World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!
Ben Carterette

Ben Carterette

D-Index & Metrics

Computer Science

D-Index
46
Citations
7863
World Ranking
6894
National Ranking
3022

Ben Carterette publication distribution in Computer Science in 2026

The chart shows the distribution of publications by all Research.com ranked scientists in the field of Computer Science in 2026. The highlighted bar marks where Ben Carterette sits on this spectrum.

32–41 publications: 7 scientists 42–51 publications: 22 scientists 52–61 publications: 82 scientists 62–71 publications: 134 scientists 72–81 publications: 249 scientists 82–91 publications: 324 scientists 92–101 publications: 421 scientists 102–111 publications: 420 scientists 112–121 publications: 497 scientists 122–131 publications: 544 scientists 132–141 publications: 555 scientists 142–151 publications: 609 scientists 152–161 publications: 559 scientists 162–171 publications: 534 scientists 172–181 publications: 556 scientists 182–191 publications: 583 scientists 192–201 publications: 519 scientists 202–211 publications: 508 scientists 212–221 publications: 490 scientists 222–231 publications: 437 scientists 232–241 publications: 423 scientists 242–251 publications: 408 scientists 252–261 publications: 377 scientists 262–271 publications: 301 scientists 272–281 publications: 335 scientists 282–291 publications: 320 scientists 292–301 publications: 293 scientists 302–311 publications: 250 scientists 312–321 publications: 238 scientists 322–331 publications: 206 scientists 332–341 publications: 209 scientists 342–351 publications: 208 scientists 352–361 publications: 162 scientists 362–371 publications: 176 scientists 372–381 publications: 127 scientists 382–391 publications: 158 scientists 392–401 publications: 128 scientists 402–411 publications: 104 scientists 412–421 publications: 94 scientists 422–431 publications: 99 scientists 432–441 publications: 83 scientists 442–451 publications: 108 scientists 452–461 publications: 73 scientists 462–471 publications: 77 scientists 472–481 publications: 69 scientists 482–491 publications: 84 scientists 492–501 publications: 62 scientists 502–511 publications: 54 scientists 512–521 publications: 57 scientists 522–531 publications: 51 scientists 532–541 publications: 51 scientists 542–551 publications: 32 scientists 552–561 publications: 38 scientists 562–571 publications: 28 scientists 572–581 publications: 43 scientists 582–591 publications: 33 scientists 592–601 publications: 41 scientists 602–611 publications: 32 scientists 612–621 publications: 28 scientists 622–631 publications: 25 scientists 632–641 publications: 27 scientists 642–651 publications: 17 scientists 652–661 publications: 20 scientists 662–671 publications: 17 scientists 672–681 publications: 15 scientists 682–691 publications: 14 scientists 692–701 publications: 21 scientists 702–711 publications: 13 scientists 712–721 publications: 12 scientists 722–731 publications: 19 scientists 732–741 publications: 14 scientists 742–751 publications: 12 scientists 752–761 publications: 10 scientists 762–771 publications: 10 scientists 772–781 publications: 11 scientists 782–791 publications: 10 scientists 792–801 publications: 11 scientists 802–811 publications: 8 scientists 812–821 publications: 8 scientists 822–831 publications: 7 scientists 832–841 publications: 11 scientists 842–851 publications: 10 scientists 852–861 publications: 5 scientists 862–871 publications: 9 scientists 872–881 publications: 4 scientists 882–891 publications: 6 scientists 892–901 publications: 3 scientists 902–911 publications: 6 scientists 912–921 publications: 3 scientists 922–931 publications: 2 scientists 932–941 publications: 2 scientists 942–951 publications: 2 scientists 952–961 publications: 3 scientists 962–971 publications: 3 scientists 972–981 publications: 3 scientists 982–990 publications: 5 scientists 991+ publications: 100 scientists
32 publications 991+

This scientist: 275 publications — 68th percentile

68% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 991 publications or more.

Ben Carterette D-index placement in Computer Science in 2026

The chart shows the D-index (discipline H-index) distribution of Computer Science scientists ranked by Research.com in 2026. The highlighted bar marks where Ben Carterette sits on this spectrum.

30–31 D-Index: 879 scientists 32–33 D-Index: 983 scientists 34–35 D-Index: 918 scientists 36–37 D-Index: 990 scientists 38–39 D-Index: 968 scientists 40–41 D-Index: 907 scientists 42–43 D-Index: 821 scientists 44–45 D-Index: 763 scientists 46–47 D-Index: 689 scientists 48–49 D-Index: 543 scientists 50–51 D-Index: 543 scientists 52–53 D-Index: 518 scientists 54–55 D-Index: 500 scientists 56–57 D-Index: 458 scientists 58–59 D-Index: 400 scientists 60–61 D-Index: 337 scientists 62–63 D-Index: 308 scientists 64–65 D-Index: 292 scientists 66–67 D-Index: 249 scientists 68–69 D-Index: 213 scientists 70–71 D-Index: 192 scientists 72–73 D-Index: 189 scientists 74–75 D-Index: 165 scientists 76–77 D-Index: 139 scientists 78–79 D-Index: 119 scientists 80–81 D-Index: 121 scientists 82–83 D-Index: 113 scientists 84–85 D-Index: 88 scientists 86–87 D-Index: 87 scientists 88–89 D-Index: 75 scientists 90–91 D-Index: 69 scientists 92–93 D-Index: 57 scientists 94–95 D-Index: 46 scientists 96–97 D-Index: 38 scientists 98–99 D-Index: 34 scientists 100–101 D-Index: 36 scientists 102–103 D-Index: 27 scientists 104–105 D-Index: 37 scientists 106–107 D-Index: 18 scientists 108–109 D-Index: 31 scientists 110–111 D-Index: 19 scientists 112–113 D-Index: 16 scientists 114–115 D-Index: 12 scientists 116–117 D-Index: 20 scientists 118–119 D-Index: 15 scientists 120–121 D-Index: 5 scientists 122–123 D-Index: 20 scientists 124–125 D-Index: 8 scientists 126–127 D-Index: 5 scientists 128–129 D-Index: 7 scientists 130 D-Index: 3 scientists 131+ D-Index: 98 scientists
30 D-Index 131+

This scientist: 46 D-Index — 53rd percentile

53% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 131 D-Index or more.

Research.com Recognitions

  • 2020 - ACM Senior Member

Overview

Ben Carterette is affiliated with Spotify, US in the United States and works primarily in the field of Computer Science. Their research encompasses a range of subfields including Information Systems, Artificial Intelligence, Management Science and Operations Research, Signal Processing, and Marketing.

The main topics of their work include:

  • Recommender Systems and Techniques
  • Information Retrieval and Search Behavior
  • Music and Audio Processing
  • Semantic Web and Ontologies
  • Advanced Text Analysis Techniques
  • Topic Modeling
  • Advanced Bandit Algorithms Research

Carterette's frequent co-authors are Rosie Jones, Jussi Karlgren, Mounia Lalmas, Ann Clifton, and Aasish Pappu. They have contributed to multiple publication venues, with the most frequent being arXiv (Cornell University), ACM SIGIR Forum, Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (Schloss Dagstuhl), ACM Transactions on Information Systems, and ACM Transactions on Recommender Systems.

Some of the recent papers authored or co-authored by Carterette include:

  • How Am I Doing?: Evaluating Conversational Search Systems Offline, 2021, ACM Transactions on Information Systems
  • Report on the Dagstuhl Seminar on Frontiers of Information Access Experimentation for Research and Education, 2023, ACM SIGIR Forum
  • Report from Dagstuhl Seminar 23031: Frontiers of Information Access Experimentation for Research and Education, 2023, Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (Schloss Dagstuhl)
  • Leveraging Behavioral Heterogeneity Across Markets for Cross-Market Training of Recommender Systems, 2020, Companion Proceedings of the Web Conference 2020
  • Distributionally-Informed Recommender System Evaluation, 2023, ACM Transactions on Recommender Systems

Ben Carterette was recognized as an ACM Senior Member in 2020.

Best Publications

  • A comparison of statistical significance tests for information retrieval evaluation

    Mark D. Smucker;James Allan;Ben Carterette

  • Minimal test collections for retrieval evaluation

    Ben Carterette;James Allan;Ramesh Sitaraman

  • Here or There

    Ben Carterette;Paul N. Bennett;David Maxwell Chickering;Susan T. Dumais

  • Here or there: preference judgments for relevance

    Ben Carterette;Paul N. Bennett;David Maxwell Chickering;Susan T. Dumais

  • System effectiveness, user models, and user utility: a conceptual framework for investigation

    Ben Carterette

  • Evaluating Stochastic Rankings with Expected Exposure

    Fernando Diaz;Bhaskar Mitra;Michael D. Ekstrand;Asia J. Biega

  • Proceedings of the 7th ACM international conference on Web search and data mining

    Ben Carterette;Fernando Diaz;Carlos Castillo;Donald Metzler

  • Evaluating Search Engines by Modeling the Relationship Between Relevance and Clicks

    Ben Carterette;Rosie Jones

  • Redundancy, diversity and interdependent document relevance

    Filip Radlinski;Paul N. Bennett;Ben Carterette;Thorsten Joachims

  • Probabilistic models of ranking novel documents for faceted topic retrieval

    Ben Carterette;Praveen Chandar

  • Offline Evaluation to Make Decisions About PlaylistRecommendation Algorithms

    Alois Gruson;Praveen Chandar;Christophe Charbuillet;James McInerney

  • Evaluation over thousands of queries

    Ben Carterette;Virgil Pavlu;Evangelos Kanoulas;Javed A. Aslam

  • When will information retrieval be "good enough"?

    James Allan;Ben Carterette;Joshua Lewis

  • Million Query Track 2007 Overview

    James Allan;Ben Carterette;Javed A. Aslam;Virgil Pavlu

  • The effect of assessor error on IR system evaluation

    Ben Carterette;Ian Soboroff

  • On rank correlation and the distance between rankings

    Ben Carterette

  • Evaluating multi-query sessions

    Evangelos Kanoulas;Ben Carterette;Paul D. Clough;Mark Sanderson

  • An overview of the BioCreative 2012 Workshop Track III: interactive text mining task

    Cecilia N. Arighi;Ben Carterette;K. Bretonnel Cohen;Martin Krallinger

  • Million Query Track 2009 Overview.

    Ben Carterette;Virgiliu Pavlu;Hui Fang;Evangelos Kanoulas

  • Simulating simple user behavior for system effectiveness evaluation

    Ben Carterette;Evangelos Kanoulas;Emine Yilmaz

  • Million Query Track 2008 Overview

    James Allan;Javed A. Aslam;Ben Carterette;Virgil Pavlu

  • Probabilistic Models of Novel Document Rankings for Faceted Topic Retrieval

    Ben Carterette;Praveen Chandar

  • Preference Judgments for Relevance

    Ben Carterette;Paul N. Bennett;David Maxwell Chickering;Susan T. Dumais

Frequent Co-Authors

Evangelos Kanoulas
Evangelos Kanoulas University of Amsterdam
James Allan
James Allan University of Massachusetts Amherst
Paul Clough
Paul Clough University of Sheffield
Paul N. Bennett
Paul N. Bennett Microsoft (United States)
Fernando Diaz
Fernando Diaz Microsoft (United States)
Mark Sanderson
Mark Sanderson RMIT University
Ian Soboroff
Ian Soboroff National Institute of Standards and Technology
Javed A. Aslam
Javed A. Aslam Northeastern University

If you think any of the details on this page are incorrect, let us know.

Report an issue

We appreciate your kind effort to assist us to improve this page, it would be helpful providing us with as much detail as possible in the text box below:

Related Online Degrees & Career Pathways

Exploring online education can open new doors for students interested in computer science. Many students start their journey with an online associate degree, which offers foundational knowledge and flexible study options. This is a great pathway for individuals wanting to enter the tech field quickly or transfer credits towards a higher degree.

For those looking to advance, pursuing one of the most worthwhile masters degrees can increase job opportunities and salary potential. Students who wish to accelerate their careers should also consider the fastest masters degree online options, allowing them to earn a reputable credential in less time.

Cost is a major consideration, and there are many excellent programs among the cheapest online degrees that maintain strong academic standards. Whether you are starting out, changing fields, or aiming for specialization, online programs offer the flexibility and affordability to fit a range of career goals in computer science.

Best Scientists Citing Ben Carterette

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles