David Rouse

538 total citations
20 papers, 386 citations indexed

About

David Rouse is a scholar working on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, Cognitive Neuroscience and Media Technology. According to data from OpenAlex, David Rouse has authored 20 papers receiving a total of 386 indexed citations (citations by other indexed papers that have themselves been cited), including 10 papers in Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 6 papers in Cognitive Neuroscience and 5 papers in Media Technology. Recurrent topics in David Rouse's work include Image and Video Quality Assessment (8 papers), Advanced Image Fusion Techniques (5 papers) and Visual perception and processing mechanisms (5 papers). David Rouse is often cited by papers focused on Image and Video Quality Assessment (8 papers), Advanced Image Fusion Techniques (5 papers) and Visual perception and processing mechanisms (5 papers). David Rouse collaborates with scholars based in United States, France and Canada. David Rouse's co-authors include S.S. Hemami, Michael Sullivan, Scott R. Bishop, S. Johnston, Romuald Pépion, Patrick Le Callet, Upton Hatch, H.J. Trussell, John Harer and Elizabeth Munch and has published in prestigious journals such as Nucleic Acids Research, Journal of the Optical Society of America A and Cognitive Therapy and Research.

In The Last Decade

David Rouse

19 papers receiving 367 citations

Peers — A (Enhanced Table)

Peers by citation overlap · career bar shows stage (early→late) cites · hero ref

Name h Career Trend Papers Cites
David Rouse United States 10 204 77 72 71 34 20 386
Gary Greenfield United States 10 149 0.7× 14 0.2× 6 0.1× 68 1.0× 25 0.7× 53 412
Qiqiang Chen China 9 161 0.8× 162 2.1× 25 0.3× 15 0.2× 5 0.1× 29 471
James D. K. Kim South Korea 12 150 0.7× 46 0.6× 4 0.1× 23 0.3× 11 0.3× 38 449
Michael L. Davidson United States 8 49 0.2× 18 0.2× 8 0.1× 252 3.5× 66 1.9× 21 505
Gregory D. Snyder United States 6 57 0.3× 16 0.2× 29 0.4× 180 2.5× 18 0.5× 6 384
Dimitris Samaras United States 6 159 0.8× 5 0.1× 7 0.1× 65 0.9× 25 0.7× 14 315
Jens-Uwe Garbas Germany 11 140 0.7× 10 0.1× 16 0.2× 62 0.9× 74 2.2× 23 300
Baobin Li China 10 214 1.0× 13 0.2× 6 0.1× 44 0.6× 83 2.4× 34 395
Elan Barenholtz United States 14 129 0.6× 5 0.1× 8 0.1× 265 3.7× 129 3.8× 41 513
Lara Thompson United States 9 33 0.2× 22 0.3× 12 0.2× 108 1.5× 6 0.2× 44 388

Countries citing papers authored by David Rouse

Since Specialization
Citations

This map shows the geographic impact of David Rouse's research. It shows the number of citations coming from papers published by authors working in each country. You can also color the map by specialization and compare the number of citations received by David Rouse with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites David Rouse more than expected).

Fields of papers citing papers by David Rouse

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers produced by David Rouse. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the papers produced by David Rouse. The network helps show where David Rouse may publish in the future.

Co-authorship network of co-authors of David Rouse

This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of David Rouse. A scholar is included among the top collaborators of David Rouse based on the total number of citations received by their joint publications. Widths of edges represent the number of papers authors have co-authored together. Node borders signify the number of papers an author published with David Rouse. David Rouse is excluded from the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.

