2026 IEEE International Conference on Bioinformatics and Biomedicine (BIBM 2026) (BIBM)

The scientific conference ranking presented on this page highlights the most impactful events in the field of Computer Science. This comprehensive ranking has been meticulously prepared by Research.com, a leading platform renowned for providing trusted data and authoritative analyses of scientific contributions across all major disciplines, including Computer Science, since 2014.

The ranking is determined based on a unique bibliometric score developed by Research.com. This score is calculated using a combination of the estimated h-index and the number of leading scientists who have participated in each conference over the course of the past three years. The result is a robust assessment that fairly compares the influence and prestige of scientific conferences within the Computer Science domain.

The Impact Score values featured in this ranking are derived from data collected on 2024-11-27, ensuring relevancy and up-to-date insights for the academic community. The creation of this ranking required extensive analysis of over 2,742 conferences, selected through a rigorous process involving detailed scrutiny of more than 148,739 scientific documents published over the last three years. These publications represent the significant work of 13,184 leading and respected scientists within the Computer Science field, further supporting the reliability and depth of the ranking.

To maintain the highest standards of accuracy and objectivity, the methodology applied for this ranking involved a thorough evaluation by subject-matter experts and data analysts. More comprehensive details about the methodology and the specific processes used to calculate the ranking scores can be found on 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 Bioinformatics and Biomedicine (based on the number of publications) are:

• Xiaohua Hu (34 papers) published 3 papers at the last edition, 7 less than at the previous edition,
• Zhaohui Liang (27 papers) absent at the last edition,
• Taesung Park (21 papers) published 5 papers at the last edition, 1 less than at the previous edition,
• Ziping Li (20 papers) absent at the last edition,
• Amarda Shehu (19 papers) published 2 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 Bioinformatics and Biomedicine (based on the number of publications) are:

• Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine (103 papers) published 3 papers at the last edition, 16 less than at the previous edition,
• Drexel University (42 papers) published 2 papers at the last edition, 7 less than at the previous edition,
• George Mason University (29 papers) published 3 papers at the last edition, 1 more than at the previous edition,
• Tongji University (28 papers) published 6 papers at the last edition the same number as at the previous edition,
• Dalian University of Technology (28 papers) published 8 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 2015 edition, 2.19% of publications had an unrecognized affiliation. Out of the publications with recognized affiliations, 14.42% were posted by at least one author from the top 10 institutions publishing at the conference. Another 6.09% included authors affiliated with research institutions from the top 11-20 affiliations. Institutions from the 21-50 range included 16.99% of all publications and 62.50% 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.