World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Discipline name D-Index World Ranking Current World Ranking National Ranking Current National Ranking Publications Citations
Computer Science 33 12594 12226 5103 4871 105 5223

Erjia Yan publications per year

The chart shows the history of publications by Erjia Yan between 2008 and 2025, highlighting the no. of papers published in each year and offering an overview of the publication velocity of this scholar. Erjia Yan published across 18 years, from 2008 to 2025, averaging 8.4 papers a year. Output peaked at 15 publications in 2018. 13 of the 151 publications appeared in the last two years.

No. of publications
5 10 15
Bar chart. Horizontal axis: year, 2008 to 2025. Vertical axis: number of publications, 0 to 15. Peak 15 publications in 2018. 2008: 2 publications 2009: 1 publication 2010: 13 publications 2011: 13 publications 2012: 6 publications 2013: 4 publications 2014: 6 publications 2015: 8 publications 2016: 10 publications 2017: 13 publications 2018: 15 publications 2019: 10 publications 2020: 13 publications 2021: 10 publications 2022: 10 publications 2023: 4 publications 2024: 12 publications 2025: 1 publication
2008 2025

151 publications in total across all disciplines

View publications per year as a table
Erjia Yan: publications per year, 2008 to 2025
Year Publications
2008 2
2009 1
2010 13
2011 13
2012 6
2013 4
2014 6
2015 8
2016 10
2017 13
2018 15
2019 10
2020 13
2021 10
2022 10
2023 4
2024 12
2025 1
Total 151
Download as CSV

Erjia Yan 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 Erjia Yan sits on this spectrum.

No. of scientists
200 400 600
Bar chart with 97 bars. Horizontal axis: publications, 32–41 to 991+. Vertical axis: number of scientists, 0 to 609. Most scientists, 609, have 142–151 publications. The last bar groups every scientist with 991 publications or more. The highlighted bar, 102–111 publications, is where this scientist sits. 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
32–41 publications 991+

This scientist: 105 publications — 10th percentile

10% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

View publications distribution as a table
Number of Computer Science scientists by publication count, Research.com 2026 ranking edition. Based on 14,188 ranked scientists.
Publications Scientists This scientist
32–41 7
42–51 22
52–61 82
62–71 134
72–81 249
82–91 324
92–101 421
102–111 420 105
112–121 497
122–131 544
132–141 555
142–151 609
152–161 559
162–171 534
172–181 556
182–191 583
192–201 519
202–211 508
212–221 490
222–231 437
232–241 423
242–251 408
252–261 377
262–271 301
272–281 335
282–291 320
292–301 293
302–311 250
312–321 238
322–331 206
332–341 209
342–351 208
352–361 162
362–371 176
372–381 127
382–391 158
392–401 128
402–411 104
412–421 94
422–431 99
432–441 83
442–451 108
452–461 73
462–471 77
472–481 69
482–491 84
492–501 62
502–511 54
512–521 57
522–531 51
532–541 51
542–551 32
552–561 38
562–571 28
572–581 43
582–591 33
592–601 41
602–611 32
612–621 28
622–631 25
632–641 27
642–651 17
652–661 20
662–671 17
672–681 15
682–691 14
692–701 21
702–711 13
712–721 12
722–731 19
732–741 14
742–751 12
752–761 10
762–771 10
772–781 11
782–791 10
792–801 11
802–811 8
812–821 8
822–831 7
832–841 11
842–851 10
852–861 5
862–871 9
872–881 4
882–891 6
892–901 3
902–911 6
912–921 3
922–931 2
932–941 2
942–951 2
952–961 3
962–971 3
972–981 3
982–990 5
991+ 100
Download as CSV

Erjia Yan 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 Erjia Yan sits on this spectrum.

No. of scientists
200 400 600 800
Bar chart with 52 bars. Horizontal axis: D-Index, 30–31 to 131+. Vertical axis: number of scientists, 0 to 990. Most scientists, 990, have 36–37 D-Index. The last bar groups every scientist with 131 D-Index or more. The highlighted bar, 32–33 D-Index, is where this scientist sits. 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
30–31 D-Index 131+

This scientist: 33 D-Index — 13th percentile

13% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

View D-Index distribution as a table
Number of Computer Science scientists by D-index, Research.com 2026 ranking edition. Based on 14,188 ranked scientists.
D-Index Scientists This scientist
30–31 879
32–33 983 33
34–35 918
36–37 990
38–39 968
40–41 907
42–43 821
44–45 763
46–47 689
48–49 543
50–51 543
52–53 518
54–55 500
56–57 458
58–59 400
60–61 337
62–63 308
64–65 292
66–67 249
68–69 213
70–71 192
72–73 189
74–75 165
76–77 139
78–79 119
80–81 121
82–83 113
84–85 88
86–87 87
88–89 75
90–91 69
92–93 57
94–95 46
96–97 38
98–99 34
100–101 36
102–103 27
104–105 37
106–107 18
108–109 31
110–111 19
112–113 16
114–115 12
116–117 20
118–119 15
120–121 5
122–123 20
124–125 8
126–127 5
128–129 7
130 3
131+ 98
Download as CSV

Overview

Erjia Yan is affiliated with Drexel University in the United States and works primarily in the field of Social Sciences. Their research encompasses a range of subfields including Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty, Education, Library and Information Sciences, Economics and Econometrics, and Computer Science Applications.

Their scientific output covers topics related to scientometrics and bibliometrics research, higher education research studies, library science and administration, web and library services, complex network analysis techniques, advanced text analysis techniques, and diversity and career in medicine.

Erjia Yan's recent scholarly publications include:

  • "Where Do We Stand? Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Social Justice in North American Library and Information Science Education," 2021, Journal of Education for Library and Information Science
  • "Citation cascade and the evolution of topic relevance," 2020, Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology
  • "Analyzing academic mobility of U.S. professors based on ORCID data and the Carnegie Classification," 2020, Quantitative Science Studies
  • "Gender and country biases in Wikipedia citations to scholarly publications," 2022, Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology
  • "Analyzing China's research collaboration with the United States in high-impact and high-technology research," 2021, Quantitative Science Studies

Several frequent coauthors have collaborated with Yan, including:

  • Chaoqun Ni
  • Mat Kelly
  • Yongjun Zhu
  • Jiangen He
  • Alex H. Poole

Yan's work has been published mainly in the following venues:

  • Quantitative Science Studies
  • Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology
  • Journal of Education for Library and Information Science
  • Innovation in Aging
  • Neural Regeneration Research

The frequent publication in these journals reflects a focus on areas related to information science, quantitative analysis of science studies, and education.

Best Publications

  • Web of Science use in published research and review papers 1997–2017: a selective, dynamic, cross-domain, content-based analysis

    Kai Li;Jason Rollins;Erjia Yan

  • PageRank for ranking authors in co-citation networks

    Ying Ding;Erjia Yan;Arthur Frazho;James Caverlee

  • Applying centrality measures to impact analysis: A coauthorship network analysis

    Erjia Yan;Ying Ding

  • Examining the usage, citation, and diffusion patterns of bibliometric mapping software: A comparative study of three tools

    Xuelian Pan;Erjia Yan;Ming Cui;Weina Hua

  • The cognitive structure of Library and Information Science: Analysis of article title words

    Staša Milojević;Cassidy R. Sugimoto;Erjia Yan;Ying Ding

  • Scholarly network similarities: How bibliographic coupling networks, citation networks, cocitation networks, topical networks, coauthorship networks, and coword networks relate to each other

    Erjia Yan;Ying Ding

  • Discovering author impact: A PageRank perspective

    Erjia Yan;Ying Ding

  • Mapping library and information science in China: a coauthorship network analysis

    Erjia Yan;Ying Ding;Qinghua Zhu

  • P-Rank: An indicator measuring prestige in heterogeneous scholarly networks

    Erjia Yan;Ying Ding;Cassidy R. Sugimoto

  • PageRank for ranking authors in co-citation networks

    Ying Ding;Erjia Yan;Arthur Frazho;James Caverlee

  • Entitymetrics: Measuring the Impact of Entities

    Ying Ding;Min Song;Jia Han;Qi Yu

  • Weighted citation: An indicator of an article's prestige

    Erjia Yan;Ying Ding

  • Applying centrality measures to impact analysis: A coauthorship network analysis

    Erjia Yan;Ying Ding

  • Predicting and recommending collaborations: An author-, institution-, and country-level analysis

    Erjia Yan;Raf Guns

  • Topics in dynamic research communities: An exploratory study for the field of information retrieval

    Erjia Yan;Ying Ding;Sta Ša Milojević;Cassidy R. Sugimoto

  • Community-based topic modeling for social tagging

    Daifeng Li;Bing He;Ying Ding;Jie Tang

  • Semantic relatedness and similarity of biomedical terms: examining the effects of recency, size, and section of biomedical publications on the performance of word2vec

    Yongjun Zhu;Erjia Yan;Fei Wang

  • Assessing the impact of software on science: A bootstrapped learning of software entities in full-text papers

    Xuelian Pan;Erjia Yan;Qianqian Wang;Weina Hua

  • A recursive field-normalized bibliometric performance indicator: an application to the field of library and information science

    Ludo Waltman;Erjia Yan;Nees Jan Eck

  • Finding knowledge paths among scientific disciplines

    Erjia Yan

  • Perspectives on social tagging

    Unknown

  • Perspectives on social tagging

    Ying Ding;Elin K. Jacob;Zhixiong Zhang;Schubert Foo

  • Will open access increase journal CiteScores? An empirical investigation over multiple disciplines.

    Yang Li;Chaojiang Wu;Erjia Yan;Kai Li

Frequent Co-Authors

Ying Ding
Ying Ding The University of Texas at Austin
Cassidy R. Sugimoto
Cassidy R. Sugimoto Indiana University
Xiaohua Hu
Xiaohua Hu Drexel University
Min Song
Min Song Yonsei University
Ludo Waltman
Ludo Waltman Leiden University
Il-Yeol Song
Il-Yeol Song Drexel University
Nees Jan van Eck
Nees Jan van Eck Leiden University
James Caverlee
James Caverlee Texas A&M University
Schubert Foo
Schubert Foo Nanyang Technological University
Blaise Cronin
Blaise Cronin Indiana 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

Studying Computer Science in the USA opens doors to various online degrees and career pathways in related technical fields. Many students look for flexible, affordable options that can expand their expertise in engineering or the sciences.

For those considering hands-on technical fields, understanding the mechanical engineering cost of education can help you plan your finances while pursuing an engineering career. If your interests lean toward physics and theoretical concepts, enrolling in an online theoretical physics degree could provide a flexible route to deepen your knowledge.

As data-driven industries continue to grow, many Computer Science graduates transition to careers with a data scientist degree, offering strong employment prospects and interdisciplinary skills. Alternatively, if you want to work in power, electronics, or communications, comparing the best online electrical engineering programs USA can help you find accredited programs to match your career goals.

Exploring these related opportunities allows you to diversify your skillset, adapt to evolving tech trends, and maximize your career options after studying Computer Science.

Best Scientists Citing Erjia Yan

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles