Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Navneet Kapur

dblp:183/9870 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
1ranked-venue papers
1as first author
0since 2021 · last 2016
—ORCID · unresolved

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 1 · 1 first-authorDatabases, data management, data science and information retrieval · 1 · 1 first-author

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Databases, data mining, and information retrieval
1 paper
Recommender systems · 50% Web and social media mining · 50%
Interdisciplinary, comprehensive, and emerging computing
1 paper
Computational finance and economics · 100%

Topics — the 2 heaviest of 3, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Recommender systems › domain-specific recommendation
educational recommender system
0.212016
Ranking Universities Based on Career Outcomes of Graduates · KDD 2016
Computational finance and economics
labor market analytics
0.112016
Ranking Universities Based on Career Outcomes of Graduates · KDD 2016

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

statistical stability analysis · 0.5ranking methodology · 0.5
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2016 Ranking Universities Based on Career Outcomes of Graduates
abstract
Every year, millions of new students enter higher educational programs. Publicly available rankings of academic programs play a key role in prospective students' decisions regarding which universities to apply to and enroll in. While surveys indicate that majority of freshmen enter college to get good jobs after graduation, established methodologies for ranking universities rely on indirect indicators of career outcomes such as reputational assessments of the universities among academic peers, acceptance and graduation rates, learning environment, and availability of research funding. In addition, many of these methodologies rely on arbitrary choices of weighting factors for the different ranking indicators, and suffer from lack of analyses of statistical stability. In this paper, we addresses these challenges holistically by developing a novel methodology for ranking and recommending universities for different professions on the basis of career outcomes of professionals who graduated from those schools. Our methodology incorporates a number of techniques for achieving statistical stability, and represents a step towards personalized educational recommendations based on interests and ambitions of individuals. We have applied this methodology on LinkedIn's Economic Graph data of over 400 million professional from around the world. The resulting university rankings have been made available to the public and demonstrate that there are valuable insights to be gleaned from professional career data on LinkedIn.
Navneet Kapur, Nikita I. Lytkin, Bee-Chung Chen, Deepak Agarwal, Igor Perisic
KDD1