World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Computer Science

D-Index
30
Citations
3779
World Ranking
14105
National Ranking
5588

Daniel P. Miranker 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 Daniel P. Miranker 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: 156 publications — 29th percentile

29% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Daniel P. Miranker 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 Daniel P. Miranker 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: 30 D-Index — 3rd percentile

3% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Overview

Daniel P. Miranker is affiliated with The University of Texas at Austin in the United States. Their research contributions include work published in academic venues such as arXiv (Cornell University) and ACM Transactions on Database Systems.

Recent publications by Daniel P. Miranker focus on join algorithms in database systems. Notable papers include:

  • TreeTracker Join: Simple, Optimal, Fast, published in 2024 at arXiv (Cornell University)
  • TreeTracker Join: Simple, Optimal, Fast, published in 2025 in ACM Transactions on Database Systems

Frequent co-authors collaborating with Daniel P. Miranker include:

  • Zeyuan Hu
  • Yisu Remy Wang

Their work has appeared predominantly in the following publication venues:

  • arXiv (Cornell University)
  • ACM Transactions on Database Systems

Best Publications

  • TREAT: a better match algorithm for AI production systems

    Daniel P. Miranker

  • Binary tree parallel processor

    Salvatore J. Stolfo;Daniel P. Miranker

  • Ultrawrap: SPARQL execution on relational data

    Juan F. Sequeda;Daniel P. Miranker

  • On directly mapping relational databases to RDF and OWL

    Juan F. Sequeda;Marcelo Arenas;Daniel P. Miranker

  • Accessing Relational Databases As Resource Description Framework Databases

    Daniel Paul Miranker;Juan Federico Sequeda

  • Treat: A New and Efficient Match Algorithm for Ai Production Systems

    Daniel P. Miranker

  • A complexity analysis of space-bounded learning algorithms for the constraint satisfaction problem

    Roberto J. Bayardo;Daniel P. Miranker

  • Translating SQL Applications to the Semantic Web

    Syed Hamid Tirmizi;Juan Sequeda;Daniel Miranker

  • NoSQL Databases for RDF: An Empirical Evaluation

    Philippe Cudré-Mauroux;Iliya Enchev;Sever Fundatureanu;Paul Groth

  • On the performance of lazy matching in production systems

    Daniel P. Miranker;David A. Brant;Bernie Lofaso;David Gadbois

  • Review: survey of directly mapping sql databases to the semantic web

    Juan f. Sequeda;Syed hamid Tirmizi;Oscar Corcho;Daniel p. Miranker

  • On a model of indexability and its bounds for range queries

    Joseph M. Hellerstein;Elias Koutsoupias;Daniel P. Miranker;Christos H. Papadimitriou

  • Integrating shotgun proteomics and mRNA expression data to improve protein identification

    Smriti R. Ramakrishnan;Christine Vogel;John T. Prince;Zhihua Li

  • DADO: A Parallel Processor for Expert Systems

    Salvatore J. Stolfo;Daniel P Miranker

  • Adaptively weighted, partitioned context edit distance string matching

    Alvin Richardson;Charles Davis;Daniel Miranker

  • The organization and performance of a TREAT-based production system compiler

    Unknown

  • OBDA: Query Rewriting or Materialization? In Practice, Both!

    Juan F. Sequeda;Marcelo Arenas;Daniel P. Miranker

  • An Unsupervised Algorithm for Learning Blocking Schemes

    Mayank Kejriwal;Daniel P. Miranker

  • A metric model of amino acid substitution

    Weijia Xu;Daniel P. Miranker

  • Effects of Database Size on Rule System Performance: Five Case Studies

    David A. Brant;Timothy Grose;Bernie Lofaso;Daniel P. Miranker

  • Index support for rule activation

    David A. Brant;Daniel P. Miranker

  • A fast coarse filtering method for peptide identification by mass spectrometry

    Smriti R. Ramakrishnan;Rui Mao;Aleksey A. Nakorchevskiy;John T. Prince

  • On the space-time trade-off in solving constraint satisfaction problems

    Roberto J. Bayardo;Daniel P. Miranker

  • On Directly Mapping Relational Databases to RDF and OWL (Extended Version)

    Juan F. Sequeda;Marcelo Arenas;Daniel P. Miranker

Frequent Co-Authors

Salvatore J. Stolfo
Salvatore J. Stolfo Columbia University
James C. Browne
James C. Browne The University of Texas at Austin
Marcelo Arenas
Marcelo Arenas Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile
Robin R. Gutell
Robin R. Gutell The University of Texas at Austin
Aloysius K. Mok
Aloysius K. Mok The University of Texas at Austin
Edward M. Marcotte
Edward M. Marcotte The University of Texas at Austin
Oscar Corcho
Oscar Corcho Technical University of Madrid
Luiz O. F. Penalva
Luiz O. F. Penalva The University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio
David E. Shaw
David E. Shaw D. E. Shaw Research
Christopher J. Mungall
Christopher J. Mungall Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory

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 doors to a wide range of academic and professional opportunities. For students eager to fast-track their careers, a 1 year computer science degree online can provide the skills and credentials needed in a condensed timeframe.

Computer science knowledge pairs well with other fields, such as environmental science and engineering. Curious about the types of careers that an environmental science background can support? Discover what jobs can you get with an environmental science degree and see how tech skills can expand your impact in this field.

Cost and accessibility are important factors to consider. If you’re interested in engineering, you’ll find options for the environmental engineering degree that combine affordability with convenience. Similarly, if mechanical engineering piques your interest, take a look at the cheapest mechanical engineering degree online to find budget-friendly paths to a rewarding career.

Whether you are pursuing computer science alone or as a complement to other disciplines, these online degrees and career pathways help you build a versatile, future-ready skill set.

Best Scientists Citing Daniel P. Miranker

Trending Scientists