Integration with Visual Perception—Research on the Usability of a Data Visualization Interface Layout in Zero-Carbon Parks Based on Eye-Tracking Technology

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

It is suggested to briefly introduce the background and challenges in abstract, and expound more about the detailed work. Discussion section is missed. In the discussion section you may discuss the limitations or challenges of the presented work comprehensively. In addition, you may compare the achieved results with other studies or similar studies in the literature. Figures should be improved; they are too small and difficult to understand. Statistical analysis seems too weak and needs to be improved. Conclusion should be improved by giving details of the contribution of the present study.

Author Response

It is suggested to briefly introduce the background and challenges in abstract, and expound more about the detailed work. Discussion section is missed. In the discussion section you may discuss the limitations or challenges of the presented work comprehensively. In addition, you may compare the achieved results with other studies or similar studies in the literature. Figures should be improved; they are too small and difficult to understand. Statistical analysis seems too weak and needs to be improved. Conclusion should be improved by giving details of the contribution of the present study.

Thank you very much for taking the time to make constructive comments on this article. As you mentioned, I failed to give a brief description of the current background and challenges in the abstract section, and I failed to give a comprehensive and profound discussion on the contribution and limitations of this study in the discussion section, and the comparison with other similar studies was also insufficient. In addition, I apologize for the inconvenience caused by the lack of uniform numerical format for the numbers. Therefore, in response to your valuable comments, I have made the following improvements to the article:

1、It is suggested to briefly introduce the background and challenges in abstract, and expound more about the detailed work.

Thanks for your suggestion.

In the abstract part of this paper, the background and challenges of this research are firstly explained, and the starting point and specific content of the work are expounded. You can see the changes in this section in line 9 - line 18.

2、Discussion section is missed. In the discussion section you may discuss the limitations or challenges of the presented work comprehensively. n addition, you may compare the achieved results with other studies or similar studies in the literature.

Thanks for your suggestion.

The discussion link is improved, and the innovativeness and limitations of this study are explained in detail. You can see the revision of this section on lines 371 to 384.

A comparison with other similar studies and a critical note are added in the introduction, where you can see the revised version on lines 99 to 103.

3、Figures should be improved; they are too small and difficult to understand.

Thanks for your suggestion, I have unified the number format and changed the data in time format to a numeric format with one decimal place reserved. You can see the changes in this section in Table2.

4、Statistical analysis seems too weak and needs to be improved.

Thank you very much for your suggestions. In this regard, I supplement the algorithm formula used in this study in the results part of Section 3 to improve the defects in this aspect. You can see this on lines 306-307

5、Conclusion should be improved by giving details of the contribution of the present study.

Thank you very much for your suggestions.The conclusion section supplements the contribution of this study from three aspects: method, research significance and practical significance.  You can see the changes in this section on lines 399 to 406.

Thank you again for your valuable comments on this research, which will continue to have a positive effect on my subsequent research. I wish you every success in your work and a happy life.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

1.     The abstract and conclusion need to be improved. The abstract must be a concise yet comprehensive reflection of what is in your paper. Please modify the abstract according to “motivation, description, results and conclusion” parts. I suggest extending the conclusions section to focus on the results you get, the method you propose, and their significance.

2.     What is the motivation of the proposed method? The details of motivation and innovations are important for potential readers and journals. Please add this detailed description in the last paragraph in section I. Please modify the paragraph according to "For this paper, the main contributions are as follows: (1) ......" to Section I. Please give the details of motivations. In Section 1, I suggest the authors can amend your contributions of manuscript in the last of Section 1.

3.     The description of manuscript is very important for potential reader and other researchers. I encourage the authors to have their manuscript proof-edited by a native English speaker to enhance the level of paper presentation. There are some occasional grammatical problems within the text. It may need the attention of someone fluent in English language to enhance the readability.

4.     The introduction section of the paper needs to revise according to the timeline of technology development. Please update references with recent paper in CVPR, ICCV, ECCV et al and Elsevier, Springer. In your section 1 and section 2, I suggest the authors amend several related literatures and corresponding references in recent years. For example: FFTI: Image Inpainting Algorithm via Features Fusion and Two-Steps Inpainting (Journal of Visual Communication and Image Representation, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvcir.2023.103776)

5.     Please give the details of proposed method for proposed model. I suggest the authors amend the calculation of your size of proposed method and the details is important for proposed method.

6.     The content of experiments needs to amend related experiments to compare related SOTA in recent three years. I recommend the authors amend related experimental results of proposed method of SOTA according to the published paper in IEEE, Springer and Elsevier.

7.     However, the manuscript, in its present form, contains several weaknesses. Adequate revisions to the following points should be undertaken in order to justify recommendation for publication.

8.     In the conclusion section, the limitations of this study and suggested improvements of this work should be highlighted.

9.     Provide a critical review of the previous "journal" (not conference) papers in the area and explain the inadequacies of previous approaches.

10.  I suggest the authors revise Section 1 and Section 2. Please revise the content according to the development of timeline.

11.  Please check all parameters in the manuscript and amend some related description of primary parameters. In section 3, please write the proposed algorithm in a proper algorithm/pseudocode format with section 3. Otherwise, it is very hard to follow. Some examples here: https://tex.stackexchange.com/questions/204592/how-to-format-a-pseudocode-algorithm

1.     The description of manuscript is very important for potential reader and other researchers. I encourage the authors to have their manuscript proof-edited by a native English speaker to enhance the level of paper presentation. There are some occasional grammatical problems within the text. It may need the attention of someone fluent in English language to enhance the readability.

Author Response

Thank you very much for taking the time to make constructive comments on this article. At the same time, thank you very much for your affirmation and positive suggestions to the article. Please refer to the attachment for details of all modifications. I sincerely reply to your inquiries about the article

1、The abstract and conclusion need to be improved. The abstract must be a concise yet comprehensive reflection of what is in your paper. Please modify the abstract according to “motivation, description, results and conclusion” parts. I suggest extending the conclusions section to focus on the results you get, the method you propose, and their significance.

Thank you very much for your valuable comments on these two parts. As you said, I failed to properly allocate the proportion of the contents of the four parts you proposed in the abstract part. In the conclusion, I also failed to give a more detailed description of the overall results and the innovative significance of the methods used, so the motivation and conclusion of the article were not well presented.

In response to your suggestion, I have made the following changes:

In the abstract part, I recombed and wrote in accordance with the four points you proposed, highlighting the background and motivation of this study. You can see the changes in this section in line 9 - line 28.

In the conclusion part, I made a more detailed supplement to the results and focused on the innovation, research significance and practical significance of this research. You can see the changes in this section in line 399 - line 406.

2、What is the motivation of the proposed method? The details of motivation and innovations are important for potential readers and journals. Please add this detailed description in the last paragraph in section I. Please modify the paragraph according to "For this paper, the main contributions are as follows: (1) ......" to Section I. Please give the details of motivations. In Section 1, I suggest the authors can amend your contributions of manuscript in the last of Section 1.

Thank you very much for your reminder and relevant suggestions on how to lay a solid foundation for the article. Indeed, as you said, I only briefly discussed the current problem in the first section, failing to show the motivation and innovation of the proposed method. So, as you suggested, I modified section 1 as follows:

In the first section, a paragraph is added about the contribution and innovative significance of this study to the research in related fields. You can see the changes in this section in line 130 - line 140.

3、The description of manuscript is very important for potential reader and other researchers. I encourage the authors to have their manuscript proof-edited by a native English speaker to enhance the level of paper presentation. There are some occasional grammatical problems within the text. It may need the attention of someone fluent in English language to enhance the readability.

I am very sorry that the article was not readable enough due to my lack of English. In view of this, after revising all the suggestions, I will seek the paper polishing service of the publishing house, proofread the whole article again, and improve the readability of the article.

4、The introduction section of the paper needs to revise according to the timeline of technology development. Please update references with recent paper in CVPR, ICCV, ECCV et al and Elsevier, Springer. In your section 1 and section 2, I suggest the authors amend several related literatures and corresponding references in recent years. For example: FFTI: Image Inpainting Algorithm via Features Fusion and Two-Steps Inpainting (Journal of Visual Communication and Image Representation, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvcir.2023.103776)

Thank you for pointing out the lack of clarity in the timeline of the references. The first section of the introduction focuses on relevant research in different fields and classifies them. For the technical development and timeline you mentioned, I supplement the latest research results of authoritative journals in the second section. You can see the new references in lines 465 to 474.

5、Please give the details of proposed method for proposed model. I suggest the authors amend the calculation of your size of proposed method and the details is important for proposed method.

I'm sorry that what you mentioned is the subsequent study on the details of the specific model. The purpose of this study is to confirm the influence degree of visual perception characteristics on the visual interface and analyze the advantages and disadvantages of the six types of interface layout. Therefore, all the internal details of the model are omitted. I will address your suggestions in the limitations of the current article, which you can see on lines 374-384.

6、The content of experiments needs to amend related experiments to compare related SOTA in recent three years. I recommend the authors amend related experimental results of proposed method of SOTA according to the published paper in IEEE, Springer and Elsevier.

Thank you very much for your advice. Since this study excludes specific layout elements, it only analyzes visual perception characteristics and advantages and disadvantages from the static overall layout, and the purpose is not to obtain SOTA in this experiment. On the other hand, most of the previous researchers focused on specific points for research, while this experiment studied the influence of visual perception on interface readability from a macro perspective, so it was difficult to obtain reference from other studies. Finally, the qualitative and quantitative synthesis method combining eye movement data and subjective evaluation data was a relatively basic but effective method. The SOTA you mentioned will be analyzed and simulated after an ablation study of specific layout elements such as color matching, background transparency, and border form

7、However, the manuscript, in its present form, contains several weaknesses. Adequate revisions to the following points should be undertaken in order to justify recommendation for publication.

I am very sorry that I failed to solve the problem of form due to my carelessness. I have re-proofread the template of the journal and revised the form problem of the article.

8、In the conclusion section, the limitations of this study and suggested improvements of this work should be highlighted.

Thank you very much for your reminder. Although I have discussed the limitations in the conclusion, it is not comprehensive and profound enough. Therefore, I have made the following modifications according to your suggestions:

To avoid repetition, I have moved your suggestions to the last paragraph of the discussion, which highlights the limitations and shortcomings of this study at the current stage. You can see the revised content of this section in lines 374 to 379. At the same time, I also supplemented the research methods and contents of the next stage, as well as how I will expand and improve the above limitations. You can see the changes in this section on lines 379 to 384.

9、Provide a critical review of the previous "journal" (not conference) papers in the area and explain the inadequacies of previous approaches.

Thank you very much for your reminding and suggestions on the lack of criticism in this article. In view of your suggestions, I have revised it in the introduction. You can see the changes in this section on lines 99 to 103.

10、I suggest the authors revise Section 1 and Section 2. Please revise the content according to the development of timeline.

Thank you for reminding me again. I believe you have already understood the specific modification of Section 1 and Section 2 through the modification of the above problems.

11、Please check all parameters in the manuscript and amend some related description of primary parameters. In section 3, please write the proposed algorithm in a proper algorithm/pseudocode format with section 3. Otherwise, it is very hard to follow. Some examples here: https://tex.stackexchange.com/questions/204592/how-to-format-a-pseudocode-algorithm

Thank you very much for your suggestions on the experimental data. I am sorry for not clearly describing the contents represented by some parameters. I have modified the description of parameters. In response to your suggestions, I supplement the algorithm formula used in this study in the results of Section 3 to improve the defects in this aspect. You can see this on lines 306-307.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

1- What is the character after integrity in the Abstract section?

2- Ask a native to revise your paper. Some sentences especially in the Introduction section are difficult to understand.

3- You mentioned, "Through literature analysis, it is found that most studies on regional carbon emission visualization focus on the data itself, including data sources, data architectures and data applications". Please add some references.

4- Define the abbreviations for the first time you use them in the paper.

5- Please check the template of this journal for referencing and numbering.

6- Add a paragraph at the end of the Introduction to show how the paper is organized.

7- What does the title f Figure 1 mean?

8- The size of the footnote of Table 1 is inconsistent.

9- Please check the template of this journal for Tables (e.g., Table. 2)

10- Use a better colour palette for Figure. 4 and make the text more clear.

11- Align the text in Table. 4 as its titles be in one row.

12- What ranges Integrity, Understandability, and selectivity have and what do minus values mean?

Author Response

Thank you very much for taking the time to make constructive comments on this article. At the same time, thank you very much for your affirmation and positive suggestions to the article. Please refer to the attachment for details of all modifications. I sincerely reply to your inquiries about the article

1- What is the character after integrity in the Abstract section?

Sorry for not being able to express the meaning of this character in English, it means the ability of people to understand the meaning of an object when they look at it.

2- Ask a native to revise your paper. Some sentences especially in the Introduction section are difficult to understand.

I am very sorry that the article was not readable enough due to my lack of English. In view of this, after revising all the suggestions, I will seek the paper polishing service of the publishing house, proofread the whole article again, and improve the readability of the article.

3- You mentioned, "Through literature analysis, it is found that most studies on regional carbon emission visualization focus on the data itself, including data sources, data architectures and data applications". Please add some references.

Thank you very much for your advice on the shortcomings of the article. Indeed, as you said, there is a lack of relevant reference for explanation in this part. I supplemented the references, and you can see the added references on lines 465 to 474.

4- Define the abbreviations for the first time you use them in the paper.

Thank you for your suggestion. I am sorry for my negligence. I have cancelled the abbreviation of relevant parameters in the paper because I have modified the names of relevant parameters. thank you for your careful attention.

5- Please check the template of this journal for referencing and numbering.

Thank you for your advice. I have compared and revised the journal template again. At the same time, I have also sought the polishing service of the publishing house.

6- Add a paragraph at the end of the Introduction to show how the paper is organized.

Thank you for your advice. I am sorry for not clearly organizing and summarizing the structure of the article in the introduction. I have modified it according to your suggestions. You can see this part in lines 124 to 129.

7- What does the title f Figure 1 mean?

Sorry for not being able to express the meaning of the picture in English. It refers to the classification of the collected samples and then the selection of representative samples of each category for presentation. I've done that in more explicit terms. You can see this on line 150.

8- The size of the footnote of Table 1 is inconsistent.

Thank you for your meticulousness and preciseness. I am sorry for not perfecting the details. I have made modifications according to your reminder.

9- Please check the template of this journal for Tables (e.g., Table. 2)

Thank you for reminding me. I have re-corrected the form template of the journal, and now the problem has been solved. If the problem persists, perhaps the software is not suitable, you can review the pdf file.

10- Use a better colour palette for Figure. 4 and make the text more clear.

I'm sorry for not making the graphic and text fit reasonably. I have modified the graphic to facilitate your review. You can see the modification in line 300 to line 301.

11- Align the text in Table. 4 as its titles be in one row.

Thank you for reminding me. I have checked the paper again according to the journal template, If it still fails to align, please refer to the pdf file of the relevant section, there may be a case of improper software adaptation resulting in garbled code

12- What ranges Integrity, Understandability, and selectivity have and what do minus values mean?

I apologize for not being able to characterize these values. The data in the table are the influence relations of integrity, comprehensibility and selectivity on task search time. -0.777 means that the influence of integrity on task search time is negative correlation, that is, the stronger the integrity is, the shorter the task search time is, and the other negative values of P more than 0.05, the correlation was not significant enough, so no specific analysis was conducted.

I supplemented relevant formulas to explain the data in the table. You can see this formula on lines 306-307.

Thank you again for your valuable comments on this research, which will continue to have a positive effect on my subsequent research. I wish you every success in your work and a happy life.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 4 Report

The paper reviews the eye movement related data to obtain the influence of position features on emission data. The reviewer would like to pose the queries as follows

1. A typographical mistake in Line Number 23.

2. How and why three aspects of visual perceptual features are chosen.

3. The current methods for emission assessment in suitable graphics if applicable could have been tabulated.

4. Why the researcher have used six layouts grouping them into two clusters, An ablation study could have been conducted to finalize the layouts.        

Author Response

Thank you very much for taking the time to make constructive comments on this article. At the same time, thank you very much for your affirmation and positive suggestions to the article. Please refer to the attachment for details of all modifications. I sincerely reply to your inquiries about the article.

1、A typographical mistake in Line Number 23.

Thank you for your preciseness and carefulness. However, this misprint was resolved in a different way because the abstract section was resorted out.

2、How and why three aspects of visual perceptual features are chosen.

Thank you very much for asking about the core entry point of this article. I will explain this question from the starting point of the research and the follow-up research content.

In my design education course, there is a course about humanized design called Design psychology. In the textbook Design Psychology, these three aspects of visual perception characteristics are introduced. The purpose of this study is to optimize and improve the visual interface of carbon emission in the park in a more humane way, and these three points are undoubtedly suitable for analysis as entry points. Integrity can make the interface look more unified and coordinated, selectivity can let users focus on observing a certain area, understanding can make the content in the interface appear in a more understandable form.

Subsequent research should carry out more detailed analysis and research on specific layout elements, such as color matching, interaction, background, border, etc. Through these three points, it is also more convenient to grasp the psychological characteristics of users so as to realize humanized optimization.

3、The current methods for emission assessment in suitable graphics if applicable could have been tabulated.

Thank you very much for your constructive comments on the article. As you said, I failed to highlight the important role of data visualization in the process of carbon emission assessment. In response to your comments, I made a new picture and placed it in the introduction section. You can see the changes in this section on lines 74 to 75.

4、Why the researcher have used six layouts grouping them into two clusters, An ablation study could have been conducted to finalize the layouts.  

I am very glad to see your inquiry on this part, and thank you very much for your suggestions on the method of this research. In this regard, because the current research is only in the preliminary stage of determining the relationship between visual perception characteristics and visual interface, how to improve the humanized visual perception of the existing model in detail is proposed in the subsequent research on specific interface elements such as color matching, border, background blur degree, etc., so the method you mentioned has not been applied for the time being. However, ablation research will support the whole study as one of the key methods of follow-up research. Once again, I sincerely thank you for your careful advice, which I will supplement in the conclusion as the content of follow-up research. You can see the changes in this section on lines 379 to 384.

Thank you again for your valuable comments on this research, which will continue to have a positive effect on my subsequent research. I wish you every success in your work and a happy life.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

My comments have been addressed.

Author Response

Thank you very much for your suggestions on improving the quality of this article, which will continue to play a positive role in my future scientific research work. Thanks again. I sincerely wish you all the best in your life and work.

Reviewer 2 Report

I suggest this paper be returned to authors for related revisions, I hope those follow comments will help the authors to improve this paper.

1.     The description of manuscript is very important for potential reader and other researchers. I encourage the authors to have their manuscript proof-edited by a native English speaker to enhance the level of paper presentation.

2.     Please update references with recent paper in CVPR, ICCV, ECCV et al and Elsevier, Springer. In your section 1 and section 2, I suggest the authors amend several related literatures and corresponding references in recent years. For example: Siamese visual tracking based on criss-cross attention and improved head network (Multimedia Tools and Applications).

3.     Please check all parameters and equations. Some parameters need to amend related depict for details. Please give the size of proposed method and calculate the size by details.

none

Author Response

Thank you very much for all your suggestions to improve the quality of this article. I'm sorry that I couldn't improve the relevant problems you raised in the first revision. This time, I revised and improved the article more seriously according to everyone's suggestions.

1. The description of the manuscript is very important for potential readers and other researchers. I encourage authors who are native English speakers to proofread their manuscripts to improve the expression level of the paper.

Thank you for your advice. I have sought the services of the English school from the publishing house to process the article. Then the language problem should have been solved.

2, please update the recent references in CVPR, ICCV, ECCV, Elsevier, Springer, etc. In your revised sections 1 and 2, I suggest to the author some relevant literature from recent years and corresponding references. For example: conjoined visual tracking based on longitudinal crosstalk focus and improved head network (multimedia tools and applications).

It is a pity that I did not improve this part in the first revision. This edition updates the seven references from journals or conferences that you recently mentioned in sections 1 and 2, and you have these updated references in lines 94-97, 113-118,528-533,543-544,565-570.

3. Please check all parameters and equations. Some parameters need to be modified to understand the details. Please give the proposed scale method and the detailed calculation scale.

Thank you for your description. I corrected the parameters and added a more detailed description. As for the sculpture, I added a supplementary note after adding the formula, and you can see the modification on lines 340-344.

Thank you very much for your suggestions on improving the quality of the paper, which will continue to play a positive role in my future scientific research work. Thanks again. I sincerely wish you all the best in your life and work.

Reviewer 3 Report

This paper can be accepted in present form.

Author Response

Thank you very much for your suggestions on improving the quality of this article, which will continue to play a positive role in my future scientific research work. Thanks again. I sincerely wish you all the best in your life and work.