World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Computer Science

D-Index
43
Citations
7660
World Ranking
7995
National Ranking
3438

Dana H. Brooks 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 Dana H. Brooks 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: 312 publications — 76th percentile

76% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Dana H. Brooks 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 Dana H. Brooks 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: 43 D-Index — 46th percentile

46% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Overview

Dana H. Brooks is a researcher affiliated with Northeastern University in the United States, with a focus primarily on Medicine and Neuroscience. Their work intersects various subfields including Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine, Cognitive Neuroscience, Artificial Intelligence, Neurology, and Oncology.

The scientist's research covers a diverse range of topics. These include Cardiac electrophysiology and arrhythmias, EEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces, Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Studies, AI in cancer detection, Cutaneous Melanoma Detection and Management, ECG Monitoring and Analysis, and Cell Image Analysis Techniques.

Recent publications from Dana H. Brooks highlight advances in brain-behavior relationships and neurophysiological modeling. Selected papers include:

  • Improving the study of brain-behavior relationships by revisiting basic assumptions, 2023, Trends in Cognitive Sciences
  • Interoception as modeling, allostasis as control, 2021, Biological Psychology
  • Comparing supervised and unsupervised approaches to emotion categorization in the human brain, body, and subjective experience, 2020, Scientific Reports
  • Segmentation of cellular patterns in confocal images of melanocytic lesions in vivo via a multiscale encoder-decoder network (MED-Net), 2020, IRIS UNIMORE (University of Modena and Reggio Emilia)
  • Neuromodulatory effects and reproducibility of the most widely used repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation protocols, 2023, PLoS ONE

Dana H. Brooks frequently collaborates with several coauthors, indicating active ongoing research partnerships. Prominent collaborators include Rob MacLeod, Sumientra Rampersad, Jess Tate, Deniz Erdoğmuş, and Jake Bergquist.

The scientist publishes regularly in several venues, with multiple articles appearing in:

  • Computing in cardiology
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
  • Brain stimulation
  • Scientific Reports
  • Computers in Biology and Medicine

Best Publications

  • Imaging the body with diffuse optical tomography

    D.A. Boas;D.H. Brooks;E.L. Miller;C.A. DiMarzio

  • Eigenvector-based spatial filtering for reduction of physiological interference in diffuse optical imaging.

    Yiheng Zhang;Dana H. Brooks;Maria Angela Franceschini;David A. Boas

  • Electrical imaging of the heart

    D.H. Brooks;R.S. MacLeod

  • Inverse electrocardiography by simultaneous imposition of multiple constraints

    D.H. Brooks;G.F. Ahmad;R.S. MacLeod;G.M. Maratos

  • Combined optical and X-ray tomosynthesis breast imaging.

    Qianqian Fang;Juliette Selb;Stefan A. Carp;Gregory Boverman

  • Recent progress in inverse problems in electrocardiology

    R.S. MacLeod;D.H. Brooks;D.H. Brooks

  • Combined Optical Imaging and Mammography of the Healthy Breast: Optical Contrast Derived From Breast Structure and Compression

    Qianqian Fang;S.A. Carp;J. Selb;G. Boverman

  • Closed-form solution for positioning based on angle of arrival measurements

    A. Pages-Zamora;J. Vidal;D.H. Brooks

  • A comparison study of linear reconstruction techniques for diffuse optical tomographic imaging of absorption coefficient

    Richard J Gaudette;Dana H Brooks;Charles A DiMarzio;Misha E Kilmer

  • Hybrid FMT-CT imaging of amyloid-beta plaques in a murine Alzheimer's disease model.

    Damon Hyde;Ruben de Kleine;Sarah A. MacLaurin;Eric L. Miller

  • Prospects for transcranial temporal interference stimulation in humans: A computational study.

    Sumientra Rampersad;Biel Roig-Solvas;Mathew Yarossi;Praveen P. Kulkarni

  • Detecting small moving objects using temporal hypothesis testing

    A.P. Tzannes;D.H. Brooks

  • Validation and Opportunities of Electrocardiographic Imaging: From Technical Achievements to Clinical Applications

    Matthijs Cluitmans;Dana H. Brooks;Robert S Macleod;Olaf Dössel

  • Optimal linear inverse solution with multiple priors in diffuse optical tomography

    Ang Li;Greg Boverman;Yiheng Zhang;Dana Brooks

  • Structured Disentangled Representations

    Babak Esmaeili;Hao Wu;Sarthak Jain;Alican Bozkurt

  • Performance dependence of hybrid x-ray computed tomography/fluorescence molecular tomography on the optical forward problem.

    Damon Hyde;Ralf Schulz;Dana Brooks;Eric Miller

  • An analytical comparison of three spatio-temporal regularization methods for dynamic linear inverse problems in a common statistical framework

    Yiheng Zhang;Alireza Ghodrati;Dana H Brooks

  • Experimental Data and Geometric Analysis Repository—EDGAR

    Kedar Aras;Wilson Good;Jess Tate;Brett Burton

  • Bayesian multiresolution map estimation of edge or transition point location in noisy signals

    Yegim Serinaijaoglu;Dana H. Brooks;Shien Fong Lin;T. J. Wu

  • Quantitative spectroscopic diffuse optical tomography of the breast guided by imperfect a priori structural information.

    Gregory Boverman;Eric L Miller;Ang Li;Quan Zhang

  • Optimization of focality and direction in dense electrode array transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS).

    Seyhmus Guler;Moritz Dannhauer;Moritz Dannhauer;Moritz Dannhauer;Burak Erem;Rob Macleod;Rob Macleod

  • A tour of accelerated parallel MR imaging from a linear systems perspective

    W. Scott Hoge;Dana H. Brooks;Bruno Madore;Walid E. Kyriakos

Frequent Co-Authors

Jennifer G. Dy
Jennifer G. Dy Northeastern University
Eric L. Miller
Eric L. Miller Tufts University
Deniz Erdogmus
Deniz Erdogmus Northeastern University
David A. Boas
David A. Boas Boston University
Gilead Tadmor
Gilead Tadmor Northeastern University
Vasilis Ntziachristos
Vasilis Ntziachristos Technical University of Munich
John K. Triedman
John K. Triedman Boston Children's Hospital
Chrysostomos L. Nikias
Chrysostomos L. Nikias University of Southern California
David Isaacson
David Isaacson Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute
Lisa Feldman Barrett
Lisa Feldman Barrett 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 the field of Computer Science doesn't have to start or end with a traditional four-year degree. Many students and professionals pursue quick certifications that pay well as a fast way to boost their skills and job prospects. These certifications can open doors to new roles or help you specialize in areas like cybersecurity, data analysis, or web development.

For those looking to earn an advanced credential quickly, the fastest online master's degree options make it possible to enhance your resume in a year or less. Many of these programs are tailored for working professionals seeking career advancement in tech fields.

Choosing the right graduate path can set you up for long-term success. Some of the best masters degree to get include computer science, data science, and other technology-focused programs that are currently in high demand.

Don't overlook the value of an associates degree online. These programs offer an affordable, flexible way to launch your career in tech, often serving as a stepping stone to further education or immediate entry-level positions.

Best Scientists Citing Dana H. Brooks

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles