scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Institution

University of Texas at Austin

EducationAustin, Texas, United States
About: University of Texas at Austin is a education organization based out in Austin, Texas, United States. It is known for research contribution in the topics: Population & Poison control. The organization has 94352 authors who have published 206297 publications receiving 9070052 citations. The organization is also known as: UT-Austin & UT Austin.


Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: This paper presents the top 10 data mining algorithms identified by the IEEE International Conference on Data Mining (ICDM) in December 2006: C4.5, k-Means, SVM, Apriori, EM, PageRank, AdaBoost, kNN, Naive Bayes, and CART.
Abstract: This paper presents the top 10 data mining algorithms identified by the IEEE International Conference on Data Mining (ICDM) in December 2006: C4.5, k-Means, SVM, Apriori, EM, PageRank, AdaBoost, kNN, Naive Bayes, and CART. These top 10 algorithms are among the most influential data mining algorithms in the research community. With each algorithm, we provide a description of the algorithm, discuss the impact of the algorithm, and review current and further research on the algorithm. These 10 algorithms cover classification, clustering, statistical learning, association analysis, and link mining, which are all among the most important topics in data mining research and development.

4,944 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, a theoretical framework that relates three aspects of a firm's ego network (direct ties, indirect ties, and indirect ties) is proposed to assess the effects of a firms network of relations on innovation.
Abstract: To assess the effects of a firm's network of relations on innovation, this paper elaborates a theoretical framework that relates three aspects of a firm's ego network—direct ties, indirect ties, an...

4,829 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: An overview of commercially available model predictive control (MPC) technology, both linear and nonlinear, based primarily on data provided by MPC vendors, is provided in this article, where a brief history of industrial MPC technology is presented first, followed by results of our vendor survey of MPC control and identification technology.

4,819 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
13 Dec 2016-JAMA
TL;DR: An algorithm based on deep machine learning had high sensitivity and specificity for detecting referable diabetic retinopathy and diabetic macular edema in retinal fundus photographs from adults with diabetes.
Abstract: Importance Deep learning is a family of computational methods that allow an algorithm to program itself by learning from a large set of examples that demonstrate the desired behavior, removing the need to specify rules explicitly. Application of these methods to medical imaging requires further assessment and validation. Objective To apply deep learning to create an algorithm for automated detection of diabetic retinopathy and diabetic macular edema in retinal fundus photographs. Design and Setting A specific type of neural network optimized for image classification called a deep convolutional neural network was trained using a retrospective development data set of 128 175 retinal images, which were graded 3 to 7 times for diabetic retinopathy, diabetic macular edema, and image gradability by a panel of 54 US licensed ophthalmologists and ophthalmology senior residents between May and December 2015. The resultant algorithm was validated in January and February 2016 using 2 separate data sets, both graded by at least 7 US board-certified ophthalmologists with high intragrader consistency. Exposure Deep learning–trained algorithm. Main Outcomes and Measures The sensitivity and specificity of the algorithm for detecting referable diabetic retinopathy (RDR), defined as moderate and worse diabetic retinopathy, referable diabetic macular edema, or both, were generated based on the reference standard of the majority decision of the ophthalmologist panel. The algorithm was evaluated at 2 operating points selected from the development set, one selected for high specificity and another for high sensitivity. Results The EyePACS-1 data set consisted of 9963 images from 4997 patients (mean age, 54.4 years; 62.2% women; prevalence of RDR, 683/8878 fully gradable images [7.8%]); the Messidor-2 data set had 1748 images from 874 patients (mean age, 57.6 years; 42.6% women; prevalence of RDR, 254/1745 fully gradable images [14.6%]). For detecting RDR, the algorithm had an area under the receiver operating curve of 0.991 (95% CI, 0.988-0.993) for EyePACS-1 and 0.990 (95% CI, 0.986-0.995) for Messidor-2. Using the first operating cut point with high specificity, for EyePACS-1, the sensitivity was 90.3% (95% CI, 87.5%-92.7%) and the specificity was 98.1% (95% CI, 97.8%-98.5%). For Messidor-2, the sensitivity was 87.0% (95% CI, 81.1%-91.0%) and the specificity was 98.5% (95% CI, 97.7%-99.1%). Using a second operating point with high sensitivity in the development set, for EyePACS-1 the sensitivity was 97.5% and specificity was 93.4% and for Messidor-2 the sensitivity was 96.1% and specificity was 93.9%. Conclusions and Relevance In this evaluation of retinal fundus photographs from adults with diabetes, an algorithm based on deep machine learning had high sensitivity and specificity for detecting referable diabetic retinopathy. Further research is necessary to determine the feasibility of applying this algorithm in the clinical setting and to determine whether use of the algorithm could lead to improved care and outcomes compared with current ophthalmologic assessment.

4,810 citations


Authors

Showing all 95138 results

NameH-indexPapersCitations
George M. Whitesides2401739269833
Eugene Braunwald2301711264576
Yi Chen2174342293080
Robert J. Lefkowitz214860147995
Joseph L. Goldstein207556149527
Eric N. Olson206814144586
Hagop M. Kantarjian2043708210208
Rakesh K. Jain2001467177727
Francis S. Collins196743250787
Gordon B. Mills1871273186451
Scott M. Grundy187841231821
Michael S. Brown185422123723
Eric Boerwinkle1831321170971
Aaron R. Folsom1811118134044
Jiaguo Yu178730113300
Network Information
Related Institutions (5)
Stanford University
320.3K papers, 21.8M citations

97% related

Columbia University
224K papers, 12.8M citations

96% related

University of California, San Diego
204.5K papers, 12.3M citations

96% related

University of Michigan
342.3K papers, 17.6M citations

96% related

University of Washington
305.5K papers, 17.7M citations

95% related

Performance
Metrics
No. of papers from the Institution in previous years
YearPapers
2023304
20221,210
202110,141
202010,331
20199,727
20188,973