Do Graph Drawing Aesthetics Matter for AI? A Replication of Foundational Studies in Graph Readability

Abstract Graph drawing aesthetics have traditionally been optimized for human readers, leading to well‐established principles such as reducing edge crossings, enhancing symmetry, and minimizing bends. These criteria shape layout algorithms and define what “readability” means in network visualization. Today, however, visualizations are increasingly interpreted not only by humans but also by Large Language Models, which now routinely process scientific papers, blog posts, and figures found online and in the wild. This raises a fundamental question: do the same aesthetic criteria that benefit humans also support AI‐based visual understanding? Exploring these criteria would inform us, visualization designers and researchers, on how to create network visualizations that are fit for both human and AI readers, and, in turn, enable AI to navigate visualizations in the wild properly. In order to study these criteria, we replicated two foundational studies that established graph drawing aesthetics for humans—only, in our case, the “participant” is AI, and not human. Our findings indicate that AI and human preferences for network visualization are not necessarily the same. We offer a first glance at AI‐specific readability criteria, and point toward visualization guidelines that support both human and machine interpretation.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Computer Graphics Forum
Published
2026-06-17
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1111/cgf.70436
Primary Topic
Data Visualization and Analytics
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Do Graph Drawing Aesthetics Matter for AI? A Replication of Foundational Studies in Graph Readability

Fabrizio Montecchiani, Walter Didimo, Simon D. Fink, Sara Di Bartolomeo et al.
Computer Graphics Forum
Data Visualization and Analytics
article

Do Graph Drawing Aesthetics Matter for AI? A Replication of Foundational Studies in Graph Readability

Fabrizio Montecchiani, Walter Didimo, Simon D. Fink, Sara Di Bartolomeo, Johann Sebastian Schicho, Aurora Traversini
article en

Abstract

Abstract Graph drawing aesthetics have traditionally been optimized for human readers, leading to well‐established principles such as reducing edge crossings, enhancing symmetry, and minimizing bends. These criteria shape layout algorithms and define what “readability” means in network visualization. Today, however, visualizations are increasingly interpreted not only by humans but also by Large Language Models, which now routinely process scientific papers, blog posts, and figures found online and in the wild. This raises a fundamental question: do the same aesthetic criteria that benefit humans also support AI‐based visual understanding? Exploring these criteria would inform us, visualization designers and researchers, on how to create network visualizations that are fit for both human and AI readers, and, in turn, enable AI to navigate visualizations in the wild properly. In order to study these criteria, we replicated two foundational studies that established graph drawing aesthetics for humans—only, in our case, the “participant” is AI, and not human. Our findings indicate that AI and human preferences for network visualization are not necessarily the same. We offer a first glance at AI‐specific readability criteria, and point toward visualization guidelines that support both human and machine interpretation.

Computer Graphics Forum
TU Wien (AT), University of Perugia (IT)
Openalex Percentile: Top 5%
Data Visualization and Analytics
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.