Hit papers significantly outperform the citation benchmark for their cohort. A paper qualifies
if it has ≥500 total citations, achieves ≥1.5× the top-1% citation threshold for papers in the
same subfield and year (this is the minimum needed to enter the top 1%, not the average
within it), or reaches the top citation threshold in at least one of its specific research
topics.
Evaluating collaborative filtering recommender systems
20043.7k citationsJoseph A. Konstan, Loren Terveen et al.profile →
Exploring the filter bubble
2014256 citationsTien Thanh Nguyen, Loren Terveen et al.profile →
Peers — A (Enhanced Table)
Peers by citation overlap · career bar shows stage (early→late)
cites ·
hero ref
This map shows the geographic impact of Loren Terveen'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 Loren Terveen with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Loren Terveen more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers produced by Loren Terveen. 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 Loren Terveen. The network helps show where Loren Terveen may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of Loren Terveen
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Loren Terveen.
A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Loren Terveen 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 Loren Terveen. Loren Terveen is excluded from
the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.
Nguyen, Tien Thanh, et al.. (2014). WWW 2014 - Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on World Wide Web.113 indexed citations
8.
Terveen, Loren, et al.. (2011). Quality is a verb. 29–38.42 indexed citations
9.
Zhou, Changqing, Shashi Shekhar, & Loren Terveen. (2008). Discovering Personal Paths from Sparse GPS Traces.11 indexed citations
10.
Cosley, Dan, Dan Frankowski, Loren Terveen, & John Riedl. (2007). SuggestBot. 32–41.170 indexed citations
11.
Zhou, Changqing, Dan Frankowski, Pamela Ludford, Shashi Shekhar, & Loren Terveen. (2004). Discovering personal gazetteers. 266–273.105 indexed citations
12.
Zhou, Changqing, Dan Frankowski, Pamela Ludford, Shashi Shekhar, & Loren Terveen. (2004). Discovering personal gazetteers: An interactive clustering approach.4 indexed citations
13.
Ludford, Pamela & Loren Terveen. (2003). Does an Individual's Myers-Briggs Type Indicator Preference Influence Task-Oriented Technology Use?. International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction.14 indexed citations
14.
Terveen, Loren, et al.. (2002). Extended abstracts : Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems : CHI 2002 changing the world, changing ourselves, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA, 20-25 April 2002/ editors, Loren Terveen, ... [et. al.] ; sponsored by ACM's Special Interest Group on Computer-Human Interaction (ACM SIGCHI). Association for Computing Machinery eBooks.6 indexed citations
Bickhard, Mark H. & Loren Terveen. (1995). Foundational Issues in Artificial Intelligence and Cognitive Science: Impasse and Solution. Elsevier eBooks.203 indexed citations
19.
Levinson, Robert, Susan L. Epstein, Loren Terveen, et al.. (1994). AAAI 1993 Fall Symposium Reports. AI Magazine. 15(1). 14.2 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.