World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Computer Science

D-Index
59
Citations
19786
World Ranking
3355
National Ranking
1625

John E. Laird 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 E. Laird 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: 249 publications — 62nd percentile

62% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

John E. Laird 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 E. Laird 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: 59 D-Index — 77th percentile

77% 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

  • 2011 - Fellow of the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS)
  • 2006 - ACM Fellow For contributions to the development and application of cognitive architectures.
  • 1995 - Fellow of the Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence (AAAI) For contributions to machine learning, integrated architectures for intelligence, and unified theories of cognition.

Overview

John E. Laird is affiliated with the University of Michigan-Ann Arbor in the United States. Their research primarily falls within the field of Computer Science, with a strong focus on Artificial Intelligence. Other subfields contributing to their work include Cognitive Neuroscience, General Health Professions, Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, and Information Systems.

The scientist's research covers various topics such as AI-based Problem Solving and Planning, Topic Modeling, Natural Language Processing Techniques, Multi-Agent Systems and Negotiation, Semantic Web and Ontologies, Speech and Dialogue Systems, and Multimodal Machine Learning Applications.

Frequent coauthors collaborating with John E. Laird include Robert E. Wray, James R. Kirk, Steven J. Jones, Peter Lindes, and Christian Lebière.

Key publication venues where their work appears regularly are:

  • arXiv (Cornell University)
  • Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence
  • Proceedings of the AAAI Symposium Series
  • Journal of Artificial General Intelligence
  • NeuroImage

Selected recent papers by John E. Laird include:

  • Special Issue "On Defining Artificial Intelligence"-Commentaries and Author's Response, 2020, Journal of Artificial General Intelligence
  • Analysis of the human connectome data supports the notion of a "Common Model of Cognition" for human and human-like intelligence across domains, 2021, NeuroImage
  • Acquiring Grounded Representations of Words with Situated Interactive Instruction, 2025, arXiv (Cornell University)
  • Improving Knowledge Extraction from LLMs for Task Learning through Agent Analysis, 2024, Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence
  • An Analysis and Comparison of ACT-R and Soar, 2022, arXiv (Cornell University)

John E. Laird has been recognized as a fellow of multiple professional organizations. These include the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) since 2011, the ACM Fellow in 2006 for contributions to cognitive architectures, and the Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence (AAAI) since 1995 for work in machine learning, integrated architectures for intelligence, and unified theories of cognition.

Best Publications

  • Soar: an architecture for general intelligence

    J. E. Laird;A. Newell;P. S. Rosenbloom

  • The Soar Cognitive Architecture

    John E. Laird

  • Cognitive architectures: Research issues and challenges

    Pat Langley;John E. Laird;Seth Rogers

  • Chunking in Soar: the anatomy of a general learning mechanism

    John E. Laird;Paul S. Rosenbloom;Allen Newell

  • Human-Level AI's Killer Application: Interactive Computer Games

    John Laird;Michael VanLent

  • Extending the Soar Cognitive Architecture

    John E. Laird

  • Human-Level AI's Killer Application: Interactive Computer Games

    John E. Laird;Michael van Lent

  • Automated Intelligent Pilots for Combat Flight Simulation

    Randolph M. Jones;John E. Laird;Paul E. Nielsen;Karen J. Coulter

  • Intelligent Agents for Interactive Simulation Environments

    Milind Tambe;W. Lewis Johnson;Randolph M. Jones;Frank V. Koss

  • A Standard Model of the Mind: Toward a Common Computational Framework across Artificial Intelligence, Cognitive Science, Neuroscience, and Robotics

    John E. Laird;Christian Lebiere;Paul S. Rosenbloom

  • Symbolic architectures for cognition

    Allen Newell;Paul S. Rosenbloom;John E. Laird

  • Integrating execution, planning, and learning in Soar for external environments

    J. E. Laird;P. S. Rosenbloom

  • The soar papers : research on integrated intelligence

    Paul S. Rosenbloom;John Laird;Allen Newell

  • It knows what you're going to do: adding anticipation to a Quakebot

    John E. Laird

  • Universal Subgoaling and Chunking: The Automatic Generation and Learning of Goal Hierarchies

    John Laird;Paul Rosenbloom;Allen Newell

  • A preliminary analysis of the Soar architecture as a basis for general intelligence

    Paul S. Rosenbloom;John E. Laird;Allen Newell;Robert McCarl

  • Using a computer game to develop advanced AI

    J.E. Laird

  • A Gentle Introduction to Soar, an Architecture for Human Cognition.

    Jill F. Lehman;John Laird;Paul Rosenbloom

  • Stimulus-Response Compatibility

    John Laird;Paul Rosenbloom;Allen Newell

  • AI characters and directors for interactive computer games

    Brian Magerko;John E. Laird;Mazin Assanie;Alex Kerfoot

  • Soar Papers: Research on Integrated Intelligence

    Paul S. Rosenbloom;Allen Newell;John E. Laird

Frequent Co-Authors

Paul S. Rosenbloom
Paul S. Rosenbloom University of Southern California
Allen Newell
Allen Newell Carnegie Mellon University
Christian Lebiere
Christian Lebiere Carnegie Mellon University
Michael Hucka
Michael Hucka California Institute of Technology
Richard L. Lewis
Richard L. Lewis University of Michigan–Ann Arbor
Kenneth D. Forbus
Kenneth D. Forbus Northwestern University
Usama M. Fayyad
Usama M. Fayyad Open Insights
Pat Langley
Pat Langley Stanford University
Milind Tambe
Milind Tambe Harvard University
Ying Zhao
Ying Zhao Nankai 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 Computer Science in the USA opens doors to many other in-demand fields and academic tracks. For students interested in boosting their career prospects, it's wise to look at the top degrees for the future. These fields often pair well with Computer Science or provide a strong alternative path.

If you’re considering graduate study but are also mindful of workload, exploring an easy masters degree could be a smart move. These programs offer a faster route to a higher qualification without the intense time requirements of more technical fields.

For those aiming for doctoral qualifications or academic leadership positions, pursuing one of the most affordable online doctoral programs is a practical option. These cost-effective programs help minimize student debt while maximizing academic achievement. Alternatively, educators seeking speed and value can choose from the cheapest online edd programs, designed to fast-track professional advancement.

Whether you're planning to advance in tech, education, or another sector, understanding related online degrees and career pathways will help you make an informed decision about your academic future.

Best Scientists Citing John E. Laird

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles