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.
You are facing the Mona Lisa
2012403 citationsSouvik Sen, Božidar Radunović 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 Tom Minka'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 Tom Minka with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Tom Minka more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers produced by Tom Minka. 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 Tom Minka. The network helps show where Tom Minka may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of Tom Minka
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Tom Minka.
A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Tom Minka 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 Tom Minka. Tom Minka 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.
Winn, John, Matteo Venanzi, Tom Minka, et al.. (2021). Enterprise Alexandria: Online High-Precision Enterprise Knowledge Base Construction with Typed Entities.1 indexed citations
Maddison, Chris J., Daniel Tarlow, & Tom Minka. (2014). A* Sampling. Neural Information Processing Systems. 27. 3086–3094.57 indexed citations
6.
Sen, Souvik, Božidar Radunović, Romit Roy Choudhury, & Tom Minka. (2012). Spot Localization using PHY Layer Information.38 indexed citations
7.
Knowles, David A. & Tom Minka. (2011). Non-conjugate Variational Message Passing for Multinomial and Binary Regression. Neural Information Processing Systems. 24. 1701–1709.43 indexed citations
Taylor, Michael, John Guiver, Stephen Robertson, & Tom Minka. (2008). SoftRank. 77–77.205 indexed citations
12.
Herbrich, Ralf, et al.. (2007). TrueSkill Through Time: Revisiting the History of Chess. HAL (Le Centre pour la Communication Scientifique Directe). 20. 337–344.58 indexed citations
13.
Sutton, Charles & Tom Minka. (2006). Local Training and Belief Propagation. 10.8 indexed citations
14.
Minka, Tom. (2006). The Dirichlet-tree distribution.20 indexed citations
15.
Minka, Tom & Zoubin Ghahramani. (2004). Expectation Propagation for Infinite Mixtures. Neural Information Processing Systems.9 indexed citations
16.
Rosenberg, Charles, et al.. (2003). Bayesian Color Constancy with Non-Gaussian Models. Neural Information Processing Systems. 16. 1595–1602.52 indexed citations
17.
Qi, Yuan & Tom Minka. (2003). Tree-structured Approximations by Expectation Propagation. Neural Information Processing Systems. 16. 193–200.44 indexed citations
18.
Minka, Tom. (2001). Using Lower Bounds to Approximate Integrals.18 indexed citations
19.
Minka, Tom. (2000). Empirical Risk Minimization is an Incomplete Inductive Principle.8 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.