World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Computer Science

D-Index
42
Citations
7763
World Ranking
8356
National Ranking
3583

Jeffrey C. Carver 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 Jeffrey C. Carver 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: 259 publications — 65th percentile

65% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Jeffrey C. Carver 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 Jeffrey C. Carver 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: 42 D-Index — 43rd percentile

43% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Research.com Recognitions

  • 2010 - ACM Senior Member

Overview

Jeffrey C. Carver is affiliated with the University of Alabama in the United States and has a research focus primarily within the field of Computer Science. Their work spans several subfields, including Information Systems, Computer Science Applications, Information Systems and Management, Software, and Computer Networks and Communications.

The topics Jeffrey C. Carver has contributed to encompass various areas of software and computing research. These include Software Engineering Research, Software Engineering Techniques and Practices, Scientific Computing and Data Management, Online Learning and Analytics, Teaching and Learning Programming, Software Reliability and Analysis Research, and Software System Performance and Reliability.

Frequent publication venues for Carver feature journals and conferences such as IEEE Software, Computing in Science & Engineering, arXiv (Cornell University), Empirical Software Engineering, and Information and Software Technology.

Notable recent publications by Jeffrey C. Carver include:

  • A survey of the state of the practice for research software in the United States, 2022, PeerJ Computer Science
  • Community smells-The sources of social debt: A systematic literature review, 2022, Information and Software Technology
  • A Systematic Literature Review of Empiricism and Norms of Reporting in Computing Education Research Literature, 2021, arXiv (Cornell University)
  • How do Practitioners Perceive the Relevance of Requirements Engineering Research?, 2020, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering
  • Human error management in requirements engineering: Should we fix the people, the processes, or the environment?, 2023, Information and Software Technology

Collaboration has been a significant aspect of Carver's research activities, with frequent co-authors including Miroslaw Staron, Birgit Penzenstadler, Nasir U. Eisty, Alexander Serebrenik, and Lorin Hochstein.

Jeffrey C. Carver received the ACM Senior Member award in 2010, recognizing their involvement in the computing community.

Best Publications

  • The role of replications in Empirical Software Engineering

    Forrest J. Shull;Jeffrey C. Carver;Sira Vegas;Natalia Juristo

  • An empirical methodology for introducing software processes

    Forrest Shull;Jeffrey Carver;Guilherme H. Travassos

  • Issues in using students in empirical studies in software engineering education

    J. Carver;L. Jaccheri;S. Morasca;F. Shull

  • A systematic literature review to identify and classify software requirement errors

    Gursimran Singh Walia;Jeffrey C. Carver

  • Software Development Environments for Scientific and Engineering Software: A Series of Case Studies

    Jeffrey C. Carver;Richard P. Kendall;Susan E. Squires;Douglass E. Post

  • Characterizing software architecture changes: A systematic review

    Byron J. Williams;Jeffrey C. Carver

  • Replicating software engineering experiments: addressing the tacit knowledge problem

    F. Shull;V. Basili;J. Carver;J.C. Maldonado

  • Understanding the High-Performance-Computing Community: A Software Engineer's Perspective

    V.R. Basili;J.C. Carver;D. Cruzes;L.M. Hochstein

  • Knowledge-Sharing Issues in Experimental Software Engineering

    Forrest Shull;Manoel G. Mendoncça;Victor Basili;Jeffrey Carver

  • Parallel Programmer Productivity: A Case Study of Novice Parallel Programmers

    Lorin Hochstein;Jeff Carver;Forrest Shull;Sima Asgari

  • Building reputation in StackOverflow: An empirical investigation

    Amiangshu Bosu;Christopher S. Corley;Dustin Heaton;Debarshi Chatterji

  • Towards Reporting Guidelines for Experimental Replications: A Proposal

    Jeffrey C. Carver

  • Process Aspects and Social Dynamics of Contemporary Code Review: Insights from Open Source Development and Industrial Practice at Microsoft

    Amiangshu Bosu;Jeffrey C. Carver;Christian Bird;Jonathan Orbeck

  • Evaluating source code summarization techniques: Replication and expansion

    Brian P. Eddy;Jeffrey A. Robinson;Nicholas A. Kraft;Jeffrey C. Carver

  • Program comprehension of domain-specific and general-purpose languages: comparison using a family of experiments

    Tomaž Kosar;Marjan Mernik;Jeffrey C. Carver

  • Identifying the characteristics of vulnerable code changes: an empirical study

    Amiangshu Bosu;Jeffrey C. Carver;Munawar Hafiz;Patrick Hilley

  • A checklist for integrating student empirical studies with research and teaching goals

    Jeffrey C. Carver;Letizia Jaccheri;Sandro Morasca;Forrest Shull

  • Impact of Peer Code Review on Peer Impression Formation: A Survey

    Amiangshu Bosu;Jeffrey C. Carver

  • Claims about the use of software engineering practices in science

    Dustin Heaton;Jeffrey C. Carver

  • Understanding the impressions, motivations, and barriers of one time code contributors to FLOSS projects: a survey

    Amanda Lee;Jeffrey C. Carver;Amiangshu Bosu

  • Identifying Barriers to the Systematic Literature Review Process

    Jeffrey C. Carver;Edgar Hassler;Elis Hernandes;Nicholas A. Kraft

  • Characterizing Software Architecture Changes: An Initial Study

    B.J. Williams;J.C. Carver

Frequent Co-Authors

Forrest Shull
Forrest Shull Carnegie Mellon University
Victor R. Basili
Victor R. Basili University of Maryland, College Park
Guilherme Horta Travassos
Guilherme Horta Travassos Federal University of Rio de Janeiro
Birgit Penzenstadler
Birgit Penzenstadler Chalmers University of Technology
Daniel S. Katz
Daniel S. Katz University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
José Carlos Maldonado
José Carlos Maldonado Universidade de São Paulo
James Howison
James Howison The University of Texas at Austin
Laurie Williams
Laurie Williams North Carolina State University
Alexander Serebrenik
Alexander Serebrenik Eindhoven University of Technology
Marvin V. Zelkowitz
Marvin V. Zelkowitz University of Maryland, College Park

External Links

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

The demand for technology and engineering professionals continues to grow, making online degrees more popular and accessible than ever. Students considering a computer science degree online have the flexibility to study from anywhere while gaining the technical skills valued by employers.

For those interested in sustainability, an environmental engineering bachelor's degree online opens doors to careers focused on solving real-world ecological challenges. Meanwhile, cost can be a concern for many learners. Exploring the mechanical engineering cost of education helps you find affordable programs that fit your budget.

Another promising pathway is earning an online physics bachelor's degree. This program provides a strong analytical foundation, supporting roles in research, data science, or engineering. By carefully comparing degree options and their associated costs, you can choose a path that matches your career goals and financial situation.

Best Scientists Citing Jeffrey C. Carver

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles