World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Computer Science

D-Index
42
Citations
8783
World Ranking
8292
National Ranking
3556

Lee Cooper 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 Lee Cooper 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: 132 publications — 19th percentile

19% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Lee Cooper 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 Lee Cooper 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: 42 D-Index — 43rd percentile

43% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Overview

Lee Cooper is affiliated with Northwestern University in the United States. Their research spans a combination of medicine, computer science, and biochemistry, genetics, and molecular biology, with a significant focus on artificial intelligence and its applications in healthcare.

The main fields of study in their work include:

  • Medicine
  • Computer Science
  • Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology

Their subfields of study highlight specialization areas such as:

  • Artificial Intelligence
  • Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging
  • Molecular Biology
  • Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine
  • Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition

Key research topics include:

  • AI in cancer detection
  • Radiomics and Machine Learning in Medical Imaging
  • Digital Imaging for Blood Diseases
  • Cell Image Analysis Techniques
  • Cancer Genomics and Diagnostics
  • Cancer Immunotherapy and Biomarkers
  • Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education

Frequently published in venues such as:

  • arXiv (Cornell University)
  • bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)
  • Modern Pathology
  • American Journal Of Pathology
  • Cell

Notable recent publications include:

  • "Glioma progression is shaped by genetic evolution and microenvironment interactions," 2022, Cell
  • "MONAI: An open-source framework for deep learning in healthcare," 2022, arXiv (Cornell University)
  • "An expanded universe of cancer targets," 2021, Cell
  • "Pitfalls in assessing stromal tumor infiltrating lymphocytes (sTILs) in breast cancer," 2020, npj Breast Cancer
  • "Report on computational assessment of Tumor Infiltrating Lymphocytes from the International Immuno-Oncology Biomarker Working Group," 2020, npj Breast Cancer

Some of their frequent collaborators include:

  • Mohamed Amgad
  • Jeffrey A. Goldstein
  • Ramin Nateghi
  • David A. Gutman
  • David L. Jaye

Best Publications

  • Predicting cancer outcomes from histology and genomics using convolutional networks

    Pooya Mobadersany;Safoora Yousefi;Mohamed Amgad;David A. Gutman

  • Correction: Corrigendum: The OncoPPi network of cancer-focused protein–protein interactions to inform biological insights and therapeutic strategies

    Zenggang Li;Andrei A. Ivanov;Rina Su;Valentina Gonzalez-Pecchi

  • MR imaging predictors of molecular profile and survival: Multi-institutional study of the TCGA glioblastoma data set

    David A. Gutman;Lee A.D. Cooper;Scott N. Hwang;Chad A. Holder

  • Deep learning enables robust assessment and selection of human blastocysts after in vitro fertilization.

    Pegah Khosravi;Ehsan Kazemi;Qiansheng Zhan;Jonas E. Malmsten

  • T2-FLAIR Mismatch, an Imaging Biomarker for IDH and 1p/19q Status in Lower-grade Gliomas: A TCGA/TCIA Project.

    Sohil H. Patel;Laila M. Poisson;Daniel J. Brat;Yueren Zhou

  • Structured crowdsourcing enables convolutional segmentation of histology images.

    Mohamed Amgad;Habiba Elfandy;Hagar Hussein;Lamees A. Atteya

  • Predicting clinical outcomes from large scale cancer genomic profiles with deep survival models

    Safoora Yousefi;Fatemeh Amrollahi;Mohamed Amgad;Chengliang Dong

  • PanCancer insights from The Cancer Genome Atlas: the pathologist's perspective.

    Lee Alex Donald Cooper;Lee Alex Donald Cooper;Elizabeth G. Demicco;Joel H. Saltz;Reid T. Powell

  • The OncoPPi network of cancer-focused protein-protein interactions to inform biological insights and therapeutic strategies

    Zenggang Li;Andrei A. Ivanov;Rina Su;Rina Su;Rina Su;Valentina Gonzalez-Pecchi

  • Cancer Digital Slide Archive: an informatics resource to support integrated in silico analysis of TCGA pathology data

    David A. Gutman;Jake Cobb;Dhananjaya Somanna;Yuna Park

  • An expanded universe of cancer targets.

    William C. Hahn;Joel S. Bader;Theodore P. Braun;Andrea Califano

  • The Digital Slide Archive: A Software Platform for Management, Integration, and Analysis of Histology for Cancer Research.

    David A. Gutman;Mohammed Khalilia;Sanghoon Lee;Michael Nalisnik

  • The Proneural Molecular Signature Is Enriched in Oligodendrogliomas and Predicts Improved Survival among Diffuse Gliomas

    Lee Cooper;David Andrew Gutman;Qi Long;Brent Johnson

  • Report on computational assessment of Tumor Infiltrating Lymphocytes from the International Immuno-Oncology Biomarker Working Group

    Mohamed Amgad;Elisabeth Specht Stovgaard;Eva Balslev;Jeppe Thagaard

  • Image-guided genomics of phenotypically heterogeneous populations reveals vascular signalling during symbiotic collective cancer invasion.

    J. Konen;E. Summerbell;Bhakti Dwivedi;K. Galior

  • Machine-Based Morphologic Analysis of Glioblastoma Using Whole-Slide Pathology Images Uncovers Clinically Relevant Molecular Correlates

    Jun Kong;Lee A. D. Cooper;Fusheng Wang;Jingjing Gao

  • Whole-brain spectroscopic MRI biomarkers identify infiltrating margins in glioblastoma patients.

    James S. Cordova;Hui Kuo G. Shu;Zhongxing Liang;Saumya S. Gurbani

  • Integrated morphologic analysis for the identification and characterization of disease subtypes.

    Lee A D Cooper;Jun Kong;David Andrew Gutman;Fusheng Wang

  • Ergonomics of wearable computers

    Chris Baber;James Knight;D. Haniff;L. Cooper

  • Machine-based detection and classification for bone marrow aspirate differential counts: initial development focusing on nonneoplastic cells

    Ramraj Chandradevan;Ahmed A Aljudi;Bradley R Drumheller;Nilakshan Kunananthaseelan

  • Comparative Performance Analysis of Intel (R) Xeon Phi (TM), GPU, and CPU: A Case Study from Microscopy Image Analysis

    George Teodoro;Tahsin Kurc;Jun Kong;Lee Cooper

Frequent Co-Authors

Joel H. Saltz
Joel H. Saltz Stony Brook University
Daniel J. Brat
Daniel J. Brat Northwestern University
Tahsin Kurc
Tahsin Kurc Stony Brook University
Carlos S. Moreno
Carlos S. Moreno Emory University
Fusheng Wang
Fusheng Wang Stony Brook University
Haian Fu
Haian Fu Emory University
Jeffrey J. Olson
Jeffrey J. Olson Emory University
Fadlo R. Khuri
Fadlo R. Khuri American University of Beirut
Roel G.W. Verhaak
Roel G.W. Verhaak The Jackson Laboratory
Jill S. Barnholtz-Sloan
Jill S. Barnholtz-Sloan Case Western Reserve 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 online education options in computer science and related fields can open up numerous opportunities, especially if you need flexibility or are concerned about academic requirements. If you’re wondering will grad schools accept low gpa, some online colleges provide alternative pathways for students who may not meet traditional admission criteria.

For those interested in fast-tracking their studies, a 2-year computer science degree online can help you gain key skills quickly and enter the tech job market sooner. Additionally, interdisciplinary options are available for students eager to apply computer science knowledge to environmental sectors.

Careers in sustainability are popular among tech-minded students, and you might ask what can you do with an environmental science degree? This path combines technology with real-world problem-solving. Similarly, those who wish to contribute to ecological engineering can choose from the most affordable online environmental engineering degree programs for in-demand roles in green technology and innovation.

Best Scientists Citing Lee Cooper

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles