Most visualization techniques have traditionally used two-dimensional, instead of three-dimensional representations to visualize multidimensional and multivariate data. In this article, a way to demonstrate the underlying superiority of three-dimensional, with respect to two-dimensional, representation is proposed. Specifically, it is based on the inevitable quality degradation produced when reducing the data dimensionality. The problem is tackled from two different approaches: a visual and an analytical approach. First, a set of statistical tests (point classification, distance perception, and outlier identification) using the two-dimensional and three-dimensional visualization are carried out on a group of 40 users. The results indicate that there is an improvement in the accuracy introduced by the inclusion of a third dimension; however, these results do not allow to obtain definitive conclusions on the superiority of three-dimensional representation. Therefore, in order to draw further conclusions, a deeper study based on an analytical approach is proposed. The aim is to quantify the real loss of quality produced when the data are visualized in two-dimensional and three-dimensional spaces, in relation to the original data dimensionality, to analyze the difference between them. To achieve this, a recently proposed methodology is used. The results obtained by the analytical approach reported that the loss of quality reaches significantly high values only when switching from three-dimensional to two-dimensional representation. The considerable quality degradation suffered in the two-dimensional visualization strongly suggests the suitability of the third dimension to visualize data.
A system for generating virtual seeds
