Still working out how to read it (from just a glance at your link it looks like it ought to be investigated, or interpreted):
Caption:
"Fig. 2.
The feeling space. (Upper) Two-dimensional map of the feeling space based on the sorting task average distance matrix between items arranged by t-SNE and clustered with DBSCAN. Color coding indicates cluster structure; gray feelings do not belong clearly to any cluster. Colored items with black edge are DBSCAN border elements. To retain the information of the distance matrix the closest three items for each node are connected with lines. Thick dark lines are showing distances that belong to the top 33rd percentile of the visualized lines (i.e., the closest items). (Lower) Heatmaps showing how strongly each basic dimension of subjective experience is associated with each discrete feeling at each location of the feeling space. Color coding shows the relative intensity as median z-score (as in Fig. 1) from high (red) to low (blue)."
Edit: The second image you linked would be perfect for the refrigerator. Great observation. (I'm not sure if I'm feeling "sadness" or "laughing".)
Uniqueness as an artifact caused by limits on current knowledge is a salient point. To give an idea of the state of the art in the understanding of living brains, this page presents a pie chart of known neuron types by species:
If an alien stumbled across that data they might surmise that rodents "rule" this planet, followed by fruit flies as their symbiotes/slaves/pets, followed by everyone else.
However, if they had a moral code like ours they might instead surmise that rats, mice, and flies are viewed as expendable to the actual "rulers" of the planet and that these have an aversion to slicing themselves up for science. So they might conclude the rulers to be one of the primates given the existence of three close species: human/chimp/baboon in one family (monkey).
One thing that the paper does not address is MTurkers becoming professional survey takers who recognize typical psychology surveys thus skewing the responses.
Personal anecdata: I took many MTurk surveys for about a month in 2012. It is mind crushing work.
There were countless near identical surveys presumably by psychology undergrads.
Pretty much anything in Kahneman's Thinking Fast and Slow was there.
Very quickly you recognize the typical priming experiment and then is your response any valid?
If you know the idea behind the baseball bat and ball pricing question then is your correct answer made in a split second helping?
Most survey givers wanted MTurkers with high ratings.
If you think about it, those MTurkers with high rating would have likely seen all those survey questions already.
Thus experienced MTurkers would really distort the answers compared to a random sample of undergraduates.
I would argue there is another important benefit than the takeaway suggested in the second sentence of [1], that is the attention to architecture choices that allow for simple or complex (costly) refactoring later can engender more forward-looking awareness in the team's culture.
[1] "One approach I use when mentoring developers in this situation is to ask them to imagine the refactoring they would have to do later to introduce the capability when it's needed. Often that thought experiment is enough to convince them that it won't be significantly more expensive to add it later."
