World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Computer Science

D-Index
33
Citations
5726
World Ranking
12525
National Ranking
5084

David Jurgens 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 Jurgens 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: 137 publications — 21st percentile

21% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

David Jurgens 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 Jurgens 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: 33 D-Index — 13th percentile

13% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Overview

David Jurgens is affiliated with the University of Michigan-Ann Arbor in the United States. Their research spans multiple fields, primarily within computer science and social sciences, with a focus on artificial intelligence, sociology, political science, communication, and statistical physics.

The scientist has contributed extensively to research topics such as:

  • Topic Modeling
  • Natural Language Processing Techniques
  • Misinformation and Its Impacts
  • Social Media and Politics
  • Hate Speech and Cyberbullying Detection
  • Complex Network Analysis Techniques
  • Authorship Attribution and Profiling

Among the frequent co-authors collaborating with David Jurgens are Jiaxin Pei, Daniel M. Romero, Minje Choi, Aparna Ananthasubramaniam, and Scott A. Hale.

The scientist has published extensively in venues including:

  • arXiv (Cornell University)
  • Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media
  • Proceedings of the 2021 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing
  • The Gerontologist
  • SSRN Electronic Journal

Notable recent papers authored or co-authored by David Jurgens include:

  • "Beyond the Imitation Game: Quantifying and extrapolating the capabilities of language models," 2022, arXiv (Cornell University)
  • "Measuring the predictability of life outcomes with a scientific mass collaboration," 2020, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
  • "That's What Friends Are For: Inferring Location in Online Social Media Platforms Based on Social Relationships," 2021, Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media
  • "Geolocation Prediction in Twitter Using Social Networks: A Critical Analysis and Review of Current Practice," 2021, Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media
  • "User Migration in Online Social Networks: A Case Study on Reddit During a Period of Community Unrest," 2021, Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media

David Jurgens has also contributed to book publishing, with work including Computational Sociolinguistics, published by Frontiers Media in 2023.

Best Publications

  • Beyond the Imitation Game: Quantifying and extrapolating the capabilities of language models

    Unknown

  • That's What Friends Are For: Inferring Location in Online Social Media Platforms Based on Social Relationships

    David Jurgens

  • Measuring the predictability of life outcomes with a scientific mass collaboration.

    Matthew J Salganik;Ian Lundberg;Alexander T Kindel;Caitlin E Ahearn

  • Geolocation Prediction in Twitter Using Social Networks: A Critical Analysis and Review of Current Practice

    David Jurgens;Tyler Finethy;James McCorriston;Yi Tian Xu

  • SemEval-2013 Task 12: Multilingual Word Sense Disambiguation

    Roberto Navigli;David Jurgens;Daniele Vannella

  • Geotagging one hundred million Twitter accounts with total variation minimization

    Ryan Compton;David Jurgens;David Allen

  • Align, Disambiguate and Walk: A Unified Approach for Measuring Semantic Similarity

    Mohammad Taher Pilehvar;David Jurgens;Roberto Navigli

  • SemEval-2012 Task 2: Measuring Degrees of Relational Similarity

    David Jurgens;Saif Mohammad;Peter Turney;Keith Holyoak

  • Measuring the Evolution of a Scientific Field through Citation Frames

    David Jurgens;Srijan Kumar;Raine Hoover;Daniel A. McFarland

  • Demographic Inference and Representative Population Estimates from Multilingual Social Media Data

    Zijian Wang;Scott Hale;David Ifeoluwa Adelani;Przemyslaw Grabowicz

  • The S-Space Package: An Open Source Package for Word Space Models

    David Jurgens;Keith Stevens

  • Still out there: Modeling and Identifying Russian Troll Accounts on Twitter

    Jane Im;Eshwar Chandrasekharan;Jackson Sargent;Paige Lighthammer

  • User Migration in Online Social Networks: A Case Study on Reddit During a Period of Community Unrest

    Edward Newell;David Jurgens;Haji Mohammad Saleem;Hardik Vala

  • A Just and Comprehensive Strategy for Using NLP to Address Online Abuse

    David Jurgens;Libby Hemphill;Eshwar Chandrasekharan

  • Finding Microaggressions in the Wild: A Case for Locating Elusive Phenomena in Social Media Posts.

    Luke Breitfeller;Emily Ahn;David Jurgens;Yulia Tsvetkov

  • SemEval-2013 Task 13: Word Sense Induction for Graded and Non-Graded Senses

    David Jurgens;Ioannis Klapaftis

  • Incorporating Dialectal Variability for Socially Equitable Language Identification

    David Jurgens;Yulia Tsvetkov;Dan Jurafsky

  • Mr. Bennet, his coachman, and the Archbishop walk into a bar but only one of them gets recognized: On The Difficulty of Detecting Characters in Literary Texts

    Hardik Vala;David Jurgens;Andrew Piper;Derek Ruths

  • SemEval-2014 Task 3: Cross-Level Semantic Similarity

    David Jurgens;Mohammad Taher Pilehvar;Roberto Navigli

  • Organizations Are Users Too: Characterizing and Detecting the Presence of Organizations on Twitter

    James McCorriston;David Jurgens;Derek Ruths

  • Embracing Ambiguity: A Comparison of Annotation Methodologies for Crowdsourcing Word Sense Labels

    David Jurgens

  • A Just and Comprehensive Strategy for Using NLP to Address Online Abuse

    David Jurgens;Eshwar Chandrasekharan;Libby Hemphill

Frequent Co-Authors

Roberto Navigli
Roberto Navigli Sapienza University of Rome
Dan Jurafsky
Dan Jurafsky Stanford University
Yulia Tsvetkov
Yulia Tsvetkov University of Washington
Saif M. Mohammad
Saif M. Mohammad National Research Council Canada
Zijian Wang
Zijian Wang Chinese Academy of Sciences
Briana Mezuk
Briana Mezuk University of Michigan–Ann Arbor
Daniel Cer
Daniel Cer Google (United States)
Eric Gilbert
Eric Gilbert University of Michigan–Ann Arbor
Steven Bethard
Steven Bethard University of Arizona
Marine Carpuat
Marine Carpuat University of Maryland, College Park

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

Studying Computer Science in the USA unlocks a range of flexible learning and career pathways. Many students consider 1 year associate degree programs online for a faster entry into the tech workforce. These programs can offer essential foundational skills in a condensed timeframe, making them ideal for those seeking quick results.

Budget-conscious learners can explore the cheapest online degrees to minimize tuition costs without sacrificing the quality of their education. Additionally, prospective applicants who may not have the strongest academic background can find opportunities by applying to online colleges that accept low gpa, ensuring accessibility for more students.

Computer science skills are also highly transferable. Beyond software and IT roles, they open doors to fields like data analytics, business, or even environmental science. If you’re curious about alternative career paths, explore what can you do with an environmental science degree to see how technological expertise can contribute in diverse industries.

Best Scientists Citing David Jurgens

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles