Computing in Cardiology Conference (CinC)

This comprehensive ranking presents a detailed evaluation of scientific conferences in the field of Computer Science. Meticulously prepared by Research.com, one of the leading websites for science research across all major fields—including Computer Science—Research.com has provided trusted data on scientific contributions since 2014. The position of each conference in this ranking is determined by a unique bibliometric score formulated by Research.com, which is computed using the estimated h-index and the number of leading scientists who have participated in each conference during the previous three years.

The ranking incorporates Impact Score values that have been gathered as of 2024-11-27, reflecting the most current and relevant data available. The rigorous process behind the selection and analysis involved the examination of more than 2,742 conferences. These conferences were chosen after an exhaustive and thorough inspection of over 148,739 scientific documents published in the last three years by 13,184 of the most respected and prominent scientists in the domain of Computer Science.

This analytical approach ensures that the ranking not only reflects the volume and quality of scientific contributions, but also highlights the influence and significance of conferences within the field. The depth of research and complexity of the analysis underscores the expertise and careful consideration that went into creating this authoritative resource.

For a comprehensive overview of the process and the specific criteria used in computing the ranking scores, 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 Computing in Cardiology Conference (based on the number of publications) are:

• Pablo Laguna (130 papers) published 14 papers at the last edition, 4 more than at the previous edition,
• Henggui Zhang (112 papers) published 7 papers at the last edition, 7 less than at the previous edition,
• Alan Murray (93 papers) absent at the last edition,
• Roger G. Mark (76 papers) absent at the last edition,
• Javier Saiz (74 papers) published 4 papers at the last edition the same number as at the previous 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 Computing in Cardiology Conference (based on the number of publications) are:

• Polytechnic University of Valencia (142 papers) published 28 papers at the last edition, 17 more than at the previous edition,
• University of Zaragoza (139 papers) published 13 papers at the last edition the same number as at the previous edition,
• University of Bologna (124 papers) published 11 papers at the last edition, 4 more than at the previous edition,
• Massachusetts Institute of Technology (122 papers) published 1 paper at the last edition the same number as at the previous edition,
• Polytechnic University of Milan (114 papers) published 11 papers at the last edition, 3 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 2020 edition, 5.70% of publications had an unrecognized affiliation. Out of the publications with recognized affiliations, 31.67% were posted by at least one author from the top 10 institutions publishing at the conference. Another 16.01% included authors affiliated with research institutions from the top 11-20 affiliations. Institutions from the 21-50 range included 18.15% of all publications and 34.16% 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.