World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Discipline name D-Index World Ranking Current World Ranking National Ranking Current National Ranking Publications Citations
Computer Science 49 5798 5632 2634 2540 176 12404

Jordan Boyd-Graber publications per year

The chart shows the history of publications by Jordan Boyd-Graber between 2004 and 2025, highlighting the no. of papers published in each year and offering an overview of the publication velocity of this scholar. Jordan Boyd-Graber published across 22 years, from 2004 to 2025, averaging 9.6 papers a year. Output peaked at 22 publications in 2021. 23 of the 211 publications appeared in the last two years.

No. of publications
5 10 15 20
Bar chart. Horizontal axis: year, 2004 to 2025. Vertical axis: number of publications, 0 to 22. Peak 22 publications in 2021. 2004: 1 publication 2005: 1 publication 2006: 1 publication 2007: 2 publications 2008: 2 publications 2009: 7 publications 2010: 4 publications 2011: 7 publications 2012: 8 publications 2013: 8 publications 2014: 15 publications 2015: 13 publications 2016: 12 publications 2017: 9 publications 2018: 17 publications 2019: 16 publications 2020: 16 publications 2021: 22 publications 2022: 13 publications 2023: 14 publications 2024: 16 publications 2025: 7 publications
2004 2025

211 publications in total across all disciplines

View publications per year as a table
Jordan Boyd-Graber: publications per year, 2004 to 2025
Year Publications
2004 1
2005 1
2006 1
2007 2
2008 2
2009 7
2010 4
2011 7
2012 8
2013 8
2014 15
2015 13
2016 12
2017 9
2018 17
2019 16
2020 16
2021 22
2022 13
2023 14
2024 16
2025 7
Total 211
Download as CSV

Jordan Boyd-Graber 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 Jordan Boyd-Graber sits on this spectrum.

No. of scientists
200 400 600
Bar chart with 97 bars. Horizontal axis: publications, 32–41 to 991+. Vertical axis: number of scientists, 0 to 609. Most scientists, 609, have 142–151 publications. The last bar groups every scientist with 991 publications or more. The highlighted bar, 172–181 publications, is where this scientist sits. 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
32–41 publications 991+

This scientist: 176 publications — 37th percentile

37% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

View publications distribution as a table
Number of Computer Science scientists by publication count, Research.com 2026 ranking edition. Based on 14,188 ranked scientists.
Publications Scientists This scientist
32–41 7
42–51 22
52–61 82
62–71 134
72–81 249
82–91 324
92–101 421
102–111 420
112–121 497
122–131 544
132–141 555
142–151 609
152–161 559
162–171 534
172–181 556 176
182–191 583
192–201 519
202–211 508
212–221 490
222–231 437
232–241 423
242–251 408
252–261 377
262–271 301
272–281 335
282–291 320
292–301 293
302–311 250
312–321 238
322–331 206
332–341 209
342–351 208
352–361 162
362–371 176
372–381 127
382–391 158
392–401 128
402–411 104
412–421 94
422–431 99
432–441 83
442–451 108
452–461 73
462–471 77
472–481 69
482–491 84
492–501 62
502–511 54
512–521 57
522–531 51
532–541 51
542–551 32
552–561 38
562–571 28
572–581 43
582–591 33
592–601 41
602–611 32
612–621 28
622–631 25
632–641 27
642–651 17
652–661 20
662–671 17
672–681 15
682–691 14
692–701 21
702–711 13
712–721 12
722–731 19
732–741 14
742–751 12
752–761 10
762–771 10
772–781 11
782–791 10
792–801 11
802–811 8
812–821 8
822–831 7
832–841 11
842–851 10
852–861 5
862–871 9
872–881 4
882–891 6
892–901 3
902–911 6
912–921 3
922–931 2
932–941 2
942–951 2
952–961 3
962–971 3
972–981 3
982–990 5
991+ 100
Download as CSV

Jordan Boyd-Graber 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 Jordan Boyd-Graber sits on this spectrum.

