World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Computer Science

D-Index
39
Citations
7681
World Ranking
9652
National Ranking
276

Filippo Lanubile 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 Filippo Lanubile 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: 189 publications — 42nd percentile

42% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Filippo Lanubile 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 Filippo Lanubile 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: 39 D-Index — 33rd percentile

33% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Overview

Filippo Lanubile is affiliated with the University of Bari Aldo Moro in Italy and has contributed extensively to the field of computer science, with a focus on software engineering research. Their body of work spans 38 publications in computer science, with notable emphasis in subfields such as artificial intelligence, information systems, sociology and political science, computer science applications, and experimental and cognitive psychology.

Their research themes cover a range of topics including software engineering research, software engineering techniques and practices, topic modeling, digital games and media, open source software innovations, scientific computing and data management, and computational physics with Python applications.

Lanubile has published articles in several venues with a significant number of contributions in:

  • Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
  • IEEE Software
  • ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology
  • Information and Software Technology

Their research papers include:

  • "Emotions and Perceived Productivity of Software Developers at the Workplace," 2021, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering
  • "Will you come back to contribute? Investigating the inactivity of OSS core developers in GitHub," 2022, Empirical Software Engineering
  • "Eliciting Best Practices for Collaboration with Computational Notebooks," 2022, Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction
  • "Love, Joy, Anger, Sadness, Fear, and Surprise: SE Needs Special Kinds of AI: A Case Study on Text Mining and SE," 2020, IEEE Software
  • "Using Personality Detection Tools for Software Engineering Research: How Far Can We Go?" 2022, ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology

Lanubile has collaborated frequently with:

  • Fabio Calefato
  • Luigi Quaranta
  • Nicole Novielli
  • Giuseppe Colavito
  • Daniela Girardi

The collaboration patterns and publication venues suggest a focus on various aspects of software engineering, human-computer interaction, and empirical software studies. The topics covered reflect interdisciplinary approaches involving cognitive psychology and sociopolitical contexts within software development environments.

Best Publications

  • Building knowledge through families of experiments

    V.R. Basili;F. Shull;F. Lanubile

  • The empirical investigation of perspective-based reading

    Victor R. Basili;Scott Green;Oliver Laitenberger;Forrest Shull

  • Sentiment Polarity Detection for Software Development

    Fabio Calefato;Filippo Lanubile;Federico Maiorano;Nicole Novielli

  • Collaboration Tools for Global Software Engineering

    F. Lanubile;C. Ebert;R. Prikladnicki;A. Vizcaino

  • Extracting reusable functions by flow graph based program slicing

    F. Lanubile;G. Visaggio

  • A Replicated Experiment to Assess Requirements InspectionTechniques

    Pierfrancesco Fusaro;Filippo Lanubile;Giuseppe Visaggio

  • How to Ask for Technical Help? Evidence-based Guidelines for Writing Questions on Stack Overflow

    Fabio Calefato;Filippo Lanubile;Nicole Novielli

  • Investigating reading techniques for object-oriented framework learning

    F. Shull;F. Lanubile;V.R. Basili

  • The challenges of sentiment detection in the social programmer ecosystem

    Nicole Novielli;Fabio Calefato;Filippo Lanubile

  • Towards discovering the role of emotions in stack overflow

    Nicole Novielli;Fabio Calefato;Filippo Lanubile

  • A benchmark study on sentiment analysis for software engineering research

    Nicole Novielli;Daniela Girardi;Filippo Lanubile

  • EmoTxt: A toolkit for emotion recognition from text

    Fabio Calefato;Filippo Lanubile;Nicole Novielli

  • Global software development: technical, organizational, and social challenges

    Filippo Lanubile;Daniela Damian;Heather L. Oppenheimer

  • Tool support for geographically dispersed inspection teams

    Filippo Lanubile;Teresa Mallardo;Fabio Calefato

  • Finding function clones in Web applications

    F. Lanubile;T. Mallardo

  • KGTorrent: A Dataset of Python Jupyter Notebooks from Kaggle

    Luigi Quaranta;Fabio Calefato;Filippo Lanubile

  • The role of social media in affective trust building in customer---supplier relationships

    Fabio Calefato;Filippo Lanubile;Nicole Novielli

  • Anger and its direction in collaborative software development

    Daviti Gachechiladze;Filippo Lanubile;Nicole Novielli;Alexander Serebrenik

  • Evaluating predictive quality models derived from software measures: lessons learned

    Filippo Lanubile;Giuseppe Visaggio

  • Evaluating software degradation through entropy

    A. Bianchi;D. Caivano;F. Lanubile;G. Visaggio

  • Experimenting with error abstraction in requirements documents

    F. Lanubile;F. Shull;V.R. Basili

Frequent Co-Authors

Rafael Prikladnicki
Rafael Prikladnicki Pontifical Catholic University of Rio Grande do Sul
Daniela Damian
Daniela Damian University of Victoria
Victor R. Basili
Victor R. Basili University of Maryland, College Park
Forrest Shull
Forrest Shull Carnegie Mellon University
Marco Torchiano
Marco Torchiano Polytechnic University of Turin
Andrea De Lucia
Andrea De Lucia University of Salerno
Alexander Serebrenik
Alexander Serebrenik Eindhoven University of Technology
Giovanni Semeraro
Giovanni Semeraro University of Bari Aldo Moro
Massimiliano Di Penta
Massimiliano Di Penta University of Sannio
Igor Steinmacher
Igor Steinmacher Northern Arizona 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 options for studying Computer Science in the USA opens up numerous flexible and affordable pathways. There are many affordable online courses that can help you gain fundamental programming skills without stretching your budget. These programs are designed to provide quality education at a lower cost, making them accessible to a broad range of students.

If you are concerned about your academic record, several online colleges that accept 2.0 gpa offer flexible admissions policies, giving you a chance to pursue a tech career regardless of your past grades. Fast-tracked learning is also possible through the accelerated cs degree programs, where you can finish your studies and enter the workforce sooner.

Graduates with a computer science degree have diverse opportunities. If you have multifaceted interests, interdisciplinary fields like environmental tech are also promising. Check out what kinds of roles and fields open up with related studies, such as what can you get with an environmental science degree, to discover more career possibilities that leverage technology in different industries.

Best Scientists Citing Filippo Lanubile

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles