World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Computer Science

D-Index
71
Citations
24469
World Ranking
1755
National Ranking
893

Mark Dredze 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 Mark Dredze 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: 267 publications — 67th percentile

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

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

Mark Dredze 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 Mark Dredze 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: 71 D-Index — 88th percentile

88% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Overview

Mark Dredze is affiliated with Johns Hopkins University in the United States. Their research spans multiple disciplines including Computer Science, Social Sciences, and Medicine, with a substantial focus on intersecting subfields such as Artificial Intelligence, Sociology and Political Science, Epidemiology, Health, and General Health Professions.

The scientist's work addresses a range of topics, particularly emphasizing misinformation and its impacts, data-driven disease surveillance, sentiment analysis and opinion mining, topic modeling, natural language processing techniques, vaccine coverage and hesitancy, and hate speech and cyberbullying detection.

Notable recent papers by Mark Dredze include the following:

  • "Comparing Physician and Artificial Intelligence Chatbot Responses to Patient Questions Posted to a Public Social Media Forum," 2023, JAMA Internal Medicine
  • "You Are What You Tweet: Analyzing Twitter for Public Health," 2021, Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media
  • "BloombergGPT: A Large Language Model for Finance," 2023, arXiv (Cornell University)
  • "Not just conspiracy theories: Vaccine opponents and proponents add to the COVID-19 'infodemic' on Twitter," 2020, Harvard Kennedy School Misinformation Review
  • "Internet Searches for Unproven COVID-19 Therapies in the United States," 2020, JAMA Internal Medicine

Frequent collaborators in their research include:

  • David Broniatowski
  • Amelia Jamison
  • Sandra Crouse Quinn
  • Xiaolei Huang
  • John W. Ayers

Mark Dredze's publications appear predominantly in venues such as:

  • Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
  • JAMA Internal Medicine
  • UNC Libraries
  • American Journal of Public Health

Best Publications

  • Biographies, Bollywood, Boom-boxes and Blenders: Domain Adaptation for Sentiment Classification

    John Blitzer;Mark Dredze;Fernando Pereira

  • You Are What You Tweet: Analyzing Twitter for Public Health

    Michael J. Paul;Mark Dredze

  • Weaponized Health Communication: Twitter Bots and Russian Trolls Amplify the Vaccine Debate

    David A. Broniatowski;Amelia M. Jamison;Si Hua Qi;Lulwah AlKulaib

  • Discovering Shifts to Suicidal Ideation from Mental Health Content in Social Media

    Munmun De Choudhury;Emre Kiciman;Mark Dredze;Glen Coppersmith

  • Quantifying Mental Health Signals in Twitter

    Glen Coppersmith;Mark Dredze;Craig Harman

  • Beto, Bentz, Becas: The Surprising Cross-Lingual Effectiveness of BERT

    Shijie Wu;Mark Dredze

  • Confidence-weighted linear classification

    Mark Dredze;Koby Crammer;Fernando Pereira

  • National and local influenza surveillance through Twitter: an analysis of the 2012-2013 influenza epidemic

    David A. Broniatowski;Michael J. Paul;Mark Dredze

  • BloombergGPT: A Large Language Model for Finance

    Unknown

  • Combining Search, Social Media, and Traditional Data Sources to Improve Influenza Surveillance.

    Mauricio Santillana;André T. Nguyen;Mark Dredze;Michael J. Paul

  • Annotating Named Entities in Twitter Data with Crowdsourcing

    Tim Finin;William Murnane;Anand Karandikar;Nicholas Keller

  • Creating Speech and Language Data With Amazon's Mechanical Turk

    Chris Callison-Burch;Mark Dredze

  • Named Entity Recognition for Chinese Social Media with Jointly Trained Embeddings

    Nanyun Peng;Mark Dredze

  • Entity Disambiguation for Knowledge Base Population

    Mark Dredze;Paul McNamee;Delip Rao;Adam Gerber

  • From ADHD to SAD: Analyzing the Language of Mental Health on Twitter through Self-Reported Diagnoses

    Glen Coppersmith;Mark Dredze;Craig Harman;Kristy Hollingshead

  • Adaptive Regularization of Weight Vectors

    Koby Crammer;Alex Kulesza;Mark Dredze

  • Improving Lexical Embeddings with Semantic Knowledge

    Mo Yu;Mark Dredze

  • Measuring Post Traumatic Stress Disorder in Twitter

    Glen Coppersmith;Craig Harman;Mark Dredze

  • Separating Fact from Fear: Tracking Flu Infections on Twitter

    Alex Lamb;Michael J. Paul;Mark Dredze

  • CLPsych 2015 Shared Task: Depression and PTSD on Twitter

    Glen Coppersmith;Mark Dredze;Craig Harman;Kristy Hollingshead

  • Discovering health topics in social media using topic models.

    Michael J. Paul;Mark Dredze

Frequent Co-Authors

Michael J. Paul
Michael J. Paul University of Colorado Boulder
Sandra Crouse Quinn
Sandra Crouse Quinn University of Maryland, College Park
Benjamin Van Durme
Benjamin Van Durme Johns Hopkins University
Fernando Pereira
Fernando Pereira Google (United States)
Koby Crammer
Koby Crammer Technion – Israel Institute of Technology
Sanjeev Khudanpur
Sanjeev Khudanpur Johns Hopkins University
Nanyun Peng
Nanyun Peng University of California, Los Angeles
Mo Yu
Mo Yu IBM (United States)
Jason Eisner
Jason Eisner Johns Hopkins University
Chris Callison-Burch
Chris Callison-Burch University of Pennsylvania

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 your options beyond a traditional Computer Science degree can open up diverse career opportunities. Many students consider alternative online programs to customize their learning and maximize value. Looking into top degrees for the future is a great way to find emerging fields that match your interests, skills, and the current job market demand.

Pursuing graduate study online can save time and money. For those wishing to advance quickly, easy masters programs can help you upskill without intensive commitment. Similarly, if your goal is to reach the highest academic level affordably, researching the cheapest online phd programs in usa can make a significant difference in your educational expenses.

Educators and leaders interested in fast-tracking their careers may benefit from cheapest online edd programs that offer both speed and value. Ultimately, online degrees provide flexibility and accessibility, empowering students to shape their unique pathways into the tech industry and beyond.

Best Scientists Citing Mark Dredze

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles