World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Computer Science

D-Index
43
Citations
6546
World Ranking
8072
National Ranking
3460

James M. Bieman 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 James M. Bieman 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: 137 publications — 21st percentile

21% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

James M. Bieman 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 James M. Bieman 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: 43 D-Index — 46th percentile

46% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Overview

James M. Bieman is affiliated with Colorado State University in the United States. The scientific profile reflects a focus on their academic position without details on specific research topics, papers, or collaborations.

The data does not include records of recent publications, frequent co-authors, or common publication venues, which limits detailed insight into their research outputs and collaborative networks.

Information about book publications is not available, and there are no details on their main fields or subfields of study. Similarly, main topics of work or areas of particular research interest have not been specified.

There are no documented awards or honors associated with this scientist, and they are currently active, as there is no indication of being deceased.

Best Publications

  • Cohesion and reuse in an object-oriented system

    James M. Bieman;Byung-Kyoo Kang

  • Measuring functional cohesion

    J.M. Bieman;L.M. Ott

  • Software Metrics: A Rigorous and Practical Approach, Third Edition

    Norman Fenton;James Bieman

  • Software reliability growth with test coverage

    Y.K. Malaiya;M.N. Li;J.M. Bieman;R. Karcich

  • Rapid prototyping: lessons learned

    V.S. Gordon;J.M. Bieman

  • The FreeBSD project: a replication case study of open source development

    T.T. Dinh-Trong;J.M. Bieman

  • Directives for composing aspect-oriented design class models

    Y. R. Reddy;S. Ghosh;G. Straw

  • Measuring design-level cohesion

    J.M. Bieman;Byung-Kyoo Kang

  • Competencies of exceptional and nonexceptional software engineers

    Richard T. Turley;James M. Bieman

  • Testing scientific software: A systematic literature review

    Upulee Kanewala;James M. Bieman

  • Design patterns and change proneness: an examination of five evolving systems

    J.M. Bieman;G. Straw;H. Wang;P.W. Munger

  • The relationship between test coverage and reliability

    Y.K. Malaiya;Naixin Li;J. Bieman;R. Karcich

  • A philosophy for software measurement

    A. L. Baker;J. M. Bieman;N. Fenton;D. A. Gustafson

  • Predicting metamorphic relations for testing scientific software: a machine learning approach using graph kernels

    Upulee Kanewala;James M. Bieman;Asa Ben-Hur

  • Understanding change-proneness in OO software through visualization

    J.M. Bieman;A.A. Andrews;H.J. Yang

  • A mathematical perspective for software measures research

    Austin C. Melton;David A. Gustafson;James M. Bieman;Albert L. Baker

  • How Software Designs Decay: A Pilot Study of Pattern Evolution

    C. Izurieta;J.M. Bieman

  • Software architecture classification for estimating the cost of COTS integration

    Daniil Yakimovich;James M. Bieman;Victor R. Basili

  • Using machine learning techniques to detect metamorphic relations for programs without test oracles

    Upulee Kanewala;James M. Bieman

  • How Software Designs Decay: A Pilot Study of Pattern Evolution

    Unknown

  • Model Composition Directives

    Greg Straw;Geri Georg;Eunjee Song;Sudipto Ghosh

Frequent Co-Authors

Norman Fenton
Norman Fenton Queen Mary University of London
Jan Jürjens
Jan Jürjens University of Koblenz and Landau
Betty H. C. Cheng
Betty H. C. Cheng Michigan State University
Lars Eisen
Lars Eisen Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
Yashwant K. Malaiya
Yashwant K. Malaiya Colorado State University
Pradip K. Srimani
Pradip K. Srimani Clemson University
Dorina C. Petriu
Dorina C. Petriu Carleton University
Jeff Offutt
Jeff Offutt George Mason University
Vanessa Murdock
Vanessa Murdock Amazon (United States)
Victor R. Basili
Victor R. Basili University of Maryland, College Park

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 range of flexible online degrees and career-boosting options. Many students look for ways to enhance their skills while minimizing costs and time. For example, if you're considering business leadership alongside technical knowledge, exploring cheapest mba online programs can be a smart move to maximize value.

Time is also a top concern for working professionals or those eager to build credentials quickly. You might be interested in 1 year master's programs online that allow you to earn an advanced degree without taking a long break from your career.

For those driven by quick entry into the workforce and solid earnings, check out short careers that pay well. These options provide practical pathways to lucrative tech and business roles without lengthy study commitments.

Lastly, with the rise of artificial intelligence, pursuing one of the ai degrees can be a future-proof investment, offering specialized skills that are in high demand across industries.

Best Scientists Citing James M. Bieman

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles