World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Computer Science

D-Index
53
Citations
17500
World Ranking
4706
National Ranking
2187

David D. Cox 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 David D. Cox 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: 121 publications — 15th percentile

15% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

David D. Cox 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 David D. Cox 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: 53 D-Index — 67th percentile

67% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Overview

David D. Cox is affiliated with IBM in the United States and has contributed extensively to the field of computer science, particularly focusing on artificial intelligence and cognitive neuroscience. Their research spans multiple subfields, including artificial intelligence, cognitive neuroscience, computer vision and pattern recognition, signal processing, and cellular and molecular neuroscience.

The scientist's work covers key topics such as neural dynamics and brain function, adversarial robustness in machine learning, multimodal machine learning applications, topic modeling, speech recognition and synthesis, speech and audio processing, and natural language processing techniques.

David D. Cox has published numerous articles in leading venues, with a concentration of work appearing in arXiv (Cornell University) and bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory). Other publication venues include The New Scientist, JAMA Network Open, and Nature Machine Intelligence.

  • Evaluation of Combined Artificial Intelligence and Radiologist Assessment to Interpret Screening Mammograms, 2020, JAMA Network Open
  • ThreeDWorld: A Platform for Interactive Multi-Modal Physical Simulation, 2020, arXiv (Cornell University)
  • Simulating a Primary Visual Cortex at the Front of CNNs Improves Robustness to Image Perturbations, 2020, bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)
  • A neural network trained for prediction mimics diverse features of biological neurons and perception, 2020, Nature Machine Intelligence
  • Encoding of 3D Head Orienting Movements in the Primary Visual Cortex, 2020, Neuron

Frequent collaborators in their research include Rameswar Panda, Shiyu Chang, Javier Masís, Rogério Feris, and Kaizhi Qian. This network of co-authors indicates a collaborative approach across various topics within computer science and neuroscience.

The scientist's main fields of study emphasize computational and cognitive approaches in understanding neural functions and advancing machine learning techniques. Their work interlinks the development of artificial intelligence with insights from brain research, particularly focusing on enhancing robustness and multimodal learning capabilities.

Best Publications

  • Making a Science of Model Search: Hyperparameter Optimization in Hundreds of Dimensions for Vision Architectures

    James Bergstra;Daniel Yamins;David Cox

  • Functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) "brain reading": detecting and classifying distributed patterns of fMRI activity in human visual cortex.

    David D Cox;Robert L Savoy

  • Visual Place Recognition: A Survey

    Stephanie Lowry;Niko Sunderhauf;Paul Newman;John J. Leonard

  • Untangling invariant object recognition.

    James J. DiCarlo;David D. Cox

  • Hyperopt: a Python library for model selection and hyperparameter optimization

    James Bergstra;Brent Komer;Chris Eliasmith;Dan Yamins

  • Hyperopt: A Python Library for Optimizing the Hyperparameters of Machine Learning Algorithms

    James Bergstra;Dan Yamins;David D. Cox

  • Why is Real-World Visual Object Recognition Hard?

    Nicolas Pinto;David Daniel Cox;David Daniel Cox;David Daniel Cox;James J DiCarlo;James J DiCarlo

  • Deep Predictive Coding Networks for Video Prediction and Unsupervised Learning

    William Edward Lotter;Gabriel Kreiman;David Daniel Cox

  • On the information bottleneck theory of deep learning

    Andrew M Saxe;Yamini Bansal;Joel Dapello;Madhu Advani

  • Large-Scale Optimization of Hierarchical Features for Saliency Prediction in Natural Images

    Eleonora Vig;Michael Dorr;David Cox

  • Evaluation of Combined Artificial Intelligence and Radiologist Assessment to Interpret Screening Mammograms

    Thomas Schaffter;Diana S. M. Buist;Christoph I. Lee;Yaroslav Nikulin

  • A High-Throughput Screening Approach to Discovering Good Forms of Biologically Inspired Visual Representation

    Nicolas Pinto;Nicolas Pinto;David Doukhan;David Doukhan;James J. DiCarlo;James J. DiCarlo;David Daniel Cox;David Daniel Cox;David Daniel Cox

  • Chemosensory cues to conspecific emotional stress activate amygdala in humans.

    Lilianne R. Mujica-Parodi;Helmut H. Strey;Blaise DeBonneval Frederick;Robert L. Savoy

  • How far can you get with a modern face recognition test set using only simple features

    Nicolas Pinto;James J DiCarlo;David D Cox

  • Beyond simple features: A large-scale feature search approach to unconstrained face recognition

    David Cox;Nicolas Pinto

  • Multiple Object Response Normalization in Monkey Inferotemporal Cortex

    Davide Zoccolan;David D. Cox;James J. DiCarlo

  • Neural networks and neuroscience-inspired computer vision.

    David Daniel Cox;Thomas Dean

  • Recurrent computations for visual pattern completion.

    Hanlin Tang;Martin Schrimpf;William Lotter;Charlotte Moerman

  • High-speed volumetric imaging of neuronal activity in freely moving rodents.

    Oliver Skocek;Tobias Nöbauer;Lukas Weilguny;Francisca Martínez Traub

  • Contextually evoked object-specific responses in human visual cortex.

    David Cox;Ethan Meyers;Pawan Sinha

  • Triton: an intermediate language and compiler for tiled neural network computations

    Philippe Tillet;H. T. Kung;David Cox

  • A high-throughput screening approach to discovering good forms of inspired visual representation

    Nicolas Pinto;David Doukhan;James J. DiCarlo;David D. Cox

Frequent Co-Authors

Walter J. Scheirer
Walter J. Scheirer University of Notre Dame
Gabriel Kreiman
Gabriel Kreiman Harvard University
Michael Milford
Michael Milford Queensland University of Technology
Lorin Evan Ullmann
Lorin Evan Ullmann IBM (United States)
João Paulo Papa
João Paulo Papa Sao Paulo State University
Chuang Gan
Chuang Gan University of Massachusetts Amherst
Peyman Golshani
Peyman Golshani University of California, Los Angeles
Ken Nakayama
Ken Nakayama Harvard University
Robert E. Campbell
Robert E. Campbell University of Tokyo

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 degrees in computer science opens doors to a variety of flexible career pathways. Whether you’re just starting out or looking to advance your skills, there are many programs tailored to different backgrounds. For those new to higher education, online associate degree programs offer an affordable and accessible entry point into the field.

As you plan your educational journey, affordability is often a key concern. Many students seek out affordable online colleges that provide quality instruction without the high price tag. These programs can be especially beneficial if you’re balancing work, family, or other commitments.

If you’re considering graduate studies, it’s important to choose a program that offers strong career returns. Some graduate degrees that are worth it are in high demand and can significantly increase your earning potential and career prospects.

Worried about your academic record? Many institutions featured among the best online colleges that accept low GPA offer supportive admissions policies, making it possible to pursue your goals even if your undergraduate GPA was less than perfect.

Best Scientists Citing David D. Cox

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles