele De Lorenzi, Christoph Ammann, and Adrian Brüngger. Xyz: An project in experimental geometric computation. volume 553 of LNCS, pages 171-186. Springer, 1991.

[100]
Jurg Nievergelt, Michele De Lorenzi, and Adrian Brüngger. ??? Technical report, Informatik, ETH Zürich, 1992 (?).

[101]
Stephen C. North. Neato User's Guide. AT&T Bell Laboratories, Murray Hill, NJ, 1992. Technical Report 59113-921014-14TM.

[102]
Gretchen P.Brown, Richard T. Carling, Christopher H. Herot, David A. Kramlich, and Paul Souza. Program visualization: Graphical support for software development. IEEE Computer, 18(8):27-35, August 1985.

[103]
ACM. Proceedings of the 1986 ACM SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM Press, 1986.

[104]
IEEE Computer Society. Proceedings of the 1987 IEEE Workshop on Visual Languages. IEEE Computer Science Press, 1987.

[105]
IEEE. Proceedings of the 1994 IEEE Visualization '94 conference, October 1994.

[106]
S.P. Reiss and J.T.Stasko. The Brown workstation environment: a user interface design toolkit. North Holland, 1989.

[107]
Steven P. Reiss and John T. Stasko. The brown workstation environment: A user interface design toolkit. Technical Report CS-89-34, Brown University, 1989.

[108]
Steven P. Reiss. PECAN: Program development systems that support multiple views. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, SE-11(3):276-285, March 1985.

[109]
Steven P. Reiss. Interacting with the FIELD environment. Software -- Practic and Experience, 20(S-1), June 1990.

[110]
Steven P. Reiss. A framework for abstract 3D visualization. In Proceedings of the 1993 IEEE Workshop on Visual Languages [75], pages 108-115.

[111]
G.-C. Roman, K. Cox, C. Wilcox, and J. Plun. Pavane: A system for declarative visualization of concurrent computations. Technical Report 91-26, Washington University.

[112]
G.-C. Roman, K. Cox, C. Wilcox, and J. Plun. Pavane: A system for declarative visualization of concurrent computations. Journal of Visual Languages and Computing, 3(2):161-193, 1992.

[113]
G. C. Roman and K. C. Cox. Program visualization: The art of mapping programs to pictures. In Proceedings of the  14^th  International Conference on Software Engineering, pages 412-420, May 1992.
Program visualization is defined as a mapping from programs to graphical representations. Simple forms of program visualization are frequently encountered in software engineering. For this reason current advances in program visualization are likely to influence future developments concerning software engineering tools and environments. The authors provide a new taxonomy of program visualization research. The proposed taxonomy becomes the vehicle through which they carry out a systematic review of current systems, techniques, trends, and ideas in program visualization.

[114]
Guia-Catalin Roman and Kenneth C. Cox. A taxonomy of program visualization systems. IEEE Software, 26(12):11-24, December 1993.

[115]
Jürgen Ruf. Entwurf und Implementierung eines Frameworks zur Visualisierung von Algorithmen in textscSather-K. Studienarbeit, 1995.

[116]
Peter Schorn. Implementing the xyz geobench: A programming environment for geometric algorithms. Technical report, Informatik, ETH Zürich, 1991.

[117]
Peter Schorn. Robust Algorithms in a Program Library for Geometric Computation. Dissertation 9519, ETH Zürich, 1991.

[118]
John J. Shilling and John T. Stasko. Using animation to design, document and trace object-oriented systems. Technical Report GIT-GVU-95-03, Georgia Institute of Technology, Graphics, Visualization and Usability Center, College of Computing, Atlanta, GA 30332-0280, June 1992.

[119]
S.P.Reiss. Connecting tools using message passing in the field environment. IEEE Software, 7(4):57-66, July 1990.

[120]
John T. Stasko, William F. Appelbe, and Eileen Kraemer. Applying program visualization techniques to aid parallel and distributed program development. Number CIT-GVU-91-08, Graphics, Visualization and Usability Center, 1991.

[121]
John T. Stasko, Albert Badre, and Clayton Lewis. Do algorithm animations assist learning? an empirical study and analysis. In Proceedings of the INTERCHI'93 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems [8], pages 61-66.
Algorithm animations are dynamic graphical illustrations of computer algorithms, and they are used as teaching aids to help explain how the algorithms work. Although many people believe that algorithm animations are useful this way, no empirical evidence has ever been presented supporting this belief. We have conducted an empirical study of a priority queue algorithm animation, and the study's results indicate that the animation only slightly assisted student understanding. In this article, we analyze those reults and hypothesize why algorithm animations may not be as helpful as was initially hoped. We also develop guidelines for making algorithm animations more useful in the future.

[122]
John T. Stasko and Doug Hayes. Xtango algorithm animation designer's package. 1991.
Beschreibung der Datenstrukturen und der Funktionen von TANGO

[123]
John T. Stasko and Eileen Kraemer. A methodology for building application-specific visualizations of parallel programs. (GIT-GVU-92-10), June 1992.

