World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Computer Science

D-Index
42
Citations
6705
World Ranking
8461
National Ranking
3616

Blase Ur 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 Blase Ur 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: 88 publications — 5th percentile

5% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Blase Ur 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 Blase Ur 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: 42 D-Index — 43rd percentile

43% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Overview

Blase Ur is affiliated with the University of Chicago in the United States and works primarily within the fields of Computer Science and Social Sciences. Their research spans various subfields, including Sociology and Political Science, Artificial Intelligence, Computer Science Applications, Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, and Software.

Their research topics cover a range of areas such as Privacy, Security, and Data Protection, Mobile Crowdsensing and Crowdsourcing, Context-Aware Activity Recognition Systems, Spreadsheets and End-User Computing, Innovative Human-Technology Interaction, Green IT and Sustainability, and Social Media and Politics.

Blase Ur's recent publications include:

  • "Who Am I?" (2021), Proceedings of the ACM on Interactive Mobile Wearable and Ubiquitous Technologies
  • "Trace2TAP" (2020), Proceedings of the ACM on Interactive Mobile Wearable and Ubiquitous Technologies
  • "Helping Users Debug Trigger-Action Programs" (2022), Proceedings of the ACM on Interactive Mobile Wearable and Ubiquitous Technologies
  • "Perceptions of Retrospective Edits, Changes, and Deletion on Social Media" (2021), Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media
  • "What Does It Mean to Be Creepy? Responses to Visualizations of Personal Browsing Activity, Online Tracking, and Targeted Ads" (2024), Proceedings on Privacy Enhancing Technologies

The frequent co-authors collaborating with Blase Ur include Michael L. Littman, Lefan Zhang, Shan Lu, Natã M. Barbosa, and Gang Wang.

Their work has appeared in several publication venues, primarily:

  • Proceedings of the ACM on Interactive Mobile Wearable and Ubiquitous Technologies
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
  • Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media
  • Proceedings on Privacy Enhancing Technologies
  • Proceedings of the 2022 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies

Best Publications

  • Smart, useful, scary, creepy: perceptions of online behavioral advertising

    Blase Ur;Pedro Giovanni Leon;Lorrie Faith Cranor;Richard Shay

  • Practical trigger-action programming in the smart home

    Blase Ur;Elyse McManus;Melwyn Pak Yong Ho;Michael L. Littman

  • How does your password measure up? the effect of strength meters on password creation

    Blase Ur;Patrick Gage Kelley;Saranga Komanduri;Joel Lee

  • Measuring password guessability for an entire university

    Michelle L. Mazurek;Saranga Komanduri;Timothy Vidas;Lujo Bauer

  • Fast, lean, and accurate: modeling password guessability using neural networks

    William Melicher;Blase Ur;Sean M. Segreti;Saranga Komanduri

  • Trigger-Action Programming in the Wild: An Analysis of 200,000 IFTTT Recipes

    Blase Ur;Melwyn Pak Yong Ho;Stephen Brawner;Jiyun Lee

  • Why Johnny can't opt out: a usability evaluation of tools to limit online behavioral advertising

    Pedro Leon;Blase Ur;Richard Shay;Yang Wang

  • Do Users' Perceptions of Password Security Match Reality?

    Blase Ur;Jonathan Bees;Sean M. Segreti;Lujo Bauer

  • SmartAuth: User-Centered Authorization for the Internet of Things

    Yuan Tian;Nan Zhang;Yueh-Hsun Lin;Xiaofeng Wang

  • “I added '!' at the end to make it secure”: observing password creation in the lab

    Blase Ur;Fumiko Noma;Jonathan Bees;Sean M. Segreti

  • Tag, you can see it!: using tags for access control in photo sharing

    Peter Klemperer;Yuan Liang;Michelle Mazurek;Manya Sleeper

  • Can long passwords be secure and usable

    Richard Shay;Saranga Komanduri;Adam L. Durity;Phillip (Seyoung) Huh

  • Measuring real-world accuracies and biases in modeling password guessability

    Blase Ur;Sean M. Segreti;Lujo Bauer;Nicolas Christin

  • What matters to users?: factors that affect users' willingness to share information with online advertisers

    Pedro Giovanni Leon;Blase Ur;Yang Wang;Manya Sleeper

  • Correct horse battery staple: exploring the usability of system-assigned passphrases

    Richard Shay;Patrick Gage Kelley;Saranga Komanduri;Michelle L. Mazurek

  • Rethinking Access Control and Authentication for the Home Internet of Things (IoT)

    Weijia He;Maximilian Golla;Roshni Padhi;Jordan Ofek

  • Biometric authentication on iPhone and Android: Usability, perceptions, and influences on adoption

    Rasekhar Bhagavatula;Blase Ur;Kevin Iacovino;Su Mon Kywe

  • Designing Password Policies for Strength and Usability

    Richard Shay;Saranga Komanduri;Adam L. Durity;Phillip (Seyoung) Huh

  • "i read my Twitter the next morning and was astonished": a conversational perspective on Twitter regrets

    Manya Sleeper;Justin Cranshaw;Patrick Gage Kelley;Blase Ur

  • Design and Evaluation of a Data-Driven Password Meter

    Blase Ur;Felicia Alfieri;Maung Aung;Lujo Bauer

  • The Current State of Access Control for Smart Devices in Homes

    Blase Ur;Jaeyeon Jung;Stuart Schechter

  • Measuring Password Guessability for an Entire University (CMU-CyLab-13-013)

    Michelle L. Mazurek;Saranga Komanduri;Tim Vidas;Lujo Bauer

Frequent Co-Authors

Lorrie Faith Cranor
Lorrie Faith Cranor Carnegie Mellon University
Lujo Bauer
Lujo Bauer Carnegie Mellon University
Nicolas Christin
Nicolas Christin Carnegie Mellon University
Michael L. Littman
Michael L. Littman Brown University
Patrick Gage Kelley
Patrick Gage Kelley University of New Mexico
Shan Lu
Shan Lu University of Chicago
Kyle Chard
Kyle Chard University of Chicago
Sascha Fahl
Sascha Fahl Helmholtz Center for Information Security
Michael K. Reiter
Michael K. Reiter Duke University
Norman Sadeh
Norman Sadeh Carnegie Mellon 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 online degrees in Computer Science opens multiple pathways for your future. Many universities now offer flexible and affordable options for students from various backgrounds. If you’re concerned about past grades, you can find online graduate schools with low gpa requirements, making it possible to begin or advance your Computer Science education even with a less-than-perfect transcript.

Interested in fast-tracking your studies? Look into an online computer science degree through accelerated programs, which are designed to help working professionals and busy students earn their qualifications sooner.

Computer Science skills pair well with interdisciplinary careers. Those curious about environmental innovation can also explore environmental engineering schools online. These programs blend technology with sustainability, preparing you for roles that tackle modern ecological challenges.

Beyond technology, you might wonder what can you get with an environmental science degree. This degree can lead to careers in research, policy, and green tech—many of which value computing expertise. Combining computer science with related online degrees widens your opportunities in today’s evolving job market.

Best Scientists Citing Blase Ur

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles