Foundations of Software Engineering (FSE) (FSE)

The scientific conference ranking presented on this page offers a comprehensive and authoritative assessment of leading events in the field of Computer Science. This ranking has been meticulously prepared by Research.com, a premier platform recognized for delivering trusted scientific data and analysis across all major academic disciplines, including Computer Science, since 2014.

The ranking methodology is grounded in a unique bibliometric score developed exclusively by Research.com. This score takes into account two key factors: the estimated h-index and the number of leading scientists who have contributed to each conference during the preceding three years. This multifaceted approach ensures a robust evaluation of conferences, reflecting both the scholarly influence and the caliber of participating researchers.

All Impact Score values included in this ranking were gathered as of 2024-11-27, ensuring the most current and reliable assessment. The process leading to the final list was highly rigorous: more than 2,742 conferences were reviewed following a comprehensive inspection and a systematic analysis of over 148,739 scientific documents published within the last three years by a distinguished cohort of 13,184 leading scientists in Computer Science.

This level of scrutiny and commitment to accuracy highlights both the depth of research and the analytic sophistication adopted by the experts at Research.com. Readers seeking a more detailed understanding of the methodology employed in computing these ranking scores are encouraged to consult 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 Foundations of Software Engineering (based on the number of publications) are:

• David Lo (25 papers) published 5 papers at the last edition the same number as at the previous edition,
• Tao Xie (24 papers) published 1 paper at the last edition, 3 less than at the previous edition,
• Premkumar Devanbu (22 papers) published 1 paper at the last edition,
• Shing-Chi Cheung (21 papers) published 2 papers at the last edition, 1 more than at the previous edition,
• Hongyu Zhang (20 papers) published 4 papers at the last edition, 1 less than 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 Foundations of Software Engineering (based on the number of publications) are:

• Microsoft (113 papers) published 9 papers at the last edition, 3 less than at the previous edition,
• IBM (60 papers) published 3 papers at the last edition, 1 less than at the previous edition,
• Carnegie Mellon University (60 papers) published 6 papers at the last edition, 2 more than at the previous edition,
• North Carolina State University (58 papers) published 14 papers at the last edition, 8 more than at the previous edition,
• University of Illinois at Urbana–Champaign (55 papers) published 4 papers at the last edition the same number as 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 2021 edition, 4.79% of publications had an unrecognized affiliation. Out of the publications with recognized affiliations, 29.05% were posted by at least one author from the top 10 institutions publishing at the conference. Another 9.50% included authors affiliated with research institutions from the top 11-20 affiliations. Institutions from the 21-50 range included 26.82% of all publications and 34.64% 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.