All Works

20 of 20 papers shown
1.
Rouse, David, David W. Porter, John Harer, et al.. (2015). Feature-aided multiple hypothesis tracking using topological and statistical behavior classifiers. Proceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE. 9474. 94740L–94740L. 9 indexed citations
2.
Rouse, David, S.S. Hemami, Romuald Pépion, & Patrick Le Callet. (2011). Estimating the usefulness of distorted natural images using an image contour degradation measure. Journal of the Optical Society of America A. 28(2). 157–157. 16 indexed citations
3.
Rouse, David, et al.. (2011). Measuring contour degradation in natural image utility assessment: methods and analysis. Proceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE. 7865. 78650U–78650U. 1 indexed citations
4.
Rouse, David, Yiran Wang, Fan Zhang, & S.S. Hemami. (2010). A novel technique to acquire perceived utility scores from textual descriptions of distorted natural images. 7240. 2505–2508. 2 indexed citations
5.
Rouse, David, Romuald Pépion, Patrick Le Callet, & S.S. Hemami. (2010). Tradeoffs in subjective testing methods for image and video quality assessment. Proceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE. 7527. 75270F–75270F. 26 indexed citations
6.
Rouse, David, Romuald Pépion, S.S. Hemami, & Patrick Le Callet. (2009). Image utility assessment and a relationship with image quality assessment. Proceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE. 7240. 724010–724010. 37 indexed citations
7.
Rouse, David & S.S. Hemami. (2009). Natural image utility assessment using image contours. 7240. 2217–2220. 14 indexed citations
8.
Ulichney, Robert, et al.. (2009). A low-complexity reduced-reference print identification algorithm. 1289–1292. 2 indexed citations
9.
Rouse, David & S.S. Hemami. (2008). Understanding and simplifying the structural similarity metric. 1188–1191. 63 indexed citations
10.
Witmer, Gary W., et al.. (2008). RAPTOR USE OF ARTIFICIAL PERCHES AT NATURAL AREAS,CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COLORADO. Insecta mundi. 8 indexed citations
11.
Rouse, David & S.S. Hemami. (2008). Analyzing the role of visual structure in the recognition of natural image content with multi-scale SSIM. Proceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE. 6806. 680615–680615. 59 indexed citations
12.
Rouse, David & S.S. Hemami. (2007). Quantifying the use of structure in cognitive tasks. Proceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE. 6492. 64921O–64921O. 12 indexed citations
13.
Trussell, H.J. & David Rouse. (2005). Reducing Non-Zero Coefficients In Fir Filter Design Using Pocs. INFM-OAR (INFN Catania). 1–4. 5 indexed citations
14.
Rouse, David. (2005). Estimation of Finite Mixture Models. NCSU Libraries Repository (North Carolina State University Libraries). 2 indexed citations
15.
Rouse, David & H.J. Trussell. (2004). Estimation of mixture densities from histograms [signal classification]. 2. ii–549.
16.
Rouse, David. (2003). Route planning using pattern classification and search techniques. 2015–2020. 3 indexed citations
17.
Sullivan, Michael, David Rouse, Scott R. Bishop, & S. Johnston. (1997). Thought Suppression, Catastrophizing, and Pain. Cognitive Therapy and Research. 21(5). 555–568. 111 indexed citations
18.
Rouse, David, et al.. (1993). Nucleotide sequence analysis of the ribosomal S12 gene ofMycobacterium intracellulare. Nucleic Acids Research. 21(4). 1039–1039. 1 indexed citations
19.
Masser, Michael P., David Rouse, & Christopher M. Austin. (1990). Australian red claw crayfish: a potential culture species for Alabama. 1 indexed citations
20.
Hatch, Upton, et al.. (1987). Demonstrating the Use of Risk Programming for Aquacultural Farm Management:. Journal of the World Aquaculture Society. 18(4). 260–269. 14 indexed citations

Rankless uses publication and citation data sourced from OpenAlex, an open and comprehensive bibliographic database. While OpenAlex provides broad and valuable coverage of the global research landscape, it—like all bibliographic datasets—has inherent limitations. These include incomplete records, variations in author disambiguation, differences in journal indexing, and delays in data updates. As a result, some metrics and network relationships displayed in Rankless may not fully capture the entirety of a scholar's output or impact.

Explore authors with similar magnitude of impact

Rankless by CCL
2026