World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Computer Science

D-Index
49
Citations
12193
World Ranking
5803
National Ranking
2638

Ralph Weischedel 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 Ralph Weischedel 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.

Ralph Weischedel 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 Ralph Weischedel 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: 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.

Overview

Ralph Weischedel is affiliated with the University of Southern California in the United States. Their research primarily spans the field of Computer Science, with a focus on Artificial Intelligence and related subfields.

Their scholarly output includes work published in venues such as:

  • arXiv (Cornell University)
  • Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence
  • Proceedings of the 60th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers)
  • Proceedings of the 2021 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing

Key areas of study within their research comprise:

  • Artificial Intelligence
  • Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition
  • Management Science and Operations Research
  • General Decision Sciences
  • Management Information Systems

Their work addresses significant topics including:

  • Topic Modeling
  • Natural Language Processing Techniques
  • Multimodal Machine Learning Applications
  • Text Readability and Simplification
  • Artificial Intelligence in Games
  • Speech and Dialogue Systems
  • Intelligent Tutoring Systems and Adaptive Learning

Among their recent scholarly publications are:

  • Predictive Engagement: An Efficient Metric for Automatic Evaluation of Open-Domain Dialogue Systems, 2020, Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence
  • Understanding Multimodal Procedural Knowledge by Sequencing Multimodal Instructional Manuals, 2022, Proceedings of the 60th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers)
  • Content Planning for Neural Story Generation with Aristotelian Rescoring, 2020, arXiv (Cornell University)
  • Perhaps PTLMs Should Go to School - A Task to Assess Open Book and Closed Book QA, 2021, Proceedings of the 2021 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing
  • Learning to Generalize for Sequential Decision Making, 2020, arXiv (Cornell University)

Frequently, they collaborate with other researchers in their field, with notable coauthors including Marjorie Freedman, Nanyun Peng, Manuel R. Ciosici, Te-Lin Wu, and Dong-Ho Lee, reflecting a pattern of ongoing collaborative research efforts.

Best Publications

  • The Automatic Content Extraction (ACE) Program Tasks, Data, and Evaluation

    George R. Doddington;Alexis Mitchell;Mark A. Przybocki;Lance A. Ramshaw

  • An Algorithm that Learns What‘s in a Name

    Daniel M. Bikel;Richard Schwartz;Ralph M. Weischedel

  • OntoNotes: The 90% Solution

    Eduard Hovy;Mitchell Marcus;Martha Palmer;Lance Ramshaw

  • Nymble: a High-Performance Learning Name-finder

    Daniel M. Bikel;Scott Miller;Richard Schwartz;Ralph Weischedel

  • PERFORMANCE MEASURES FOR INFORMATION EXTRACTION

    John Makhoul;Francis Kubala;Richard Schwartz;Ralph Weischedel

  • Coping with ambiguity and unknown words through probabilistic models

    Ralph Weischedel;Richard Schwartz;Jeff Palmucci;Marie Meteer

  • CoNLL-2011 Shared Task: Modeling Unrestricted Coreference in OntoNotes

    Sameer Pradhan;Lance Ramshaw;Mitchell Marcus;Martha Palmer

  • Plan-And-Write: Towards Better Automatic Storytelling

    Lili Yao;Nanyun Peng;Ralph M. Weischedel;Kevin Knight

  • A New String-to-Dependency Machine Translation Algorithm with a Target Dependency Language Model

    Libin Shen;Jinxi Xu;Ralph Weischedel

  • A novel use of statistical parsing to extract information from text

    Scott Miller;Heidi Fox;Lance Ramshaw;Ralph Weischedel

  • Challenges in information retrieval and language modeling: report of a workshop held at the center for intelligent information retrieval, University of Massachusetts Amherst, September 2002

    James Allan;Jay Aslam;Nicholas Belkin;Chris Buckley

  • ONTONOTES: A UNIFIED RELATIONAL SEMANTIC REPRESENTATION

    Sameer S. Pradhan;Eduard H. Hovy;Mitchell P. Marcus;Martha Palmer

  • OntoNotes: A Unified Relational Semantic Representation

    a.S. Pradhan;E. Hovy;M.S. Marcus;M. Palmer

  • Meta-rules as a basis for processing ill-formed input

    Ralph M. Weischedel;Norman K. Sondheimer

  • Evaluating a probabilistic model for cross-lingual information retrieval

    Jinxi Xu;Ralph Weischedel;Chanh Nguyen

  • Unrestricted Coreference: Identifying Entities and Events in OntoNotes

    S.S. Pradhan;L. Ramshaw;R. Weischedel;J. MacBride

  • Optimal Network Problem: A Branch-and-Bound Algorithm

    D E Boyce;A Farhi;R Weischedel

  • OntoNotes Release 5.0

    Ralph Weischedel;Martha Palmer;Mitchell Marcus;Eduard Hovy

  • TREC 2003 QA at BBN: Answering Definitional Questions.

    Jinxi Xu;Ana Licuanan;Ralph M. Weischedel

  • BBN: Description of the SIFT System as Used for MUC-7

    Scott Miller;Michael Crystal;Heidi Fox;Lance Ramshaw

  • NAMED ENTITY EXTRACTION FROM SPEECH

    Francis Kubala;Richard Schwartz;Rebecca Stone;Ralph Weischedel

  • Empirical studies in strategies for Arabic retrieval

    Jinxi Xu;Alexander Fraser;Ralph Weischedel

  • Algorithms That Learn to Extract Information BBN: Description of the Sift System as Used for MUC-7

    Scott Miller;Michael Crystal;Heidi Fox;Lance Ramshaw

Frequent Co-Authors

Richard Schwartz
Richard Schwartz Brown University
Nanyun Peng
Nanyun Peng University of California, Los Angeles
Martha Palmer
Martha Palmer University of Colorado Boulder
Aram Galstyan
Aram Galstyan University of Southern California
Eduard Hovy
Eduard Hovy Carnegie Mellon University
Sameer Pradhan
Sameer Pradhan Vassar College
David E. Boyce
David E. Boyce Northwestern University
Aravind K. Joshi
Aravind K. Joshi University of Pennsylvania
Bonnie Webber
Bonnie Webber University of Edinburgh
Nianwen Xue
Nianwen Xue Brandeis 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 computer science in the USA opens up a wide range of related online degrees and career opportunities. Many students choose flexible learning options such as a fast track computer science degree, which allows for a quicker entry into the workforce without sacrificing quality education.

If you're interested in interdisciplinary or specialized STEM areas, there are also highly affordable programs in related fields. For instance, those passionate about sustainability may consider the cheapest online environmental science degree, combining technology with environmental stewardship. Engineering enthusiasts can pursue the cheapest online master's mechanical engineering to advance technical skills and boost career prospects.

For a more theoretical focus, an online theoretical physics degree can offer opportunities in research, software, and analytics roles. Choosing the right online degree depends on your career objectives, budget, and interest in emerging industries linked to computer science.

Best Scientists Citing Ralph Weischedel

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles