Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Daniel Olson
dblp:36/2505
· DBLP profile ↗
9ranked-venue papers
1as first author
4since 2021 · last 2025
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Applied, interdisciplinary, general and emerging computing · 6 · 1 first-author · 4 since 2021Databases, data management, data science and information retrieval · 2Graphics, 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% | |
| Computer graphics and multimedia
1 paper |
Visualization and visual analytics · 56% Rendering · 44% |
Topics — the 6 heaviest of 7, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Bioinformatics and computational biology › protein sequence analysis
protein homology detection |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | NEAR: neural embeddings for amino acid relationships · Bioinform. 2025 |
Bioinformatics and computational biology › protein sequence analysis › protein sequence representation
protein language model |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | NEAR: neural embeddings for amino acid relationships · Bioinform. 2025 |
Rendering
non-photorealistic rendering |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | Artifact-Based Rendering: Harnessing Natural and Traditional Visual Media for More Expressive and Engaging 3D Visualizations · IEEE Trans. Vis. Comput. Graph. 2020 |
Visualization and visual analytics
scientific visualization |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | Artifact-Based Rendering: Harnessing Natural and Traditional Visual Media for More Expressive and Engaging 3D Visualizations · IEEE Trans. Vis. Comput. Graph. 2020 |
Information retrieval
evaluation |
0.0 | 1 | 2000 | Do batch and user evaluation give the same results? · SIGIR 2000 |
Information retrieval › evaluation › user-oriented evaluation
interactive retrieval evaluation |
0.0 | 1 | 2000 | Do batch and user evaluation give the same results? · SIGIR 2000 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
resnet · 0.9k-NN search · 0.9contrastive learning · 0.9texture synthesis · 0.4design study · 0.43d mesh optimization · 0.4instance recall task · 0.0
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | NEAR: neural embeddings for amino acid relationshipsabstractSUMMARY: Protein language models (PLMs) have recently demonstrated potential to supplant classical protein database search methods based on sequence alignment, but are slower than common alignment-based tools and appear to be prone to a high rate of false labeling. Here, we present Neural Embeddings for Amino acid Relationships (NEAR), a method based on neural representation learning that is designed to improve both speed and accuracy of search for likely homologs in a large protein sequence database. NEAR's ResNet embedding model is trained using contrastive learning guided by trusted sequence alignments. It computes per-residue embeddings for target and query protein sequences, and identifies alignment candidates with a pipeline consisting of residue-level k-NN search and a simple neighbor aggregation scheme. Tests on a benchmark consisting of trusted remote homologs and randomly shuffled decoy sequences reveal that NEAR substantially improves accuracy relative to state-of-the-art PLMs, with lower memory requirements and faster embedding and search speed. While these results suggest that the NEAR model may be useful for standalone homology detection with increased sensitivity over standard alignment-based methods, in this manuscript, we focus on a more straightforward analysis of the model's value as a high-speed pre-filter for sensitive annotation. In that context, NEAR is at least 5x faster than the pre-filter currently used in the widely used profile hidden Markov model (pHMM) search tool HMMER3, and also outperforms the pre-filter used in our fast pHMM tool, nail. AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: NEAR is under an open-source license. Code and data curation instructions can be found at https://github.com/TravisWheelerLab/NEAR. Daniel Olson, Thomas Colligan, Daphne Demekas, Jack W. Roddy, Ken Youens-Clark, Travis J. Wheeler |
Bioinform. | 1 |
| 2022 | Leveraging Biolink for Interoperability between Semantic Models
Ian Braun, Pablo Alarcón Moreno, Emily Hartley, Daniel Olson, Nirupama Benis, Ronald Cornet, Mark D. Wilkinson, Ramona L. Walls |
AMIA | 4 |
| 2022 | Translating SDTM Terminology and OMOP Vocabularies using the UMLS
William T. Roddy, Daniel Olson, Diane Corey, Ian Braun, Terrence McHugh, Emily Hartley, Smith Heavner, Ramona Walls |
AMIA | 2 |
| 2021 | A Responsive Data Curation and Integration Pipeline for Rare Disease Data
Ramona L. Walls, Jeffery S. Barrett, Alexandre Betourne, Emily Hartley, Jane Larkindale, Daniel Olson, William T. Roddy, Amanda Borens |
AMIA | 6 |
| 2020 | Artifact-Based Rendering: Harnessing Natural and Traditional Visual Media for More Expressive and Engaging 3D VisualizationsabstractWe introduce Artifact-Based Rendering (ABR), a framework of tools, algorithms, and processes that makes it possible to produce real, data-driven 3D scientific visualizations with a visual language derived entirely from colors, lines, textures, and forms created using traditional physical media or found in nature. A theory and process for ABR is presented to address three current needs: (i) designing better visualizations by making it possible for non-programmers to rapidly design and critique many alternative data-to-visual mappings; (ii) expanding the visual vocabulary used in scientific visualizations to depict increasingly complex multivariate data; (iii) bringing a more engaging, natural, and human-relatable handcrafted aesthetic to data visualization. New tools and algorithms to support ABR include front-end applets for constructing artifact-based colormaps, optimizing 3D scanned meshes for use in data visualization, and synthesizing textures from artifacts. These are complemented by an interactive rendering engine with custom algorithms and interfaces that demonstrate multiple new visual styles for depicting point, line, surface, and volume data. A within-the-research-team design study provides early evidence of the shift in visualization design processes that ABR is believed to enable when compared to traditional scientific visualization systems. Qualitative user feedback on applications to climate science and brain imaging support the utility of ABR for scientific discovery and public communication. Seth Johnson, Francesca Samsel, Greg Abram, Daniel Olson, Andrew J. Solis, Bridger Herman, Phillip J. Wolfram, Christophe Lenglet, Daniel F. Keefe |
IEEE Trans. Vis. Comput. Graph. | 4 |
| 2002 | Professional's Information Link (PiL): a web-based asynchronous consultation service
William R. Hersh, Robin Miller, Daniel Olson, Lynetta Sacherek, Ping Cross |
AMIA | 3 |
| 2002 | SmartQuery: context-sensitive links to medical knowledge sources from the electronic patient record
Susan Price, William R. Hersh, Daniel Olson, Peter J. Embí |
AMIA | 3 |
| 2001 | Challenging conventional assumptions of automated information retrieval with real users: Boolean searching and batch retrieval evaluations
William R. Hersh, Andrew Turpin, Susan Price, Dale Kraemer, Daniel Olson, Benjamin Chan, Lynetta Sacherek |
Inf. Process. Manag. | 5 |
| 2000 | Do batch and user evaluation give the same results?abstractDo improvements in system performance demonstrated by batch evaluations confer the same benefit for real users? We carried out experiments designed to investigate this question. After identifying a weighting scheme that gave maximum improvement over the baseline in a non-interactive evaluation, we used it with real users searching on an instance recall task. Our results showed the weighting scheme giving beneficial results in batch studies did not do so with real users. Further analysis did identify other factors predictive of instance recall, including number of documents saved by the user, document recall, and number of documents seen by the user. William R. Hersh, Andrew Turpin, Susan Price, Benjamin Chan, Dale Kraemer, Lynetta Sacherek, Daniel Olson |
SIGIR | 7 |