World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Computer Science

D-Index
52
Citations
14097
World Ranking
5004
National Ranking
2326

John A. Miller 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 John A. Miller 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: 209 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.

John A. Miller 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 John A. Miller 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: 52 D-Index — 65th percentile

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

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

Overview

John A. Miller is affiliated with the University of Georgia in the United States and primarily works in the field of Computer Science. Their research spans several subfields including Artificial Intelligence, Management Science and Operations Research, Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, Safety Research, and Modeling and Simulation.

The scientist's research covers numerous topics, with a particular focus on Ethics and Social Impacts of AI, COVID-19 epidemiological studies, Anomaly Detection Techniques and Applications, Traffic Prediction and Management Techniques, Adversarial Robustness in Machine Learning, Data-Driven Disease Surveillance, and Time Series Analysis and Forecasting.

Among recent publications, the following papers illustrate the scope and range of their research:

  • A Survey of Deep Learning and Foundation Models for Time Series Forecasting, 2024, arXiv (Cornell University)
  • Outside the Echo Chamber: Optimizing the Performative Risk, 2021, arXiv (Cornell University)

Though not as a primary author, related contributions tied to frequent coauthor Mohammadhossein Toutiaee include publications in 2020 and 2021 focusing on video content understanding, stereotype-free classification of fictitious faces, and improving COVID-19 forecasting using exogenous variables.

John A. Miller has collaborated with several researchers at varying frequencies. Frequent coauthors include Khaled Rasheed, I. Budak Arpinar, Mohammadhossein Toutiaee, Moritz Hardt, and Ludwig Schmidt, each contributing to multiple joint works.

Their work has predominantly appeared in the venue arXiv (Cornell University), with nine publications listed there. Additionally, research has been published in IEEE Open Journal of Instrumentation and Measurement, the 2022 Winter Simulation Conference (WSC), the 2022 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, and AgriEngineering.

Best Publications

  • Quality of Service for Workflows and Web Service Processes

    Jorge Cardoso;Amit P. Sheth;John A. Miller;Jonathan Arnold

  • PlasmoDB: a functional genomic database for malaria parasites

    Cristina Aurrecoechea;John Brestelli;Brian P. Brunk;Jennifer Dommer

  • TriTrypDB: a functional genomic resource for the Trypanosomatidae

    Martin Aslett;Cristina Aurrecoechea;Matthew Berriman;John Brestelli

  • Web Service Semantics - WSDL-S

    Rama Akkiraju;Joel Farrell;John A. Miller;Meenakshi Nagarajan

  • METEOR-S WSDI: A Scalable P2P Infrastructure of Registries for Semantic Publication and Discovery of Web Services

    Kunal Verma;Kaarthik Sivashanmugam;Amit Sheth;Abhijit Patil

  • Constraint driven Web service composition in METEOR-S

    R. Aggarwal;Kunal Verma;J. Miller;W. Milnor

  • Adding Semantics to Web Services Standards

    Kaarthik Sivashanmugam;Kunal Verma;Amit P. Sheth;John A. Miller

  • Modeling Quality of Service for Workflows and Web Service Processes

    Jorge Cardoso;John A. Miller;Amit P. Sheth;Jonathan Arnold

  • Framework for Semantic Web Process Composition

    Kaarthik Sivashanmugam;John A. Miller;Amit P. Sheth;Kunal Verma

  • GiardiaDB and TrichDB: integrated genomic resources for the eukaryotic protist pathogens Giardia lamblia and Trichomonas vaginalis

    Cristina Aurrecoechea;John Brestelli;Brian P. Brunk;Jane M. Carlton

  • Exception Handling in Workflow Systems

    Zongwei Luo;Amit Sheth;Krys Kochut;John Miller

  • WebWork: METEOR _2 ‘s Web-Based Workflow Management System

    John A. Miller;Devanand Palaniswami;Amit P. Sheth;Krys J. Kochut

  • Web services: been there, done that?

    S. Staab;W. van der Aalst;V.R. Benjamins;A. Sheth

  • An evaluation of local improvement operators for genetic algorithms

    J.A. Miller;W.D. Potter;R.V. Gandham;C.N. Lapena

  • CryptoDB: a Cryptosporidium bioinformatics resource update.

    Mark Heiges;Haiming Wang;Edward Robinson;Cristina Aurrecoechea

  • CORBA-Based Run Time Architectures for Workflow Management Systems

    John A. Miller;Amit P. Sheth;Krzysztof J. Kochut;X. Wang

  • The METEOR-S Approach for Configuring and Executing Dynamic Web Processes

    Kunal Verma;Karthik Gomadam;Amit P. Sheth;John Miller

  • Workflow Quality of Service

    Jorge Cardoso;Amit P. Sheth;John Miller

  • Enhancing web services description and discovery to facilitate composition

    Preeda Rajasekaran;John Miller;Kunal Verma;Amit Sheth

  • EuPathDB: a portal to eukaryotic pathogen databases.

    Cristina Aurrecoechea;John Brestelli;Brian P. Brunk;Steve Fischer

Frequent Co-Authors

Amit P. Sheth
Amit P. Sheth University of South Carolina
Jorge Cardoso
Jorge Cardoso University of Coimbra
William S. York
William S. York University of Georgia
Jessica C. Kissinger
Jessica C. Kissinger University of Georgia
Christian J. Stoeckert
Christian J. Stoeckert University of Pennsylvania
Mark E. Josephson
Mark E. Josephson Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center
Paul A. Fishwick
Paul A. Fishwick The University of Texas at Dallas
David S. Roos
David S. Roos University of Pennsylvania
Francis E. Marchlinski
Francis E. Marchlinski University of Pennsylvania
Zongwei Luo
Zongwei Luo Southern University of Science and Technology

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 degrees opens up flexible and affordable options for students interested in Computer Science and related fields. Many choose to start with the cheapest online university programs to manage costs while getting a recognized qualification.

For those aiming to blend technical skills with specialized knowledge, pursuing an engineering degree online can be a smart next step. This route offers access to various engineering disciplines through flexible learning formats.

Individuals aspiring to lead or transition into managerial roles in tech often consider advanced business education. The executive mba is ideal for working professionals who want to enhance their leadership skills without stepping away from their careers.

Additionally, students interested in information management or digital curation may explore the mlis degree online cost to compare affordable pathways in library and information science.

Selecting the right online program is crucial for balancing affordability, accreditation, and future career opportunities. Explore these pathways to find the best match for your academic and professional goals.

Best Scientists Citing John A. Miller

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles