THE INTERACTION BETWEEN INTERNAL AND EXTERNAL INFORMATION ON RELATIONAL DATA SEARCH

People often use tools to search for information. In order to improve the quality of an information search, it is important to understand how internal information, which is stored in user’s mind, and external information, represented by the interface of tools interact with each other. How information is distributed between internal and external representations significantly affects information search performance. However, few studies have examined the relationship between types of interface and types of search task in the context of information search. For a distributed information search task, how data are distributed, represented, and formatted significantly affects the user search performance in terms of response time and accuracy. Guided by UFuRT (User, Function, Representation, Task), a human-centered process, I propose a search model, task taxonomy. The model defines its relationship with other existing information models. The taxonomy clarifies the legitimate operations for each type of search task of relation data. Based on the model and taxonomy, I have also developed prototypes of interface for the search tasks of relational data. These prototypes were used for experiments. The experiments described in this study are of a within-subject design with a sample of 24 participants recruited from the graduate schools located in the Texas Medical Center. Participants performed one-dimensional nominal search tasks over nominal, ordinal, and ratio displays, and searched one-dimensional nominal, ordinal, interval, and ratio tasks over table and graph displays. Participants also performed the same task and display combination for twodimensional searches. Distributed cognition theory has been adopted as a theoretical framework for analyzing and predicting the search performance of relational data. It has been shown that the representation dimensions and data scales, as well as the search task types, are main factors in determining search efficiency and effectiveness. In particular, the more external representations used, the better search task performance, and the results suggest the ideal search performance occurs when the question type and corresponding data scale representation match. The implications of the study lie in contributing to the effective design of search interface for relational data, especially laboratory results, which are often used in healthcare activities.

New algorithms for automated phylogenetic reconstruction using artificial intelligence and data mining techniques

Academic and industrial research in the late 90s have brought about an exponential explosion of DNA sequence data. Automated expert systems are being created to help biologists to extract patterns, trends and links from this ever-deepening ocean of information. Two such systems aimed on retrieving and subsequently utilizing phylogenetically relevant information have been developed in this dissertation, the major objective of which was to automate the often difficult and confusing phylogenetic reconstruction process. ^ Popular phylogenetic reconstruction methods, such as distance-based methods, attempt to find an optimal tree topology (that reflects the relationships among related sequences and their evolutionary history) by searching through the topology space. Various compromises between the fast (but incomplete) and exhaustive (but computationally prohibitive) search heuristics have been suggested. An intelligent compromise algorithm that relies on a flexible “beam” search principle from the Artificial Intelligence domain and uses the pre-computed local topology reliability information to adjust the beam search space continuously is described in the second chapter of this dissertation. ^ However, sometimes even a (virtually) complete distance-based method is inferior to the significantly more elaborate (and computationally expensive) maximum likelihood (ML) method. In fact, depending on the nature of the sequence data in question either method might prove to be superior. Therefore, it is difficult (even for an expert) to tell a priori which phylogenetic reconstruction method—distance-based, ML or maybe maximum parsimony (MP)—should be chosen for any particular data set. ^ A number of factors, often hidden, influence the performance of a method. For example, it is generally understood that for a phylogenetically “difficult” data set more sophisticated methods (e.g., ML) tend to be more effective and thus should be chosen. However, it is the interplay of many factors that one needs to consider in order to avoid choosing an inferior method (potentially a costly mistake, both in terms of computational expenses and in terms of reconstruction accuracy.) ^ Chapter III of this dissertation details a phylogenetic reconstruction expert system that selects a superior proper method automatically. It uses a classifier (a Decision Tree-inducing algorithm) to map a new data set to the proper phylogenetic reconstruction method. ^