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

Timothy D. Johnson

dblp:18/8022 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
3ranked-venue papers
0as first author
0since 2021 · last 2015
0000-0002-7676-5347ORCID · corroborated

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

Applied, interdisciplinary, general and emerging computing · 3Graphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 1

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.

Interdisciplinary, comprehensive, and emerging computing
1 paper
Bioinformatics and computational biology · 100%

Topics — the 4 heaviest of 4, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Bioinformatics and computational biology › epigenomics
ChIP-seq analysis
0.212014
PePr: a peak-calling prioritization pipeline to identify consistent or differential peaks from replicated ChIP-Seq data · Bioinform. 2014
Bioinformatics and computational biology › epigenomics
differential binding site identification
0.212014
PePr: a peak-calling prioritization pipeline to identify consistent or differential peaks from replicated ChIP-Seq data · Bioinform. 2014
Bioinformatics and computational biology
epigenomics
0.212014
PePr: a peak-calling prioritization pipeline to identify consistent or differential peaks from replicated ChIP-Seq data · Bioinform. 2014
Bioinformatics and computational biology › epigenomics › ChIP-seq analysis
peak calling
0.212014
PePr: a peak-calling prioritization pipeline to identify consistent or differential peaks from replicated ChIP-Seq data · Bioinform. 2014

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

negative binomial model · 0.2local variance estimation · 0.2
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2015 A Bayesian Model of Category-Specific Emotional Brain Responses
abstract
Understanding emotion is critical for a science of healthy and disordered brain function, but the neurophysiological basis of emotional experience is still poorly understood. We analyzed human brain activity patterns from 148 studies of emotion categories (2159 total participants) using a novel hierarchical Bayesian model. The model allowed us to classify which of five categories--fear, anger, disgust, sadness, or happiness--is engaged by a study with 66% accuracy (43-86% across categories). Analyses of the activity patterns encoded in the model revealed that each emotion category is associated with unique, prototypical patterns of activity across multiple brain systems including the cortex, thalamus, amygdala, and other structures. The results indicate that emotion categories are not contained within any one region or system, but are represented as configurations across multiple brain networks. The model provides a precise summary of the prototypical patterns for each emotion category, and demonstrates that a sufficient characterization of emotion categories relies on (a) differential patterns of involvement in neocortical systems that differ between humans and other species, and (b) distinctive patterns of cortical-subcortical interactions. Thus, these findings are incompatible with several contemporary theories of emotion, including those that emphasize emotion-dedicated brain systems and those that propose emotion is localized primarily in subcortical activity. They are consistent with componential and constructionist views, which propose that emotions are differentiated by a combination of perceptual, mnemonic, prospective, and motivational elements. Such brain-based models of emotion provide a foundation for new translational and clinical approaches.
Tor D. Wager, Jian Kang 0003, Timothy D. Johnson, Thomas E. Nichols, Ajay B. Satpute, Lisa Feldman Barrett
PLoS Comput. Biol.3
2014 Spatial Modeling of Multiple Sclerosis for Disease Subtype Prediction
Bernd Taschler, Tian Ge, Kerstin Bendfeldt, Nicole Mueller-Lenke, Timothy D. Johnson, Thomas E. Nichols
MICCAI (2)5
2014 PePr: a peak-calling prioritization pipeline to identify consistent or differential peaks from replicated ChIP-Seq data
abstract
MOTIVATION: ChIP-Seq is the standard method to identify genome-wide DNA-binding sites for transcription factors (TFs) and histone modifications. There is a growing need to analyze experiments with biological replicates, especially for epigenomic experiments where variation among biological samples can be substantial. However, tools that can perform group comparisons are currently lacking. RESULTS: We present a peak-calling prioritization pipeline (PePr) for identifying consistent or differential binding sites in ChIP-Seq experiments with biological replicates. PePr models read counts across the genome among biological samples with a negative binomial distribution and uses a local variance estimation method, ranking consistent or differential binding sites more favorably than sites with greater variability. We compared PePr with commonly used and recently proposed approaches on eight TF datasets and show that PePr uniquely identifies consistent regions with enriched read counts, high motif occurrence rate and known characteristics of TF binding based on visual inspection. For histone modification data with broadly enriched regions, PePr identified differential regions that are consistent within groups and outperformed other methods in scaling False Discovery Rate (FDR) analysis. AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: http://code.google.com/p/pepr-chip-seq/.
Yan-Xiao Zhang, Yu-Hsuan Lin, Timothy D. Johnson, Laura S. Rozek, Maureen A. Sartor
Bioinform.3