World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Computer Science

D-Index
37
Citations
6628
World Ranking
10652
National Ranking
4456

Lawrence K. Cormack 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 Lawrence K. Cormack 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: 161 publications — 31st percentile

31% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Lawrence K. Cormack 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 Lawrence K. Cormack 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: 37 D-Index — 27th percentile

27% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Overview

Lawrence K. Cormack is affiliated with The University of Texas at Austin in the United States. Their research activity spans multiple fields and subfields focused on neuroscience and medicine, with significant contributions in cognitive neuroscience, epidemiology, ophthalmology, social psychology, and neurology.

The scientist's work covers a range of topics, primarily centered on visual perception and processing mechanisms. Other main areas include ophthalmology and visual impairment studies, glaucoma and retinal disorders, vestibular and auditory disorders, gaze tracking and assistive technology, retinal imaging and analysis, and neuroendocrine regulation and behavior.

Frequent publication venues for their research consist of:

  • Journal of Vision
  • bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)
  • eLife
  • Personality and Individual Differences
  • Progress in Retinal and Eye Research

Lawrence K. Cormack has collaborated on numerous occasions with several researchers, including:

  • Alexander C. Huk
  • Kathryn Bonnen
  • Johannes Burge
  • Mary Hayhoe
  • Karl Muller

Recent research papers authored or co-authored by the scientist include:

  • Recent understanding of binocular vision in the natural environment with clinical implications (2021, Progress in Retinal and Eye Research)
  • Retinal motion statistics during natural locomotion (2023, eLife)
  • Effects of endocrine-disrupting chemicals on hypothalamic oxytocin and vasopressin systems (2021, Journal of Experimental Zoology Part A Ecological and Integrative Physiology)
  • Sex, sexual arousal, and sexual decision making: An evolutionary perspective (2021, Personality and Individual Differences)
  • Continuous psychophysics shows millisecond-scale visual processing delays are faithfully preserved in movement dynamics (2024, Journal of Vision)

Best Publications

  • Study of Subjective and Objective Quality Assessment of Video

    Kalpana Seshadrinathan;Rajiv Soundararajan;Alan Conrad Bovik;Lawrence K Cormack

  • No-reference quality assessment using natural scene statistics: JPEG2000

    H.R. Sheikh;A.C. Bovik;L. Cormack

  • Full-reference quality assessment of stereopairs accounting for rivalry

    Ming-Jun Chen;Che-Chun Su;Do-Kyoung Kwon;Lawrence K. Cormack

  • No-Reference Quality Assessment of Natural Stereopairs

    Ming-Jun Chen;L. K. Cormack;A. C. Bovik

  • A subjective study to evaluate video quality assessment algorithms

    Kalpana Seshadrinathan;Rajiv Soundararajan;Alan C. Bovik;Lawrence K. Cormack

  • GAFFE: A Gaze-Attentive Fixation Finding Engine

    U. Rajashekar;I. van der Linde;A.C. Bovik;L.K. Cormack

  • Interocular correlation, luminance contrast and cyclopean processing

    Lawrence K. Cormack;Scott B. Stevenson;Clifton M. Schor

  • Negative feedback control model of proximal convergence and accommodation.

    Clifton M. Schor;Jack Alexander;Lawrence Cormack;Scott Stevenson

  • Disparity- and velocity-based signals for three-dimensional motion perception in human MT+

    Bas Rokers;Lawrence K Cormack;Alexander C Huk

  • Image quality assessment using natural scene statistics

    Hamid Rahim Sheikh;Alan C. Bovik;Lawrence K. Cormack

  • DOVES: a database of visual eye movements.

    Ian Van Der Linde;Umesh Rajashekar;Alan C Bovik;Lawrence K Cormack

  • Visual search in noise: revealing the influence of structural cues by gaze-contingent classification image analysis.

    Umesh Rajashekar;Alan C. Bovik;Lawrence K. Cormack

  • Oriented Correlation Models of Distorted Natural Images With Application to Natural Stereopair Quality Evaluation

    Che-Chun Su;Lawrence K. Cormack;Alan C. Bovik

  • Disparity statistics in natural scenes.

    Yang Liu;Alan C. Bovik;Lawrence K. Cormack

  • Disparity tuning in mechanisms of human stereopsis

    Scott B. Stevenson;Lawrence K. Cormack;Clifton M. Schor;Christopher W. Tyler

  • Area MT encodes three-dimensional motion.

    Thaddeus B. Czuba;Alexander C. Huk;Lawrence K. Cormack;Adam Kohn

  • Continuous psychophysics: Target-tracking to measure visual sensitivity.

    Kathryn Bonnen;Johannes Burge;Jacob Yates;Jonathan Pillow

  • Blind quality assessment for JPEG2000 compressed images

    H.R. Sheikh;Z. Wang;L. Cormack;A.C. Bovik

  • Statistical Modeling of 3-D Natural Scenes With Application to Bayesian Stereopsis

    Yang Liu;Lawrence K. Cormack;Alan Conrad Bovik

  • Hyperacuity, superresolution and gap resolution in human stereopsis.

    Scott B. Stevenson;Lawrence K. Cormack;Clifton M. Schor

Frequent Co-Authors

Alan C. Bovik
Alan C. Bovik The University of Texas at Austin
Timothy J Schallert
Timothy J Schallert The University of Texas at Austin
Clifton M. Schor
Clifton M. Schor University of California, Berkeley
Adam Kohn
Adam Kohn Albert Einstein College of Medicine
Wilson S. Geisler
Wilson S. Geisler The University of Texas at Austin
Jonathan W. Pillow
Jonathan W. Pillow Princeton University
Francisco Gonzalez-Lima
Francisco Gonzalez-Lima The University of Texas at Austin
David Alais
David Alais University of Sydney
David M. Buss
David M. Buss The University of Texas at Austin
Cindy M. Meston
Cindy M. Meston The University of Texas at Austin

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 options can help you fast-track your career in computer science and related fields. Many students consider master's programs that deliver industry-focused skills within a short time frame. For example, one year masters programs online allow you to upskill quickly and enter the workforce sooner.

If affordability is a concern, you might look into the cheapest mba programs in the USA, giving you a competitive edge in tech management roles without a high price tag. For those particularly interested in emerging fields, the best online ai degree programs offer specialized training in artificial intelligence, a rapidly growing area within computer science.

Additionally, some students prioritize programs that enable a quick return on investment. Reviewing the easiest online degrees that pay well can reveal pathways that open doors to high-paying tech jobs in less time. Whatever your goals, these diverse online degree options can expand your opportunities in the computer science field.

Best Scientists Citing Lawrence K. Cormack

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles