World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Computer Science

D-Index
36
Citations
8153
World Ranking
11039
National Ranking
334

Didar Zowghi 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 Didar Zowghi 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: 207 publications — 49th percentile

49% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Didar Zowghi 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 Didar Zowghi 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: 36 D-Index — 23rd percentile

23% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Overview

Didar Zowghi is affiliated with the University of Technology Sydney in Australia. Their research spans multiple fields including Computer Science and Social Sciences, with a focus on various interdisciplinary subfields such as Information Systems, Safety Research, Artificial Intelligence, Health Informatics, and Sociology and Political Science.

Their work covers several main topics. These include Ethics and Social Impacts of AI, Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education, Big Data and Business Intelligence, Software Engineering Techniques and Practices, Mobile Learning in Education, Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI), and Law, AI, and Intellectual Property.

Didar Zowghi has contributed to a number of research papers, including recent publications such as:

  • AI and the quest for diversity and inclusion: a systematic literature review (2023) in AI and Ethics
  • Inquiry-based mobile learning in secondary school science education: A systematic review (2020) in Journal of Computer Assisted Learning
  • Adult learning in online communities of practice: A systematic review (2021) in British Journal of Educational Technology
  • Responsible AI Pattern Catalogue: A Collection of Best Practices for AI Governance and Engineering (2023) in ACM Computing Surveys
  • AI governance: a systematic literature review (2025) in AI and Ethics

Frequent collaborators of Didar Zowghi include Muneera Bano, Jon Whittle, Rifat Ara Shams, Caihua Liu, and Qinghua Lu. The frequency of their collaborative work ranges from several to dozens of coauthored publications.

Publication venues where Didar Zowghi's work frequently appears include arXiv (Cornell University), Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research), AI and Ethics, IEEE Software, and Proceedings of the Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

Best Publications

  • Requirements Elicitation: A Survey of Techniques, Approaches, and Tools

    Didar Zowghi;Chad Coulin

  • A maturity model for the implementation of software process improvement: an empirical study

    Mahmood Niazi;David Wilson;Didar Zowghi

  • RE challenges in multi-site software development organisations

    Daniela Damian;Didar Zowghi

  • A systematic review on the relationship between user involvement and system success

    Muneera Bano;Didar Zowghi

  • Critical success factors for software process improvement implementation: an empirical study

    Mahmood Niazi;David Wilson;Didar Zowghi

  • Mobile learning for science and mathematics school education: A systematic review of empirical evidence

    Muneera Bano;Didar Zowghi;Matthew Kearney;Sandra Schuck

  • The impact of stakeholders' geographical distribution on managing requirements in a multi-site organization

    D.E. Damian;D. Zowghi

  • Reasoning about inconsistencies in natural language requirements

    Vincenzo Gervasi;Didar Zowghi

  • Analysis of requirements volatility during software development life cycle

    N. Nurmuliani;D. Zowghi;S. Powell

  • Strategy for Adopting Information technology for SMEs: Experience in Adopting Email within an Indonesian Furniture Company

    S Sarosa;D Zowghi

  • Requirements Engineering challenges in multi-site software development organizations

    Daniela E. Damian;Didar Zowghi

  • An investigation into the notion of non-functional requirements

    Dewi Mairiza;Didar Zowghi;Nurie Nurmuliani

  • A framework for assisting the design of effective software process improvement implementation strategies

    Mahmood Niazi;David Wilson;Didar Zowghi

  • An insight into the interplay between culture, conflict and distance in globally distributed requirements negotiations

    D.E. Damian;D. Zowghi

  • On the interplay between consistency, completeness, and correctness in requirements evolution

    Didar Zowghi;Vincenzo Gervasi

  • A study of the impact of requirements volatility on software project performance

    D. Zowghi;N. Nurmuliani

  • Teaching requirements engineering through role playing: lessons learnt

    D. Zowghi;S. Paryani

  • AI and the quest for diversity and inclusion: a systematic literature review

    Unknown

  • A logical framework for modeling and reasoning about the evolution of requirements

    D. Zowghi;R. Offen

  • User involvement in software development and system success: a systematic literature review

    Muneera Bano;Didar Zowghi

  • Using card sorting technique to classify requirements change

    N. Nurmuliani;D. Zowghi;S.P. Williams

Frequent Co-Authors

Alessio Ferrari
Alessio Ferrari École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne
Mahmood Niazi
Mahmood Niazi King Fahd University of Petroleum and Minerals
David Wilson
David Wilson Burnet Institute
Daniela Damian
Daniela Damian University of Victoria
Stephen G. MacDonell
Stephen G. MacDonell Victoria University of Wellington
Brian Henderson-Sellers
Brian Henderson-Sellers University of Technology Sydney
Walid Maalej
Walid Maalej Hasso Plattner Institute
Jane Cleland-Huang
Jane Cleland-Huang University of Notre Dame
Stefania Gnesi
Stefania Gnesi Institute of Information Science and Technologies
Daniel Amyot
Daniel Amyot University of Ottawa

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 Computer Science in the USA opens a variety of flexible online study options. For those seeking a quicker way to enter the workforce, consider 1 year associate degree programs online that provide core tech skills in a short timeframe. If you’re aiming to build expertise and advance your prospects, explore the most valuable masters degrees in technology and related fields, which are highly sought after by employers.

Budget is also important for many students. There are affordable online colleges that offer accredited Computer Science degrees without hefty tuition fees. If you’re concerned about past academic performance, several online colleges that accept 2.0 gpa provide more inclusive admissions policies, giving many students a new start.

No matter your academic stage or financial situation, there are a range of online Computer Science pathways in the USA designed to support diverse goals and backgrounds.

Best Scientists Citing Didar Zowghi

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles