World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Computer Science

D-Index
46
Citations
9249
World Ranking
6820
National Ranking
2998

Mark O. Riedl 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 O. Riedl 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: 250 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: 560 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: 424 scientists 242–251 publications: 408 scientists 252–261 publications: 378 scientists 262–271 publications: 300 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: 222 publications — 54th percentile

54% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Mark O. Riedl 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 O. Riedl sits on this spectrum.

30–31 D-Index: 879 scientists 32–33 D-Index: 984 scientists 34–35 D-Index: 918 scientists 36–37 D-Index: 990 scientists 38–39 D-Index: 969 scientists 40–41 D-Index: 907 scientists 42–43 D-Index: 821 scientists 44–45 D-Index: 765 scientists 46–47 D-Index: 689 scientists 48–49 D-Index: 543 scientists 50–51 D-Index: 543 scientists 52–53 D-Index: 517 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: 46 D-Index — 53rd percentile

53% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Overview

Mark O. Riedl is affiliated with the Georgia Institute of Technology in the United States. Their research primarily covers the field of computer science, with a significant focus on artificial intelligence. Their work spans several subfields including artificial intelligence, computer vision and pattern recognition, safety research, health informatics, and sociology and political science.

The main topics explored in their research include:

  • Topic Modeling
  • Natural Language Processing Techniques
  • Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)
  • Artificial Intelligence in Games
  • Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
  • Multimodal Machine Learning Applications
  • Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education

Riedl has a substantial publication record with frequent appearances in several notable venues. These include:

  • arXiv (Cornell University)
  • Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Interactive Digital Entertainment
  • Patterns
  • Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence
  • Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction

Some of their recent papers are:

  • Human-Centered Explainable AI (HCXAI): Beyond Opening the Black-Box of AI (2022), presented at the CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems Extended Abstracts
  • Reframing Human-AI Collaboration for Generating Free-Text Explanations (2022), in the Proceedings of the 2022 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies
  • Charting the Sociotechnical Gap in Explainable AI: A Framework to Address the Gap in XAI (2023), in the Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction
  • Just Say No: Analyzing the Stance of Neural Dialogue Generation in Offensive Contexts (2021), presented at the Proceedings of the 2021 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing
  • Interactive Narrative: A Novel Application of Artificial Intelligence for Computer Games (2021), in the Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence

Riedl has collaborated frequently with several researchers, including:

  • Upol Ehsan
  • Prithviraj Ammanabrolu
  • Xiangyu Peng
  • Spencer Frazier
  • Zhiyu Lin

Best Publications

  • Narrative planning: balancing plot and character

    Mark O. Riedl;R. Michael Young

  • Expanding Explainability: Towards Social Transparency in AI systems

    Upol Ehsan;Q. Vera Liao;Michael Muller;Mark O. Riedl

  • Interactive Narrative: An Intelligent Systems Approach

    Mark Owen Riedl;Vadim Bulitko

  • An architecture for integrating plan-based behavior generation with interactive game environments.

    R. Michael Young;Mark O. Riedl;Mark Branly;Arnav Jhala

  • Human‐centered artificial intelligence and machine learning

    Mark O. Riedl

  • From linear story generation to branching story graphs

    M.O. Riedl;R.M. Young

  • Managing interaction between users and agents in a multi-agent storytelling environment

    Mark Riedl;C. J. Saretto;R. Michael Young

  • Story generation with crowdsourced plot graphs

    Boyang Li;Stephen Lee-Urban;George Johnston;Mark O. Riedl

  • An Intent-Driven Planner for Multi-Agent Story Generation

    Mark Owen Riedl;R. Michael Young

  • Automated rationale generation: a technique for explainable AI and its effects on human perceptions

    Upol Ehsan;Pradyumna Tambwekar;Larry Chan;Brent Harrison

  • Event Representations for Automated Story Generation with Deep Neural Nets

    Lara J. Martin;Prithviraj Ammanabrolu;Xinyu Wang;William Hancock

  • Believable agents and intelligent story adaptation for interactive storytelling

    Mark O. Riedl;Andrew Stern

  • Human-Centered Explainable AI: Towards a Reflective Sociotechnical Approach.

    Upol Ehsan;Mark O. Riedl

  • Toward supporting stories with procedurally generated game worlds

    Ken Hartsook;Alexander Zook;Sauvik Das;Mark O. Riedl

  • Friend, Collaborator, Student, Manager: How Design of an AI-Driven Game Level Editor Affects Creators

    Matthew Guzdial;Nicholas Liao;Jonathan Chen;Shao-Yu Chen

  • AI for game production

    Mark Owen Riedl;Alexander Zook

  • Rationalization: A Neural Machine Translation Approach to Generating Natural Language Explanations

    Upol Ehsan;Brent Harrison;Larry Chan;Mark O. Riedl

  • Towards an architecture for intelligent control of narrative in interactive virtual worlds

    R. Michael Young;Mark Riedl

  • Automated scenario generation: toward tailored and optimized military training in virtual environments

    Alexander Zook;Stephen Lee-Urban;Mark O. Riedl;Heather K. Holden

  • An empirical study of cognition and theatrical improvisation

    Brian Magerko;Waleed Manzoul;Mark Riedl;Allan Baumer

  • Playing Text-Adventure Games with Graph-Based Deep Reinforcement Learning

    Prithviraj Ammanabrolu;Mark O. Riedl

  • From linear story generation to branching story graphs

    Mark O. Riedl;R. Michael Young

Frequent Co-Authors

R. Michael Young
R. Michael Young University of Utah
Ashwin Ram
Ashwin Ram Georgia Institute of Technology
Ruth Aylett
Ruth Aylett Heriot-Watt University
Oded Nov
Oded Nov New York University
Stacy Marsella
Stacy Marsella Northeastern University
Stefan Edelkamp
Stefan Edelkamp Charles University
Andrea L. Thomaz
Andrea L. Thomaz The University of Texas at Austin
Kai Goebel
Kai Goebel Palo Alto Research Center
Alon Halevy
Alon Halevy Facebook (United States)

External Links

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 Computer Science in the USA opens the door to a variety of flexible, career-focused options. For those seeking a fast, affordable entry point, pursuing an associates degree online can provide foundational skills and a stepping stone toward a higher degree or immediate employment in tech roles.

Affordability is a major concern, and there are plenty of cheap online colleges that offer recognized programs, helping you balance quality education with budget-friendly options.

If your academic record isn't perfect, don’t worry—there are best online colleges that accept low GPA, making higher education accessible to more students.

Lastly, consider broadening your horizons. For example, after earning your tech qualifications, you might ask, what can you do with an environmental science degree? Interdisciplinary pathways are growing, especially in fields connecting technology with the environment—opening even more diverse career options.

Best Scientists Citing Mark O. Riedl

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles