Demo Data from VLDB 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Roxana Daneshjou
dblp:46/9780
· DBLP profile ↗
8ranked-venue papers
1as first author
5since 2021 · last 2025
0000-0001-7988-9356ORCID · verified
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Applied, interdisciplinary, general and emerging computing · 5 · 2 since 2021Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 2 · 1 first-author · 2 since 2021Human-computer interaction and ubiquitous computing · 2 · 2 since 2021Graphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 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.
| Artificial intelligence
1 paper |
Trustworthy machine learning · 87% Image recognition and object detection · 13% | |
| Interdisciplinary, comprehensive, and emerging computing
3 papers |
Medical and health informatics · 85% Bioinformatics and computational biology · 15% |
Topics — the 8 heaviest of 8, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning › interpretability
concept-based explanation |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | SkinCon: A skin disease dataset densely annotated by domain experts for fine-grained debugging and analysis · NeurIPS 2022 |
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning
interpretability |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | SkinCon: A skin disease dataset densely annotated by domain experts for fine-grained debugging and analysis · NeurIPS 2022 |
Medical and health informatics › digital health
dermatology informatics |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | SkinCon: A skin disease dataset densely annotated by domain experts for fine-grained debugging and analysis · NeurIPS 2022 |
Medical and health informatics
precision medicine |
0.2 | 2 | 2011 | Bioinformatics challenges for personalized medicine · Bioinform. 2011 Bioinformatics challenges for personalized medicine · Bioinform. 2011 |
Computer vision › Image recognition and object detection
medical image analysis |
0.2 | 1 | 2022 | SkinCon: A skin disease dataset densely annotated by domain experts for fine-grained debugging and analysis · NeurIPS 2022 |
Bioinformatics and computational biology › genomics
genome analysis |
0.1 | 2 | 2011 | Bioinformatics challenges for personalized medicine · Bioinform. 2011 Bioinformatics challenges for personalized medicine · Bioinform. 2011 |
Bioinformatics and computational biology
data integration |
0.0 | 1 | 2011 | Bioinformatics challenges for personalized medicine · Bioinform. 2011 |
Bioinformatics and computational biology
systems biology |
0.0 | 1 | 2011 | Bioinformatics challenges for personalized medicine · Bioinform. 2011 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
slice discovery · 1.1concept bottleneck model · 1.1
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | BiasICL: In-Context Learning and Demographic Biases of Vision Language Models
Sonnet Xu, Joseph D. Janizek, Yixing Jiang, Roxana Daneshjou |
MICCAI (7) | 4 |
| 2022 | Do Humans Trust Advice More if it Comes from AI?: An Analysis of Human-AI InteractionsabstractIn decision support applications of AI, the AI algorithm's output is framed as a suggestion to a human user. The user may ignore this advice or take it into consideration to modify their decision. With the increasing prevalence of such human-AI interactions, it is important to understand how users react to AI advice. In this paper, we recruited over 1100 crowdworkers to characterize how humans use AI suggestions relative to equivalent suggestions from a group of peer humans across several experimental settings. We find that participants' beliefs about how human versus AI performance on a given task affects whether they heed the advice. When participants do heed the advice, they use it similarly for human and AI suggestions. Based on these results, we propose a two-stage, "activation-integration" model for human behavior and use it to characterize the factors that affect human-AI interactions. Kailas Vodrahalli, Roxana Daneshjou, Tobias Gerstenberg, James Zou 0001 |
AIES | 2 |
| 2022 | SkinCon: A skin disease dataset densely annotated by domain experts for fine-grained debugging and analysisabstractFor the deployment of artificial intelligence (AI) in high risk settings, such as healthcare, methods that provide interpretability/explainability or allow fine-grained error analysis are critical. Many recent methods for interpretability/explainability and fine-grained error analysis use concepts, which are meta-labels which are semantically meaningful to humans. However, there are only a few datasets that include concept-level meta-labels and most of these meta-labels are relevant for natural images that do not require domain expertise. Previous densely annotated datasets in medicine focused on meta-labels that are relevant to a single disease such as osteoarthritis or melanoma. In dermatology, skin disease is described using an established clinical lexicon that allow clinicians to describe physical exam findings to one another. To provide the first medical dataset densely annotated by domain experts to provide annotations useful across multiple disease processes, we developed SkinCon: a skin disease dataset densely annotated by dermatologists. SkinCon includes 3230 images from the Fitzpatrick 17k skin disease dataset densely annotated with 48 clinical concepts, 22 of which have at least 50 images representing the concept. The concepts used were chosen by two dermatologists considering the clinical descriptor terms used to describe skin lesions. Examples include "plaque", "scale", and "erosion". These same concepts were also used to label 656 skin disease images from the Diverse Dermatology Images dataset, providing an additional external dataset with diverse skin tone representations. We review the potential applications for the SkinCon dataset, such as probing models, concept-based explanations, concept bottlenecks, error analysis, and slice discovery. Furthermore, we use SkinCon to demonstrate two of these use cases: debugging mistakes of an existing dermatology AI model with concepts and developing interpretable models with post-hoc concept bottleneck models. Roxana Daneshjou, Mert Yüksekgönül, Zhuo Ran Cai, Roberto A. Novoa, James Zou 0001 |
NeurIPS | 1 |
| 2022 | Towards Transparency in Dermatology Image Datasets with Skin Tone Annotations by Experts, Crowds, and an AlgorithmabstractWhile artificial intelligence (AI) holds promise for supporting healthcare providers and improving the accuracy of medical diagnoses, a lack of transparency in the composition of datasets exposes AI models to the possibility of unintentional and avoidable mistakes. In particular, public and private image datasets of dermatological conditions rarely include information on skin color. As a start towards increasing transparency, AI researchers have appropriated the use of the Fitzpatrick skin type (FST) from a measure of patient photosensitivity to a measure for estimating skin tone in algorithmic audits of computer vision applications including facial recognition and dermatology diagnosis. In order to understand the variability of estimated FST annotations on images, we compare several FST annotation methods on a diverse set of 460 images of skin conditions from both textbooks and online dermatology atlases. These methods include expert annotation by board-certified dermatologists, algorithmic annotation via the Individual Typology Angle algorithm, which is then converted to estimated FST (ITA-FST), and two crowd-sourced, dynamic consensus protocols for annotating estimated FSTs. We find the inter-rater reliability between three board-certified dermatologists is comparable to the inter-rater reliability between the board-certified dermatologists and either of the crowdsourcing methods. In contrast, we find that the ITA-FST method produces annotations that are significantly less correlated with the experts' annotations than the experts' annotations are correlated with each other. These results demonstrate that algorithms based on ITA-FST are not reliable for annotating large-scale image datasets, but human-centered, crowd-based protocols can reliably add skin type transparency to dermatology datasets. Furthermore, we introduce the concept of dynamic consensus protocols with tunable parameters including expert review that increase the visibility of crowdwork and provide guidance for future crowdsourced annotations of large image datasets. Matthew Groh, Caleb Harris, Roxana Daneshjou, Omar Badri, Arash Koochek |
Proc. ACM Hum. Comput. Interact. | 3 |
| 2021 | Racial Representation Analysis in Dermatology Academic Materials
Girmaw Abebe, Celia Cintas, Roxana Daneshjou, Kush R. Varshney, Peter W. J. Staar, Skyler Speakman, Kenya S. Andrews, Chinyere Agunwa, Justin Jia, Elizabeth E. Bailey, Jules Lipoff, Ginikanwa Onyekaba, Veronica Rotemberg, Ademide Adelekun, James Zou 0001 |
AMIA | 3 |
| 2012 | Chapter 7: PharmacogenomicsabstractThere is great variation in drug-response phenotypes, and a "one size fits all" paradigm for drug delivery is flawed. Pharmacogenomics is the study of how human genetic information impacts drug response, and it aims to improve efficacy and reduced side effects. In this article, we provide an overview of pharmacogenetics, including pharmacokinetics (PK), pharmacodynamics (PD), gene and pathway interactions, and off-target effects. We describe methods for discovering genetic factors in drug response, including genome-wide association studies (GWAS), expression analysis, and other methods such as chemoinformatics and natural language processing (NLP). We cover the practical applications of pharmacogenomics both in the pharmaceutical industry and in a clinical setting. In drug discovery, pharmacogenomics can be used to aid lead identification, anticipate adverse events, and assist in drug repurposing efforts. Moreover, pharmacogenomic discoveries show promise as important elements of physician decision support. Finally, we consider the ethical, regulatory, and reimbursement challenges that remain for the clinical implementation of pharmacogenomics. Konrad J. Karczewski, Roxana Daneshjou, Russ B. Altman |
PLoS Comput. Biol. | 2 |
| 2011 | Bioinformatics challenges for personalized medicine
Guy Haskin Fernald, Emidio Capriotti, Roxana Daneshjou, Konrad J. Karczewski, Russ B. Altman |
Bioinform. | 3 |
| 2011 | Bioinformatics challenges for personalized medicineabstractMOTIVATION: Widespread availability of low-cost, full genome sequencing will introduce new challenges for bioinformatics. RESULTS: This review outlines recent developments in sequencing technologies and genome analysis methods for application in personalized medicine. New methods are needed in four areas to realize the potential of personalized medicine: (i) processing large-scale robust genomic data; (ii) interpreting the functional effect and the impact of genomic variation; (iii) integrating systems data to relate complex genetic interactions with phenotypes; and (iv) translating these discoveries into medical practice. CONTACT: [email protected] Guy Haskin Fernald, Emidio Capriotti, Roxana Daneshjou, Konrad J. Karczewski, Russ B. Altman |
Bioinform. | 3 |