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

Jaimie Murdock

dblp:97/5234 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
3ranked-venue papers
3as first author
0since 2021 · last 2015
0000-0002-1732-5499ORCID · corroborated

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

Databases, 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-author

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%
Computer graphics and multimedia
1 paper
Visualization and visual analytics · 100%
Artificial intelligence
1 paper
Knowledge representation and reasoning · 100%

Topics — the 3 heaviest of 3, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Data mining › text mining
topic model
0.212015
Visualization Techniques for Topic Model Checking · AAAI 2015
Visualization and visual analytics › text visualization
topic visualization
0.212015
Visualization Techniques for Topic Model Checking · AAAI 2015
Knowledge, reasoning and agents › Knowledge representation and reasoning
cognitive modeling
0.112015
Visualization Techniques for Topic Model Checking · AAAI 2015

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

topic modeling · 0.7information-theoretic similarity measures · 0.7
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2015 Visualization Techniques for Topic Model Checking
abstract
Topic models remain a black box both for modelers and for end users in many respects. From the modelers' perspective, many decisions must be made which lack clear rationales and whose interactions are unclear — for example, how many topics the algorithms should find (K), which words to ignore (aka the "stop list"), and whether it is adequate to run the modeling process once or multiple times, producing different results due to the algorithms that approximate the Bayesian priors. Furthermore, the results of different parameter settings are hard to analyze, summarize, and visualize, making model comparison difficult. From the end users' perspective, it is hard to understand why the models perform as they do, and information-theoretic similarity measures do not fully align with humanistic interpretation of the topics. We present the Topic Explorer, which advances the state-of-the-art in topic model visualization for document-document and topic-document relations. It brings topic models to life in a way that fosters deep understanding of both corpus and models, allowing users to generate interpretive hypotheses and to suggest further experiments. Such tools are an essential step toward assessing whether topic modeling is a suitable technique for AI and cognitive modeling applications.
Jaimie Murdock, Colin Allen
AAAI1
2010 Two Methods for Evaluating Dynamic Ontologies
Jaimie Murdock, Cameron Buckner, Colin Allen
KEOD1
2010 Evaluating Dynamic Ontologies
Jaimie Murdock, Cameron Buckner, Colin Allen
IC3K1