The paper provides some perspective by raising a few general issues. One issue concerns the limits of human sensory input and the resulting conscious awareness. The limits are cause for humility in the face of overwhelming quantities of data. For example one paper indicates using a recursive partitioning algorithm on a problem with over two million variables. Analysts that would look at the data on much smaller problems inevitably end up looking at caricatures of the data. After making the assumption that it is still beneficial to have analysts involved in the analysis process, it seems that thought and computational power could be devoted to producing and prioritizing caricatures that exploit analysts' visual processing strengths.
In terms for constructing trees, a dynamic example shows the approach of using grand tour, brushing, alphablending and graphical partitioning to build trees. The visual approach uses linear combinations of predictor variables. When the data view allows partitioning on more than one predictor variable the approach includes a type of look ahead compared to a one variable at a time algorithm. More generally the views can be smoothed regression surfaces and various approaches can be used to graphically define multivariate partitions. The view used for partitioning may not be well chosen. Thus projection pursuit or related algorithms can help the analysts to select views. Trees displays can use graphical representations to show the partition boundaries. This can be done for traditional as well as graphically defined partitions.
The paper emphasizes graphical possibilities and does not evaluate the quality of analyst defined trees. Adjusting the significance tests of human defined partitions for multiple comparison is an open research question with some algorithm emulation possibilities. More generally graphics can be also be used in the evaluation process. One evaluation process generates different trees by weighted random selection of prioritized variables at each partitioning step. The paper closes by describing an approach to laying out trees based on their similarities.
These explanations differ from common statistical analysis in that they are both based on ``non-generative'' models of the world. I will explain how generative and non-generative models differ and why the difference is important.
As an application, we show how MaxEnt in graphical models can provide a practical tool for the assessment of model parameters in graphical models that are build in collaboration with domain experts.
[Postscript]