Chalermek Intanagonwiwat
Thai computer scientist
Chalermek Intanagonwiwat (Thai: เฉลิมเอก อินทนากรวิวัฒน์, RTGS: Chaloem-ek Inthanakonwiwat) is a computer scientist best known for his work on directed diffusion under the supervision of Deborah Estrin, Ramesh Govindan, and John Heidemann. In 2013 he moved to San Jose, California to work at Cisco Systems, Inc.
Intanagonwiwat earned his bachelor's degree in Computer Engineering from King Mongkut's Institute of Technology Ladkrabang in Thailand and pursued his M.S. and Ph.D. degrees in Computer Science at the University of Southern California, USA. He worked as postdoc researcher at Rutgers University, USA. His research interests include computer networks and distributed systems (particularly, large-scale wireless networks of distributed embedded systems, sensor networks, ad hoc networks, cooperative computing, mobile computing, pervasive computing, and ubiquitous computing). From 2003 - 2013, he taught in the Department of Computer Engineering, Chulalongkorn University.
According to Citeseer Research Index [1], Dr. Intanagonwiwat is among the top 0.73% most cited authors in Computer Science. Microsoft Academic Search [2] has placed him among the 200 most-cited computer scientists in Networks and Communications.
The public source identifies “Chalermek Intanagonwiwat” as thai computer scientist. This brief keeps that definition visible, then builds a research path around Chalermek, Intanagonwiwat and Thai.
Why this record matters
A short description can identify a subject without explaining its stakes. For “Chalermek Intanagonwiwat”, the useful work is to connect “thai computer scientist” to the records capable of establishing context and consequence.
The entry’s evidential value lies in the named roles, institutions and publications that can be tested against primary documentation. The source revision retrieved here is dated Jul 21, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q5068705. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 2013 and 2003.
Public reputation and documentary evidence do not always develop together; absence from a summary is not evidence of historical absence. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Read biographical claims against dates, named institutions and the cited references. Distinguish a subject’s later reputation from evidence produced during their lifetime.
- Establishing names and roles
- Building a first chronology
- Locating cited institutions
Personal papers, civil or court records, institutional files and the scholarship cited by the source.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “Chalermek Intanagonwiwat”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow Chalermek Intanagonwiwat primary sources, Chalermek Intanagonwiwat archive and Chalermek research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Chalermek Intanagonwiwat”?
- How has the subject’s reputation changed across later accounts?
- Which claims depend on a single source or contested interpretation?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “Chalermek Intanagonwiwat” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.