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

Connor Cook

dblp:203/9474 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
3ranked-venue papers
1as first author
1since 2021 · last 2022
—ORCID · unresolved

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

Applied, interdisciplinary, general and emerging computing · 2 · 1 first-author · 1 since 2021Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 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.

Databases, data mining, and information retrieval
1 paper
Data mining · 100%

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

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Data mining › text mining › topic model
interactive topic modeling
0.312017
Tandem Anchoring: a Multiword Anchor Approach for Interactive Topic Modeling · ACL (1) 2017
Data mining › text mining
topic modeling
0.312017
Tandem Anchoring: a Multiword Anchor Approach for Interactive Topic Modeling · ACL (1) 2017

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

user study · 0.3tandem anchors · 0.3
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2022 Demonstrating an approach for evaluating synthetic geospatial and temporal epidemiologic data utility: results from analyzing >1.8 million SARS-CoV-2 tests in the United States National COVID Cohort Collaborative (N3C)
abstract
OBJECTIVE: This study sought to evaluate whether synthetic data derived from a national coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) dataset could be used for geospatial and temporal epidemic analyses. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Using an original dataset (n = 1 854 968 severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 tests) and its synthetic derivative, we compared key indicators of COVID-19 community spread through analysis of aggregate and zip code-level epidemic curves, patient characteristics and outcomes, distribution of tests by zip code, and indicator counts stratified by month and zip code. Similarity between the data was statistically and qualitatively evaluated. RESULTS: In general, synthetic data closely matched original data for epidemic curves, patient characteristics, and outcomes. Synthetic data suppressed labels of zip codes with few total tests (mean = 2.9 ± 2.4; max = 16 tests; 66% reduction of unique zip codes). Epidemic curves and monthly indicator counts were similar between synthetic and original data in a random sample of the most tested (top 1%; n = 171) and for all unsuppressed zip codes (n = 5819), respectively. In small sample sizes, synthetic data utility was notably decreased. DISCUSSION: Analyses on the population-level and of densely tested zip codes (which contained most of the data) were similar between original and synthetically derived datasets. Analyses of sparsely tested populations were less similar and had more data suppression. CONCLUSION: In general, synthetic data were successfully used to analyze geospatial and temporal trends. Analyses using small sample sizes or populations were limited, in part due to purposeful data label suppression-an attribute disclosure countermeasure. Users should consider data fitness for use in these cases.
Jason A. Thomas, Randi E. Foraker, Noa Zamstein, Jon D. Morrow, Philip R. O. Payne, Adam B. Wilcox, Melissa A. Haendel, Christopher G. Chute, Kenneth R. Gersing, Anita Walden, Tellen D. Bennett, David Eichmann, Justin Guinney, Warren A. Kibbe, Emily R. Pfaff, Peter N. Robinson, Joel H. Saltz, Heidi Spratt, Justin Starren, Christine Suver, Chunlei Wu, Davera Gabriel, Stephanie S. Hong, Kristin Kostka, Harold P. Lehmann, Richard A. Moffitt, Michele Morris, Matvey Palchuk, Xiaohan Tanner Zhang, Richard L. Zhu, Benjamin R. C. Amor, Mark M. Bissell, Marshall Clark, Andrew T. Girvin, Adam M. Lee, Robert T. Miller, Kellie M. Walters, Yooree Chae, Connor Cook, Alexandra Dest, Racquel R. Dietz, Thomas Dillon, Patricia A. Francis, Rafael Fuentes, Alexis Graves, Andrew J. Neumann, Shawn T. O'Neil, Usman Sheikh, Andréa M. Volz, Elizabeth Zampino, Christopher P. Austin, Samuel Bozzette, Mariam Deacy, Nicole Garbarini, Michael G. Kurilla, Samuel G. Michael, Joni L. Rutter, Meredith Temple-O'Connor, Katie Rebecca Bradwell, Amin Manna, Nabeel Qureshi, Mary Morrison Saltz, Julie A. McMurry, Carolyn T. Bramante, Jeremy Richard Harper, Wenndy Hernandez, Farrukh M. Koraishy, Federico Mariona, Saidulu Mattapally, Amit Saha, Satyanarayana Vedula, Yujuan Fu, Nisha Mathews, Ofer Mendelevitch
J. Am. Medical Informatics Assoc.40
2018 An Open Vocabulary Approach for Estimating Teacher Use of Authentic Questions in Classroom Discourse
Connor Cook, Andrew Olney, Sean Kelly, Sidney K. D'Mello
EDM1
2017 Tandem Anchoring: a Multiword Anchor Approach for Interactive Topic Modeling
abstract
Interactive topic models are powerful tools for understanding large collections of text.However, existing sampling-based interactive topic modeling approaches scale poorly to large data sets.Anchor methods, which use a single word to uniquely identify a topic, offer the speed needed for interactive work but lack both a mechanism to inject prior knowledge and lack the intuitive semantics needed for userfacing applications.We propose combinations of words as anchors, going beyond existing single word anchor algorithmsan approach we call "Tandem Anchors".We begin with a synthetic investigation of this approach then apply the approach to interactive topic modeling in a user study and compare it to interactive and noninteractive approaches.Tandem anchors are faster and more intuitive than existing interactive approaches.
Jeffrey Lund, Connor Cook, Kevin D. Seppi, Jordan L. Boyd-Graber
ACL (1)2