No. of scientists
200 400 600 800
Bar chart with 52 bars. Horizontal axis: D-Index, 30–31 to 131+. Vertical axis: number of scientists, 0 to 990. Most scientists, 990, have 36–37 D-Index. The last bar groups every scientist with 131 D-Index or more. The highlighted bar, 48–49 D-Index, is where this scientist sits. 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
30–31 D-Index 131+

This scientist: 49 D-Index — 60th percentile

60% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

View D-Index distribution as a table
Number of Computer Science scientists by D-index, Research.com 2026 ranking edition. Based on 14,188 ranked scientists.
D-Index Scientists This scientist
30–31 879
32–33 983
34–35 918
36–37 990
38–39 968
40–41 907
42–43 821
44–45 763
46–47 689
48–49 543 49
50–51 543
52–53 518
54–55 500
56–57 458
58–59 400
60–61 337
62–63 308
64–65 292
66–67 249
68–69 213
70–71 192
72–73 189
74–75 165
76–77 139
78–79 119
80–81 121
82–83 113
84–85 88
86–87 87
88–89 75
90–91 69
92–93 57
94–95 46
96–97 38
98–99 34
100–101 36
102–103 27
104–105 37
106–107 18
108–109 31
110–111 19
112–113 16
114–115 12
116–117 20
118–119 15
120–121 5
122–123 20
124–125 8
126–127 5
128–129 7
130 3
131+ 98
Download as CSV

Overview

Jordan Boyd-Graber is affiliated with the University of Maryland, College Park in the United States. Their research primarily centers on computer science, with a particular focus on artificial intelligence as the main subfield. The body of work includes contributions in computer vision and pattern recognition, general social sciences, signal processing, and information systems.

Their research topics encompass several areas, notably:

  • Topic Modeling
  • Natural Language Processing Techniques
  • Multimodal Machine Learning Applications
  • Computational and Text Analysis Methods
  • Advanced Text Analysis Techniques
  • Speech and Dialogue Systems
  • Domain Adaptation and Few-Shot Learning

Boyd-Graber has published extensively in a variety of academic venues. The most frequent venue for their publications is arXiv (Cornell University), with 40 publications. Other notable venues include the Proceedings of the 2021 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, Proceedings of the 60th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers), JMIR Formative Research, and Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence.

The following are some recent papers authored or co-authored by Boyd-Graber:

  • "Prompting GPT-3 To Be Reliable" (2022, arXiv (Cornell University))
  • "Is Automated Topic Model Evaluation Broken?: The Incoherence of Coherence" (2021, arXiv (Cornell University))
  • "NeurIPS 2020 EfficientQA Competition: Systems, Analyses and Lessons Learned" (2021, arXiv (Cornell University))
  • "CLIMATE-FEVER: A Dataset for Verification of Real-World Climate Claims" (2020, Zurich Open Repository and Archive (University of Zurich))
  • "ClimaText: A Dataset for Climate Change Topic Detection" (2020, arXiv (Cornell University))

Frequent collaborators in Boyd-Graber's work include Chen Zhao, Chenglei Si, Hal Daumé, Michelle Yuan, and Alexander Hoyle. Collaboration counts with these co-authors range from four to eight joint publications, signaling ongoing partnerships in various research endeavors.

Best Publications

  • Reading Tea Leaves: How Humans Interpret Topic Models

    Jonathan Chang;Sean Gerrish;Chong Wang;Jordan L. Boyd-graber

  • Deep Unordered Composition Rivals Syntactic Methods for Text Classification

    Mohit Iyyer;Varun Manjunatha;Jordan Boyd-Graber;Hal Daumé Iii

  • A Neural Network for Factoid Question Answering over Paragraphs

    Mohit Iyyer;Jordan Boyd-Graber;Leonardo Claudino;Richard Socher

  • Interactive Topic Modeling

    Yuening Hu;Jordan Boyd-Graber;Brianna Satinoff

  • Political Ideology Detection Using Recursive Neural Networks

    Mohit Iyyer;Peter Enns;Jordan Boyd-Graber;Philip Resnik

  • A Topic Model for Word Sense Disambiguation

    Jordan Boyd-Graber;David Blei;Xiaojin Zhu

  • Applications of Topic Models

    Jordan L. Boyd-Graber;Yuening Hu;David M. Mimno

  • Pathologies of Neural Models Make Interpretations Difficult

    Shi Feng;Eric Wallace;Alvin Grissom;Mohit Iyyer

  • Syntactic Topic Models

    Jordan L. Boyd-graber;David M. Blei

  • Beyond LDA: Exploring Supervised Topic Modeling for Depression-Related Language in Twitter

    Philip Resnik;William Armstrong;Leonardo Claudino;Thang Nguyen

  • Language Models

    Unknown

  • Mr. LDA: a flexible large scale topic modeling package using variational inference in MapReduce

    Ke Zhai;Jordan Boyd-Graber;Nima Asadi;Mohamad L. Alkhouja

  • Opponent modeling in deep reinforcement learning

    He He;Jordan Boyd-Graber;Kevin Kwok;Hal Daumé

  • Adding dense, weighted connections to WordNet

    Jordan Boyd-Graber;Christiane Fellbaum;Daniel Osherson;Robert Schapire

  • Connections between the lines: augmenting social networks with text

    Jonathan Chang;Jordan Boyd-Graber;David M. Blei

  • Prompting GPT-3 To Be Reliable

    Unknown

  • Care and Feeding of Topic Models: Problems, Diagnostics, and Improvements

    Edoardo M. Airoldi;David M. Blei;Elena A. Erosheva;Stephen E. Fienberg

  • Can You Unpack That? Learning to Rewrite Questions-in-Context

    Ahmed Elgohary;Denis Peskov;Jordan L. Boyd-Graber

  • Feuding Families and Former Friends: Unsupervised Learning for Dynamic Fictional Relationships

    Mohit Iyyer;Anupam Guha;Snigdha Chaturvedi;Jordan L. Boyd-Graber

  • Holistic Sentiment Analysis Across Languages: Multilingual Supervised Latent Dirichlet Allocation

    Jordan Boyd-Graber;Philip Resnik

  • Multilingual topic models for unaligned text

    Jordan Boyd-Graber;David M. Blei

  • Cold-start Active Learning through Self-supervised Language Modeling

    Michelle Yuan;Hsuan-Tien Lin;Jordan L. Boyd-Graber

  • CLIMATE-FEVER: A Dataset for Verification of Real-World Climate Claims

    Thomas Diggelmann;Jordan L. Boyd-Graber;Jannis Bulian;Massimiliano Ciaramita

Frequent Co-Authors

Hal Daumé
Hal Daumé University of Maryland, College Park
Philip Resnik
Philip Resnik University of Maryland, College Park
Mohit Iyyer
Mohit Iyyer University of Maryland, College Park
Leah Findlater
Leah Findlater University of Washington
Pedro Rodriguez
Pedro Rodriguez Luxembourg Institute of Science and Technology
David M. Blei
David M. Blei Columbia University
Michael J. Paul
Michael J. Paul University of Colorado Boulder
Benjamin Van Durme
Benjamin Van Durme Johns Hopkins University
Graham Neubig
Graham Neubig Carnegie Mellon University
David Mimno
David Mimno Cornell 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

Studying computer science in the USA opens doors to a variety of related online degree programs and career paths. One popular choice for tech-savvy graduates is pursuing a cyber security masters, which prepares students for high-demand roles protecting digital infrastructure.

If you’re interested in project management and technology’s impact on the built environment, consider an online degree in construction management. This field blends engineering, management, and computer science skills to lead complex construction projects.

Budget is often a key concern when selecting an online program. For those drawn to public service or law enforcement, understanding criminal justice degree cost can help you make a more informed educational choice. Similarly, for aspiring financial professionals, researching the cost of accounting degree ensures you find the most affordable route to your qualification.

Exploring these related degrees can help you discover new career pathways while making wise financial decisions about your education.

Best Scientists Citing Jordan Boyd-Graber

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles