This study presents insights from interviews with nineteen Knowledge Graph (KG) practitioners who work in both enterprise and academic settings on a wide variety of use cases. Through this study, we identify critical challenges experienced by KG practitioners when creating, exploring, and analyzing KGs that could be alleviated through visualization design. Our findings reveal three major personas among KG practitioners - KG Builders, Analysts, and Consumers - each of whom have their own distinct expertise and needs. We discover that KG Builders would benefit from schema enforcers, while KG Analysts need customizable query builders that provide interim query results. For KG Consumers, we identify a lack of efficacy for node-link diagrams, and the need for tailored domain-specific visualizations to promote KG adoption and comprehension. Lastly, we find that implementing KGs effectively in practice requires both technical and social solutions that are not addressed with current tools, technologies, and collaborative workflows. From the analysis of our interviews, we distill several visualization research directions to improve KG usability, including knowledge cards that balance digestibility and discoverability, timeline views to track temporal changes, interfaces that support organic discovery, and semantic explanations for AI and machine learning predictions.

Presenting a predictive model's performance is a communication bottleneck that threatens collaborations between data scientists and subject matter experts. Accuracy and error metrics alone fail to tell the whole story of a model - its risks, strengths, and limitations - making it difficult for subject matter experts to feel confident in their decision to use a model. As a result, models may fail in unexpected ways or go entirely unused, as subject matter experts disregard poorly presented models in favor of familiar, yet arguably substandard methods. In this paper, we describe an iterative study conducted with both subject matter experts and data scientists to understand the gaps in communication between these two groups. We find that, while the two groups share common goals of understanding the data and predictions of the model, friction can stem from unfamiliar terms, metrics, and visualizations - limiting the transfer of knowledge to SMEs and discouraging clarifying questions being asked during presentations. Based on our findings, we derive a set of communication guidelines that use visualization as a common medium for communicating the strengths and weaknesses of a model. We provide a demonstration of our guidelines in a regression modeling scenario and elicit feedback on their use from subject matter experts. From our demonstration, subject matter experts were more comfortable discussing a model's performance, more aware of the trade-offs for the presented model, and better equipped to assess the model's risks - ultimately informing and contextualizing the model's use beyond text and numbers.