World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!
Award Badge
Computer Science
Netherlands
2025

D-Index & Metrics

Computer Science

D-Index
56
Citations
10607
World Ranking
4131
National Ranking
52

Alexander Serebrenik publication distribution in Computer Science in 2026

The chart shows the distribution of publications by all Research.com ranked scientists in the field of Computer Science in 2026. The highlighted bar marks where Alexander Serebrenik sits on this spectrum.

32–41 publications: 7 scientists 42–51 publications: 22 scientists 52–61 publications: 82 scientists 62–71 publications: 134 scientists 72–81 publications: 249 scientists 82–91 publications: 324 scientists 92–101 publications: 421 scientists 102–111 publications: 420 scientists 112–121 publications: 497 scientists 122–131 publications: 544 scientists 132–141 publications: 555 scientists 142–151 publications: 609 scientists 152–161 publications: 559 scientists 162–171 publications: 534 scientists 172–181 publications: 556 scientists 182–191 publications: 583 scientists 192–201 publications: 519 scientists 202–211 publications: 508 scientists 212–221 publications: 490 scientists 222–231 publications: 437 scientists 232–241 publications: 423 scientists 242–251 publications: 408 scientists 252–261 publications: 377 scientists 262–271 publications: 301 scientists 272–281 publications: 335 scientists 282–291 publications: 320 scientists 292–301 publications: 293 scientists 302–311 publications: 250 scientists 312–321 publications: 238 scientists 322–331 publications: 206 scientists 332–341 publications: 209 scientists 342–351 publications: 208 scientists 352–361 publications: 162 scientists 362–371 publications: 176 scientists 372–381 publications: 127 scientists 382–391 publications: 158 scientists 392–401 publications: 128 scientists 402–411 publications: 104 scientists 412–421 publications: 94 scientists 422–431 publications: 99 scientists 432–441 publications: 83 scientists 442–451 publications: 108 scientists 452–461 publications: 73 scientists 462–471 publications: 77 scientists 472–481 publications: 69 scientists 482–491 publications: 84 scientists 492–501 publications: 62 scientists 502–511 publications: 54 scientists 512–521 publications: 57 scientists 522–531 publications: 51 scientists 532–541 publications: 51 scientists 542–551 publications: 32 scientists 552–561 publications: 38 scientists 562–571 publications: 28 scientists 572–581 publications: 43 scientists 582–591 publications: 33 scientists 592–601 publications: 41 scientists 602–611 publications: 32 scientists 612–621 publications: 28 scientists 622–631 publications: 25 scientists 632–641 publications: 27 scientists 642–651 publications: 17 scientists 652–661 publications: 20 scientists 662–671 publications: 17 scientists 672–681 publications: 15 scientists 682–691 publications: 14 scientists 692–701 publications: 21 scientists 702–711 publications: 13 scientists 712–721 publications: 12 scientists 722–731 publications: 19 scientists 732–741 publications: 14 scientists 742–751 publications: 12 scientists 752–761 publications: 10 scientists 762–771 publications: 10 scientists 772–781 publications: 11 scientists 782–791 publications: 10 scientists 792–801 publications: 11 scientists 802–811 publications: 8 scientists 812–821 publications: 8 scientists 822–831 publications: 7 scientists 832–841 publications: 11 scientists 842–851 publications: 10 scientists 852–861 publications: 5 scientists 862–871 publications: 9 scientists 872–881 publications: 4 scientists 882–891 publications: 6 scientists 892–901 publications: 3 scientists 902–911 publications: 6 scientists 912–921 publications: 3 scientists 922–931 publications: 2 scientists 932–941 publications: 2 scientists 942–951 publications: 2 scientists 952–961 publications: 3 scientists 962–971 publications: 3 scientists 972–981 publications: 3 scientists 982–990 publications: 5 scientists 991+ publications: 100 scientists
32 publications 991+

This scientist: 298 publications — 73rd percentile

73% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 991 publications or more.

Alexander Serebrenik D-index placement in Computer Science in 2026

The chart shows the D-index (discipline H-index) distribution of Computer Science scientists ranked by Research.com in 2026. The highlighted bar marks where Alexander Serebrenik sits on this spectrum.

30–31 D-Index: 879 scientists 32–33 D-Index: 983 scientists 34–35 D-Index: 918 scientists 36–37 D-Index: 990 scientists 38–39 D-Index: 968 scientists 40–41 D-Index: 907 scientists 42–43 D-Index: 821 scientists 44–45 D-Index: 763 scientists 46–47 D-Index: 689 scientists 48–49 D-Index: 543 scientists 50–51 D-Index: 543 scientists 52–53 D-Index: 518 scientists 54–55 D-Index: 500 scientists 56–57 D-Index: 458 scientists 58–59 D-Index: 400 scientists 60–61 D-Index: 337 scientists 62–63 D-Index: 308 scientists 64–65 D-Index: 292 scientists 66–67 D-Index: 249 scientists 68–69 D-Index: 213 scientists 70–71 D-Index: 192 scientists 72–73 D-Index: 189 scientists 74–75 D-Index: 165 scientists 76–77 D-Index: 139 scientists 78–79 D-Index: 119 scientists 80–81 D-Index: 121 scientists 82–83 D-Index: 113 scientists 84–85 D-Index: 88 scientists 86–87 D-Index: 87 scientists 88–89 D-Index: 75 scientists 90–91 D-Index: 69 scientists 92–93 D-Index: 57 scientists 94–95 D-Index: 46 scientists 96–97 D-Index: 38 scientists 98–99 D-Index: 34 scientists 100–101 D-Index: 36 scientists 102–103 D-Index: 27 scientists 104–105 D-Index: 37 scientists 106–107 D-Index: 18 scientists 108–109 D-Index: 31 scientists 110–111 D-Index: 19 scientists 112–113 D-Index: 16 scientists 114–115 D-Index: 12 scientists 116–117 D-Index: 20 scientists 118–119 D-Index: 15 scientists 120–121 D-Index: 5 scientists 122–123 D-Index: 20 scientists 124–125 D-Index: 8 scientists 126–127 D-Index: 5 scientists 128–129 D-Index: 7 scientists 130 D-Index: 3 scientists 131+ D-Index: 98 scientists
30 D-Index 131+

This scientist: 56 D-Index — 72nd percentile

72% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 131 D-Index or more.

Research.com Recognitions

  • 2025 - Research.com Computer Science in Netherlands Leader Award
  • 2022 - Research.com Computer Science in Netherlands Leader Award

Overview

Alexander Serebrenik is affiliated with Eindhoven University of Technology in the Netherlands, contributing extensively to the field of computer science. Their work spans over 126 publications focusing primarily on software engineering and related areas.

Their research covers several main topics, including:

  • Software Engineering Research
  • Software Engineering Techniques and Practices
  • Open Source Software Innovations
  • Software System Performance and Reliability
  • Software Reliability and Analysis Research
  • Advanced Malware Detection Techniques
  • Model-Driven Software Engineering Techniques

The subfields associated with their work include:

  • Information Systems
  • Software
  • Computer Science Applications
  • Computer Networks and Communications
  • Artificial Intelligence

Alexander Serebrenik has published papers in a variety of venues, with a notable frequency in:

  • Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
  • IEEE Software
  • Empirical Software Engineering
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
  • ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology

Recent papers include:

  • The Diversity Crisis in Software Development, 2021, IEEE Software
  • How bugs are born: a model to identify how bugs are introduced in software components, 2020, Empirical Software Engineering
  • Emotions and Perceived Productivity of Software Developers at the Workplace, 2021, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering
  • Opinion Mining for Software Development: A Systematic Literature Review, 2022, ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology
  • A systematic literature review of cross-domain model consistency checking by model management tools, 2020, Software & Systems Modeling

The scientist collaborates regularly with several co-authors, including:

  • Miroslaw Staron
  • Nicole Novielli
  • Birgit Penzenstadler
  • Nathan Cassee
  • Sebastian Baltes

Best Publications

  • Process Discovery using Integer Linear Programming

    J. M. E. M. van derWerf;B. F. van Dongen;C. A. J. Hurkens;A. Serebrenik

  • Gender and Tenure Diversity in GitHub Teams

    Bogdan Vasilescu;Daryl Posnett;Baishakhi Ray;Mark G.J. van den Brand

  • StackOverflow and GitHub: Associations between Software Development and Crowdsourced Knowledge

    Bogdan Vasilescu;Vladimir Filkov;Alexander Serebrenik

  • Detecting code smells using machine learning techniques: Are we there yet?

    Dario Di Nucci;Fabio Palomba;Damian A. Tamburri;Alexander Serebrenik

  • EnTagRec ++: An enhanced tag recommendation system for software information sites

    Shaowei Wang;David Lo;Bogdan Vasilescu;Alexander Serebrenik

  • How social Q&A sites are changing knowledge sharing in open source software communities

    Bogdan Vasilescu;Alexander Serebrenik;Prem Devanbu;Vladimir Filkov

  • Rewriting aggregate queries using views

    Sara Cohen;Werner Nutt;Alexander Serebrenik

  • Security and emotion: sentiment analysis of security discussions on GitHub

    Daniel Pletea;Bogdan Vasilescu;Alexander Serebrenik

  • On negative results when using sentiment analysis tools for software engineering research

    Robbert Jongeling;Proshanta Sarkar;Subhajit Datta;Alexander Serebrenik

  • Process discovery using integer linear programming

    J.M.E.M. van der Werf;B.F. van Dongen;K.M. van Hee;C.A.J. Hurkens

  • The impact of continuous integration on other software development practices: a large-scale empirical study

    Yangyang Zhao;Alexander Serebrenik;Yuming Zhou;Vladimir Filkov

  • Process Mining Software Repositories

    Wouter Poncin;Alexander Serebrenik;Mark van den Brand

  • Lean GHTorrent: GitHub data on demand

    Georgios Gousios;Bogdan Vasilescu;Alexander Serebrenik;Andy Zaidman

  • Why Developers Are Slacking Off: Understanding How Software Teams Use Slack

    Bin Lin;Alexey Zagalsky;Margaret-Anne Storey;Alexander Serebrenik

  • Code of conduct in open source projects

    Parastou Tourani;Bram Adams;Alexander Serebrenik

  • Gender, Representation and Online Participation: A Quantitative Study of StackOverflow

    B. Vasilescu;A. Capiluppi;A. Serebrenik

  • Gender, representation and online participation : a quantitative study

    Bogdan Vasilescu;Andrea Capiluppi;Alexander Serebrenik

  • Challenges for static analysis of Java reflection: literature review and empirical study

    Davy Landman;Alexander Serebrenik;Jurgen J. Vinju

  • Gender diversity and women in software teams: how do they affect community smells?

    Gemma Catolino;Fabio Palomba;Damian A. Tamburri;Alexander Serebrenik

  • On the variation and specialisation of workload--A case study of the Gnome ecosystem community

    Bogdan Vasilescu;Alexander Serebrenik;Mathieu Goeminne;Tom Mens

  • Why developers are slacking off

    B. Lin;Alexey Zagalsky;Margaret-Anne D. Storey;A. Serebrenik

Frequent Co-Authors

Mark van den Brand
Mark van den Brand Eindhoven University of Technology
Bogdan Vasilescu
Bogdan Vasilescu Carnegie Mellon University
Fabio Palomba
Fabio Palomba University of Salerno
Damian A. Tamburri
Damian A. Tamburri Eindhoven University of Technology
Tom Mens
Tom Mens University of Mons
Andy Zaidman
Andy Zaidman Delft University of Technology
Vladimir Filkov
Vladimir Filkov University of California, Davis
Jürgen Giesl
Jürgen Giesl RWTH Aachen University
Werner Nutt
Werner Nutt Free University of Bozen-Bolzano
Gregorio Robles
Gregorio Robles King Juan Carlos University

If you think any of the details on this page are incorrect, let us know.

Report an issue

We appreciate your kind effort to assist us to improve this page, it would be helpful providing us with as much detail as possible in the text box below:

Related Online Degrees & Career Pathways

Exploring Computer Science in the USA opens many doors for flexible, online learning options. Many aspiring professionals now choose remote education for its affordability and convenience. For example, there are several affordable graduate schools that offer online master's programs in computer science and related fields. These programs are ideal for students looking to boost their credentials while managing costs.

For those interested in advancing to leadership roles, pursuing the cheapest online doctorate in organizational leadership can be a smart way to specialize further without incurring heavy debt. Similarly, if you’re seeking quicker entry into the workforce, you might explore easy associate degrees that pay well—many technology-focused options exist, offering strong salary potential with just two years of study.

Understanding how much does a doctorate in education cost is also important for educators and organizational leaders aiming to move up in the academic or tech sector. Whether starting with an associate or pursuing a doctorate, online degrees provide diverse, affordable pathways toward a rewarding tech career.

Best Scientists Citing Alexander Serebrenik

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles