## 4 Model Construction
### Layout Aesthetics and Visual Cognitive Mapping Model
#### (1) Symmetry \(C_{a1}\)
Density \(C_{a2}\)  
Density in interface design refers to the arrangement and spacing of elements, determining the degree of tightness or looseness. The calculation involves assessing the difference between the actual and optimal interfacial densities. According to the density calculation formula [26], the influencing factor is the ratio of the area of all elements to the interface area. Simplicity \(C_{a3}\)  
Simplicity refers to the level of alignment and integration of interface elements, with the goal of reducing cognitive load on the user interface layout. According to the simplicity calculation formula [26], the factors that influence simplicity include the number of alignment points for elements in the vertical and horizontal directions of the interface, as well as the total number of interface elements. Order \(C_{a4}\)  
An interface layout that conforms to the reading habits and gaze trajectory of the human eye can effectively guide the user's browsing order. According to the order degree calculation formula [26], the influencing factors are the area of elements in the upper-left, upper-right, lower-left, and lower-right regions of the interface and the weight of each region. Dominance \(C_{a5}\)  
There is a significant dominance of interface information, with the human eye first navigating the upper-left region of the interface, followed by the upper right, lower left, and lower right. According to the dominance calculation formula [26], the influencing factor is the difference in element area between the optimal interface and the upper-left, upper-right, lower-left, and lower-right areas of the interface. Visual Cognitive Measurement Values  
Acquiring user visual cognitive physiological measurements involves conducting eye movement experiments. This entails introducing the experimental equipment, environment, and subjects. Experimental Equipment: The Tobii X120 eye tracker (Tobii, Danderyd Municipality, Sweden) (with a sampling frequency of 120 Hz and an accuracy of approximately 0.4\({}^{\circ}\)) and a 23.8-inch Dell desktop presentation monitor (Dell, Round Rock, TX, USA) (with a resolution of 1920 \(\times\) 1080 px, operating at 60 Hz) were chosen. ErgoLAB software (ErgoLAB v3.12) was employed to develop, execute, and collect experimental stimulation programs, while SPSS software (v.29) was utilized for experimental data processing and analysis. All potential interfering factors (such as noise, external light sources, odors, temperature, etc.) were minimized during the experiment. The experimental setting encompassed a laboratory space covering approximately 42 square meters, indoors, with shading treatments applied. 2. Experimental Subjects: The study enlisted 6 professionals (comprising the professional group) with over 3 years of experience in human-machine interface design, alongside 32 non-designers, none of whom had prior involvement in similar experiments. Among the non-professional group, there were 16 males and 16 females aged 20-32 years, with an average age of 25 years (standard deviation = 0.843). The day before the experiment, participants were reminded to ensure adequate sleep and to avoid being excessively tired or excited. Prior to the formal experiment, all participants underwent vision chart and color vision tests to ensure normal vision in both eyes and no visual impairments. Additionally, participants completed and signed a consent form approved by the university review board, ensuring that they fully understood the experiment's content and the associated ethical and legal guidelines.