[124]
J. T. Stasko and E. Kraemer. A methodology for building application-specific visualizations of parallel programs. Journal of Parallel and Distributed Computing, 18(2):258-264, June 1993.

[125]
John T. Stasko and Charles Patterson. Understanding and characterizing software visualization systems. In Proceedings of the 1992 IEEE Workshop on Visual Languages [74], pages 3-10.

[126]
John T. Stasko and Joseph F. Wehrli. Three-dimensional algorithm animation. In Proceedings of ACM CHI'92 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems -- Posters and Short Talks, Short Talks: Good Graphics!, pages 79-80, 1992.
Algorithm animation is the process of abstracting a program's data, operations, and semantics, and creating dynamic graphical views of those abstractions [Sta90]. Algorithm animation systems have been used for both instructional purposes such as augmenting classroom lectures and for "visually documenting" complex programs. To now, algorithm animation systems have supported only 2-D black-and-white or color views. Our work extends algorithm animation to three-dimensional computer graphics.

[127]
John T. Stasko and Joseph F. Wehrli. Three-dimensional computation visualization. In Proceedings of the 1993 IEEE Workshop on Visual Languages [75], pages 100-107.

[128]
John Stasko. The TANGO algorithm animation system. Technical Report CS-88-20, Brown University, 1988.

[129]
John Thomas Stasko. TANGO: A framework and system for algorithm animation. Technical Report CS-89-30, Brown University, May 1989. Ph.D. dissertation.

[130]
John T. Stasko. The path-transition paradigm: A practical methodology for adding animation to program interfaces. Journal on Visual Languages and Computing, 1(3):213-236, September 1990.

[131]
John T. Stasko. A practical animation language for software development. 1990.

[132]
John T. Stasko. Simplifying algorithm animation with tango. In Proceedings of the 1990 IEEE Workshop on Visual Languages [72], pages 1-6.
Tango supports a clean separation between programs and animations, resulting in a flexibility to map one or several programs to more than one animation view --- a feature useful not only for experimenting with many views of a simple program, but also for more sophisticated animations such asw parallel process visualization.

[133]
John T. Stasko. Tango: A framework and system for algorithm animation. IEEE Computer, 23(9):39-44, September 1990.

[134]
John T. Stasko. Using direct manipulation to build algorithm animations by demonstration. In Proceedings of ACM CHI'91 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Programming by Demonstration, pages 307-314, 1991.
Dance is a tool that facilitates direct manipulation, demonstrational development of animations for the Tango algorithm animation system. Designers sketch out target actions in a graphical-editing fashion, then Dance automatically generates the code that will carry out those actions. Dance promotes ease-of-design, rapid prototyping, and increased experimentation. It also introduces a methodology that could be used to incorporate demonstrational animation design into areas such as computer assisted instruction and user interface development.

[135]
John T. Stasko. Animating algorithms with XTANGO. SIGACT News (ACM Special Interest Group on Automata and Computability Theory), 23(2):67-71, 1992.

[136]
John T. Stasko. The POLKA Animation Designer's Package. Technical report, Georgia Institute of Technology, 1993.

[137]
John T. Stasko. The parade environment for visualizing parallel program executions: A progress report. Technical Report GIT-GVU-95-03, Georgia Institute of Technology, Graphics, Visualization and Usability Center, College of Computing, Atlanta, GA 30332-0280, 1995.
This report describes the current status of the PARADE visualization environment. PARADE supports the design and implementation of software visualizations of parallel and distributed programs. It contains primary components for monitoring a program's execution, building the software visualization, and mapping the execution to the visualization. In this report we provide brief descriptions of many of the projects that comprise the PARADE environment, and we provide references to more detailed information on the projects.

[138]
Roberto Tamassia and Ioannis Tollis, editors. Proceedings of Graph Drawing'94, volume 894 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Princeton, New Jersey, October 10-12 1994. DIMACS Workshop on Graph Drawing, Springer Verlag.

[139]
Daniel Thalmann, editor. Scientific Visualization and Graphics Simulations. 1991. algorithmische Geometrie.

[140]
Joseph Wehrli and John Stasko. Interactive three-dimensional visual debugging in massively parallel computation. In Proceedings of ACM/ONR Workshop on Parallel and Distributed Debugging, pages 235-237, San Diego, California, May 1993. [Extended abstract].

[141]
Alex Q. Zhao. Gthread. ksr pthread program visualization package. Technical report, Georgia Institute of Technology, Graphics, Visualization and Usability Center, College of Computing, Atlanta, GA 30332-0280, 1994.
Theis document describes the views and code instrumentation involved in using Gthread, a visualization package for KSR Pthread programs. This package consists of two parts: a KSR C library gathering trace information, and a visualizer possibly running on another platform illustrating the structure and execution of the program. The Gthread package will help programmers developing and debugging multi-threaded programs with little extra work.


Arne Frick
Last modified: Sun Jan 21 00:51:04 MET 1996