World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Computer Science

D-Index
42
Citations
6497
World Ranking
8479
National Ranking
3625

Bogdan Vasilescu 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 Bogdan Vasilescu 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: 94 publications — 7th percentile

7% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Bogdan Vasilescu 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 Bogdan Vasilescu 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

Bogdan Vasilescu is affiliated with Carnegie Mellon University in the United States and has a research portfolio focused primarily in the field of Computer Science, with notable contributions across several subfields including Information Systems, Signal Processing, Computer Science Applications, Software, and Artificial Intelligence.

The scholar's research has addressed a variety of topics within software engineering and cybersecurity domains. Key research areas include Software Engineering Research, Advanced Malware Detection Techniques, Open Source Software Innovations, Network Security and Intrusion Detection, Spam and Phishing Detection, Software Testing and Debugging Techniques, and Software Engineering Techniques and Practices.

Recent publications exemplify the scope and diversity of their work. Among notable papers are:

  • "In-IDE Code Generation from Natural Language: Promise and Challenges," 2022, published in ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology
  • "'Did you miss my comment or what?,'" 2022, published in Proceedings of the 44th International Conference on Software Engineering
  • "VarCLR," 2022, published in Proceedings of the 44th International Conference on Software Engineering
  • "Generative AI in Software Engineering Must Be Human-Centered: The Copenhagen Manifesto," 2024, published in Journal of Systems and Software
  • "'This is damn slick!'," 2022, published in Proceedings of the 44th International Conference on Software Engineering

The scientist frequently collaborates with peers, with prominent co-authors including Claire Le Goues, Graham Neubig, Jeremy Lacomis, Edward J. Schwartz, and Audris Mockus.

Publication venues reflect a blend of preprint repositories and established conference and journal outlets. The most common venues for their work are arXiv (Cornell University), Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research), ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology, Proceedings of the 44th International Conference on Software Engineering, and Proceedings of the ACM on Software Engineering.

Best Publications

  • Quality and productivity outcomes relating to continuous integration in GitHub

    Bogdan Vasilescu;Yue Yu;Huaimin Wang;Premkumar Devanbu

  • 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

  • Using an LLM to Help with Code Understanding

    Unknown

  • 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

  • Learning to mine aligned code and natural language pairs from stack overflow

    Pengcheng Yin;Bowen Deng;Edgar Chen;Bogdan Vasilescu

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

    Daniel Pletea;Bogdan Vasilescu;Alexander Serebrenik

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

    Yangyang Zhao;Alexander Serebrenik;Yuming Zhou;Vladimir Filkov

  • Lean GHTorrent: GitHub data on demand

    Georgios Gousios;Bogdan Vasilescu;Alexander Serebrenik;Andy Zaidman

  • Wait for it: determinants of pull request evaluation latency on GitHub

    Yue Yu;Huaimin Wang;Vladimir Filkov;Premkumar Devanbu

  • Ecosystem-level determinants of sustained activity in open-source projects: a case study of the PyPI ecosystem

    Marat Valiev;Bogdan Vasilescu;James Herbsleb

  • Developer onboarding in GitHub: the role of prior social links and language experience

    Casey Casalnuovo;Bogdan Vasilescu;Premkumar Devanbu;Vladimir Filkov

  • 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

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

    Bogdan Vasilescu;Alexander Serebrenik;Mathieu Goeminne;Tom Mens

  • Going farther together: the impact of social capital on sustained participation in open source

    Huilian Sophie Qiu;Alexander Nolte;Anita Brown;Alexander Serebrenik

  • Software quality metrics aggregation in industry

    Karine Mordal;Nicolas Anquetil;Jannik Laval;Alexander Serebrenik

  • Adding sparkle to social coding: an empirical study of repository badges in the npm ecosystem

    Asher Trockman;Shurui Zhou;Christian Kastner;Bogdan Vasilescu

  • Continuous Integration in a Social-Coding World: Empirical Evidence from GitHub

    Bogdan Vasilescu;Stef van Schuylenburg;Jules Wulms;Alexander Serebrenik

  • Perceptions of Diversity on Git Hub: A User Survey

    Bogdan Vasilescu;Vladimir Filkov;Alexander Serebrenik

Frequent Co-Authors

Alexander Serebrenik
Alexander Serebrenik Eindhoven University of Technology
Vladimir Filkov
Vladimir Filkov University of California, Davis
Premkumar Devanbu
Premkumar Devanbu University of California, Davis
Mark van den Brand
Mark van den Brand Eindhoven University of Technology
Tom Mens
Tom Mens University of Mons
David Lo
David Lo Singapore Management University
Filippo Lanubile
Filippo Lanubile University of Bari Aldo Moro
Daniela Damian
Daniela Damian University of Victoria
Graham Neubig
Graham Neubig Carnegie Mellon University
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

If you’re considering studying Computer Science in the USA, you might also explore flexible and affordable online degree options. Many students begin their journey with 1 year associate degree programs online, which offer a quick and practical entry point into technology careers.

For those seeking advanced knowledge and higher earning potential, pursuing one of the most valuable masters degrees can open doors to leadership roles and specialized tech positions.

Budget is often a key concern for students. That's why many look for the cheapest online colleges to reduce costs without sacrificing quality.

If your academic history isn’t perfect, don’t worry – there are reputable college with low gpa options that accept students with varied backgrounds. This makes it possible for more learners to pursue fulfilling and lucrative tech careers.

Best Scientists Citing Bogdan Vasilescu

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles