World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!
Andrea De Lucia

Andrea De Lucia

Award Badge
Computer Science
Italy
2025

D-Index & Metrics

Computer Science

D-Index
80
Citations
19482
World Ranking
1102
National Ranking
13

Andrea De Lucia 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 Andrea De Lucia 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: 345 publications — 81st percentile

81% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Andrea De Lucia 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 Andrea De Lucia 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: 80 D-Index — 93rd percentile

93% 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 Italy Leader Award
  • 2023 - Research.com Computer Science in Italy Leader Award
  • 2022 - Research.com Computer Science in Italy Leader Award

Overview

Andrea De Lucia is affiliated with the University of Salerno in Italy and has contributed extensively to the field of computer science, with a central focus on software engineering and related research areas. Their work spans a variety of subfields, including information systems, software development, artificial intelligence, signal processing, and computer science applications.

The scientist has published research on numerous topics, particularly within software engineering research and software reliability and analysis. Additional main themes in their research include advanced malware detection techniques, software testing and debugging methods, quantum computing algorithms and architecture, quantum information and cryptography, and cloud computing and resource management.

Andrea De Lucia's recent papers reflect attention to both empirical and theoretical issues within software engineering and software security. Notable recent publications include:

  • "A large empirical assessment of the role of data balancing in machine-learning-based code smell detection," 2020, Journal of Systems and Software
  • "The Secret Life of Software Vulnerabilities: A Large-Scale Empirical Study," 2022, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering
  • "Just-in-time software vulnerability detection: Are we there yet?", 2022, Journal of Systems and Software
  • "Software engineering for quantum programming: How far are we?", 2022, Journal of Systems and Software
  • "Fairness-aware machine learning engineering: how far are we?", 2023, Empirical Software Engineering

Their frequent coauthors include Fabio Palomba, Fabiano Pecorelli, Filomena Ferrucci, Emanuele Iannone, and Dario Di Nucci, indicating strong collaborative ties within the software engineering research community.

Andrea De Lucia has contributed to several reputable publication venues, with multiple papers in Empirical Software Engineering, arXiv (Cornell University), Journal of Systems and Software, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, and ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology.

Best Publications

  • Recovering traceability links between code and documentation

    G. Antoniol;G. Canfora;G. Casazza;A. De Lucia

  • Development and evaluation of a virtual campus on Second Life: The case of SecondDMI

    Andrea De Lucia;Rita Francese;Ignazio Passero;Genoveffa Tortora

  • Recovering traceability links in software artifact management systems using information retrieval methods

    Andrea De Lucia;Fausto Fasano;Rocco Oliveto;Genoveffa Tortora

  • On the diffuseness and the impact on maintainability of code smells: a large scale empirical investigation

    Fabio Palomba;Gabriele Bavota;Massimiliano Di Penta;Fausto Fasano

  • How to effectively use topic models for software engineering tasks? an approach based on genetic algorithms

    Annibale Panichella;Bogdan Dit;Rocco Oliveto;Massimilano Di Penta

  • Conditioned program slicing

    Gerardo Canfora;Aniello Cimitile;Andrea De Lucia

  • Mining Version Histories for Detecting Code Smells

    Fabio Palomba;Gabriele Bavota;Massimiliano Di Penta;Rocco Oliveto

  • Detecting bad smells in source code using change history information

    Fabio Palomba;Gabriele Bavota;Massimiliano Di Penta;Rocco Oliveto

  • Do They Really Smell Bad? A Study on Developers' Perception of Bad Code Smells

    Fabio Palomba;Gabriele Bavota;Massimiliano Di Penta;Rocco Oliveto

  • When and why your code starts to smell bad

    Michele Tufano;Fabio Palomba;Gabriele Bavota;Rocco Oliveto

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

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

  • An experimental investigation on the innate relationship between quality and refactoring

    Gabriele Bavota;Andrea De Lucia;Massimiliano Di Penta;Rocco Oliveto

  • When and Why Your Code Starts to Smell Bad (and Whether the Smells Go Away)

    Michele Tufano;Fabio Palomba;Gabriele Bavota;Rocco Oliveto

  • On the Equivalence of Information Retrieval Methods for Automated Traceability Link Recovery

    Rocco Oliveto;Malcom Gethers;Denys Poshyvanyk;Andrea De Lucia

  • User reviews matter! Tracking crowdsourced reviews to support evolution of successful apps

    Fabio Palomba;Mario Linares-Vasquez;Gabriele Bavota;Rocco Oliveto

  • Automatic query reformulations for text retrieval in software engineering

    Sonia Haiduc;Gabriele Bavota;Andrian Marcus;Rocco Oliveto

  • Understanding function behaviors through program slicing

    A. De Lucia;A.R. Fasolino;M. Munro

  • Are test smells really harmful? An empirical study

    Gabriele Bavota;Abdallah Qusef;Rocco Oliveto;Andrea Lucia

  • When Does a Refactoring Induce Bugs? An Empirical Study

    Gabriele Bavota;Bernardino De Carluccio;Andrea De Lucia;Massimiliano Di Penta

  • Multi-objective Cross-Project Defect Prediction

    Gerardo Canfora;Andrea De Lucia;Massimiliano Di Penta;Rocco Oliveto

  • [Journal First] On the Diffuseness and the Impact on Maintainability of Code Smells: A Large Scale Empirical Investigation

    Fabio Palomba;Gabriele Bavota;Massimiliano Di Penta;Fausto Fasano

Frequent Co-Authors

Rocco Oliveto
Rocco Oliveto University of Molise
Fabio Palomba
Fabio Palomba University of Salerno
Gabriele Bavota
Gabriele Bavota Universita della Svizzera Italiana
Genoveffa Tortora
Genoveffa Tortora University of Salerno
Massimiliano Di Penta
Massimiliano Di Penta University of Sannio
Denys Poshyvanyk
Denys Poshyvanyk William & Mary
Giuseppe Scanniello
Giuseppe Scanniello University of Salerno
Andy Zaidman
Andy Zaidman Delft University of Technology
Andrian Marcus
Andrian Marcus The University of Texas at Dallas
Gerardo Canfora
Gerardo Canfora University of Sannio

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

Pursuing a degree in computer science opens doors to a variety of related fields and career options. As technology evolves, there’s an increasing demand for interdisciplinary expertise. Many students consider branching out with online degrees in fields closely aligned with computer science.

For example, environmental engineering degrees online are becoming popular for those interested in sustainable technology and environmental solutions. If you’re drawn to mechanics and design, you might want to explore options like online mechanical engineering degrees, which often incorporate computer science principles in robotics and simulations.

For students fascinated by fundamental science and computation, earning a physics degree online can be a strategic choice, offering strong analytical and programming skills. Additionally, if you’re interested in statistics, machine learning, or big data, exploring the cheapest data science degree programs in the USA can prepare you for lucrative roles in this growing field.

These flexible online pathways make it easier than ever to tailor your education to your interests and career goals, all while gaining invaluable technical expertise.

Best Scientists Citing Andrea De Lucia

Trending Scientists