33rd British Machine Vision Conference (BMVC)

The presented ranking features leading scientific conferences in the field of Engineering and Technology, offering a comprehensive assessment based on rigorous quantitative and qualitative analysis. Developed by Research.com, a trusted authority in science research since 2014, this ranking benefits from over a decade of specialization in providing reliable data on academic contributions across all major scientific disciplines, including Engineering and Technology.

The position of each conference in the ranking is determined by an exclusive bibliometric score, meticulously designed by Research.com. This score is calculated using a combination of the estimated h-index and the number of prominent scientists who have participated in each conference over the preceding three years. This multifaceted approach ensures that the ranking accurately reflects both the scholarly impact and the level of engagement from thought leaders in the field.

Significantly, the Impact Score values associated with each conference were collected as of 2024-11-27, ensuring the most current and relevant data informs the analysis. The ranking process itself was comprehensive, involving an examination of over 2,262 conferences, each selected following a detailed and rigorous inspection of 26,934 scientific documents published in the last three years by 9,385 esteemed and well-respected scientists within Engineering and Technology.

This methodical and exacting evaluation ensures the utmost reliability and authority of the ranking, enabling academics, industry professionals, and decision-makers to confidently identify the most influential scientific conferences in the domain. For a comprehensive explanation of the methodology and scoring system, please refer to our Methodology Page.

Papers citation over time

A key indicator for each conference is its effectiveness in reaching other researchers with the papers published at that venue.

The chart below presents the interquartile range (first quartile 25%, median 50% and third quartile 75%) of the number of citations of articles over time.

Top authors and change over time

The top authors publishing at British Machine Vision Conference (based on the number of publications) are:

• Andrew Zisserman (30 papers) published 4 papers at the last edition, 3 more than at the previous edition,
• Horst Bischof (28 papers) published 2 papers at the last edition, 1 more than at the previous edition,
• Luc Van Gool (25 papers) absent at the last edition,
• Shaogang Gong (22 papers) published 1 paper at the last edition, 1 less than at the previous edition,
• Tao Xiang (20 papers) absent at the last edition.

The overall trend for top authors publishing at this conference is outlined below. The chart shows the number of publications at each edition of the conference for top authors.

Top affiliations and change over time

Only papers with recognized affiliations are considered

The top affiliations publishing at British Machine Vision Conference (based on the number of publications) are:

• University of Oxford (56 papers) published 7 papers at the last edition, 1 more than at the previous edition,
• Queen Mary University of London (45 papers) published 4 papers at the last edition, 2 less than at the previous edition,
• ETH Zurich (38 papers) published 7 papers at the last edition, 4 more than at the previous edition,
• Microsoft (30 papers) published 2 papers at the last edition, 2 less than at the previous edition,
• Chinese Academy of Sciences (29 papers) published 6 papers at the last edition, 5 more than at the previous edition.

The overall trend for top affiliations publishing at this conference is outlined below. The chart shows the number of publications at each edition of the conference for top affiliations.

Publication chance based on affiliation

The publication chance index shows the ratio of articles published by the best research institutions at the conference edition to all articles published within that conference. The best research institutions were selected based on the largest number of articles published during all editions of the conference.

The chart below presents the percentage ratio of articles from top institutions (based on their ranking of total papers).Top affiliations were grouped by their rank into the following tiers: top 1-10, top 11-20, top 21-50, and top 51+. Only articles with a recognized affiliation are considered.

During the most recent 2017 edition, 11.65% of publications had an unrecognized affiliation. Out of the publications with recognized affiliations, 21.43% were posted by at least one author from the top 10 institutions publishing at the conference. Another 10.44% included authors affiliated with research institutions from the top 11-20 affiliations. Institutions from the 21-50 range included 20.88% of all publications and 47.25% were from other institutions.

Returning Authors Index

A very common phenomenon observed among researchers publishing scientific articles is the intentional selection of conferences they have already attended in the past. In particular, it is worth analyzing the case when the authors participate in the same conference from year to year.

The Returning Authors Index presented below illustrates the ratio of authors who participated in both a given as well as the previous edition of the conference in relation to all participants in a given year.

Returning Institution Index

The graph below shows the Returning Institution Index, illustrating the ratio of institutions that participated in both a given and the previous edition of the conference in relation to all affiliations present in a given year.

The experience to innovation index

Our experience to innovation index was created to show a cross-section of the experience level of authors publishing at a conference. The index includes the authors publishing at the last edition of a conference, grouped by total number of publications throughout their academic career (P) and the total number of citations of these publications ever received (C).

The group intervals were selected empirically to best show the diversity of the authors' experiences, their labels were selected as a convenience, not as judgment. The authors were divided into the following groups:

• Novice - P < 5 or C < 25 (the number of publications less than 5 or the number of citations less than 25),
• Competent - P < 10 or C < 100 (the number of publications less than 10 or the number of citations less than 100),
• Experienced - P < 25 or C < 625 (the number of publications less than 25 or the number of citations less than 625),
• Master - P < 50 or C < 2500 (the number of publications less than 50 or the number of citations less than 2500),
• Star - P ≥ 50 and C ≥ 2500 (both the number of publications greater than 50 and the number of citations greater than 2500).

The chart below illustrates experience levels of first authors in cases of publications with multiple authors.