VLDB 2026 Research / reviewers in the wild / expert
Terrance Goan
dblp:19/2246
· DBLP profile ↗
7ranked-venue papers
4as first author
1since 2021 · last 2023
0000-0001-8498-6767ORCID · corroborated
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Security and privacy · 3 · 1 first-authorDatabases, data management, data science and information retrieval · 2 · 2 first-authorArtificial intelligence and machine learning · 1 · 1 first-authorGraphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 1 · 1 first-authorHuman-computer interaction and ubiquitous computing · 1 · 1 since 2021
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.
| Computer graphics and multimedia
1 paper |
Visualization and visual analytics · 100% | |
| Human-computer interaction and pervasive computing
1 paper |
Health and well-being technologies · 100% |
Topics — the 6 heaviest of 7, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Visualization and visual analytics
uncertainty visualization |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | MetaExplorer : Facilitating Reasoning with Epistemic Uncertainty in Meta-analysis · CHI 2023 |
Software testing › fault analysis
software error analysis |
0.0 | 1 | 1994 | Learning About Software Errors Via Systematic Experimentation · AAAI 1994 |
Network security › intrusion detection and prevention › intrusion detection › intrusion detection system
distributed intrusion detection |
0.0 | 1 | 1993 | Analysis of an Algorithm for Distributed Recognition and Accountability · CCS 1993 |
Network security › intrusion detection and prevention
intrusion detection |
0.0 | 1 | 1993 | Analysis of an Algorithm for Distributed Recognition and Accountability · CCS 1993 |
Distributed systems
distributed algorithms |
0.0 | 1 | 1993 | Analysis of an Algorithm for Distributed Recognition and Accountability · CCS 1993 |
Empirical software engineering
experimental methodology |
0.0 | 1 | 1994 | Learning About Software Errors Via Systematic Experimentation · AAAI 1994 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
qualitative evaluation · 1.3iterative design · 1.3proof sketch · 0.0distributed algorithm · 0.0
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | MetaExplorer : Facilitating Reasoning with Epistemic Uncertainty in Meta-analysisabstractScientists often use meta-analysis to characterize the impact of an intervention on some outcome of interest across a body of literature. However, threats to the utility and validity of meta-analytic estimates arise when scientists average over potentially important variations in context like different research designs. Uncertainty about quality and commensurability of evidence casts doubt on results from meta-analysis, yet existing software tools for meta-analysis do not provide an explicit software representation of these concerns. We present MetaExplorer, a prototype system for meta-analysis that we developed using iterative design with meta-analysis experts to provide a guided process for eliciting assessments of uncertainty and reasoning about how to incorporate them during statistical inference. Our qualitative evaluation of MetaExplorer with experienced meta-analysts shows that imposing a structured workflow both elevates the perceived importance of epistemic concerns and presents opportunities for tools to engage users in dialogue around goals and standards for evidence aggregation. Alex Kale, Terrance Goan, Elizabeth Tipton, Jessica Hullman |
CHI | 3 |
| 2018 | Making Explainable Recommendations Within an Intelligent Information SystemabstractThe development of methods that can generate compelling and accurate explanations of machine learning models and their predictions would mark a major advance in the state of the art by enabling developers and end users to detect model shortcomings, understand why predictions are made, and enable rich human-automation dialog. In our ongoing research, we seek to make contributions in three areas. First, our system utilizes abductive inference to produce more compelling and accurate explanations than prior methods. Second, our approach fully integrates explanations as actionable tools within a recommendation system. Third, accumulated feedback and abductive reasoning support the discovery of new features that hold the potential for improving subsequent rounds of machine learning. Terrance Goan |
EJC | 1 |
| 2006 | Identifying Information Provenance in Support of Intelligence Analysis, Sharing, and Protection
Terrance Goan, Emi Fujioka, Ryan Kaneshiro, Lynn Gasch |
ISI | 1 |
| 2004 | The Cyber Enemy Within ... Countering the Threat from Malicious InsidersabstractOne of the most critical problems facing the information security community is the threat of a malicious insider abusing his computer privileges to modify, remove, or prevent access to an organization's data. An insider is considered trusted (at least implicitly) by his organization because he is granted access to its computing environment. Whether or not that insider is in fact trustworthy is a question that lies at the heart of the insider threat problem. Complicating this problem is the fact that there is no "one size fits all" description of a malicious insider. Motivations, objectives, cyber expertise, system privileges all can and do vary from one case to the next. Dick Brackney, Terrance Goan, Allen Ott, Lockheed Martin |
ACSAC | 2 |
| 1997 | Supporting the User: Conceptual Modeling & Knowledge Discovery
Terrance Goan |
Conceptual Modeling | 1 |
| 1994 | Learning About Software Errors Via Systematic Experimentation
Terrance Goan, Oren Etzioni |
AAAI | 1 |
| 1993 | Analysis of an Algorithm for Distributed Recognition and AccountabilityabstractComputer and network systems are vulnerable to attacks. Abandoning the existing huge infrastructure of possibly-insecure computer and network systems is impossible, and replacing them by totally secure systems may not be feasible or cost effective. A common element in many attacks is that a single user will often attempt to intrude upon multiple resources throughout a network. Detecting the attack can become significantly easier by compiling and integrating evidence of such intrusion attempts across the network rather than attempting to assess the situation from the vantage point of only a single host. To solve this problem, we suggest an approach for distributed recognition and accountability (DRA), which consists of algorithms which “process”, at a central location, distributed and asynchronous “reports” generated by computers (or a subset thereof) throughout the network. Our highest-priority objectives are to observe ways by which an individual moves around in a network of computers, including changing user names to possibly hide his/her true identity, and to associate all activities of multiple instances of the same individual to the same networkwide user. We present the DRA algorithm and a sketch of its proof under an initial set of simplifying albeit realistic assumptions. Later, we relax these assumptions to accommodate pragmatic aspects such as missing or delayed “reports”, clock skew, tampered “reports”, etc. We believe that such algorithms will have widespread applications in the future, particularly in intrusion-detection systems. Calvin Ko, Deborah A. Frincke, Terrance Goan, Todd L. Heberlein, Karl N. Levitt, Biswanath Mukherjee, Christopher Wee |
CCS | 3 |