World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Computer Science

D-Index
37
Citations
6197
World Ranking
10710
National Ranking
323

John Yearwood 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 Yearwood 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: 273 publications — 68th percentile

68% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

John Yearwood 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 Yearwood 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: 37 D-Index — 27th percentile

27% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Overview

John Yearwood is affiliated with Deakin University in Australia and has contributed extensively to the field of computer science. Their publication record includes at least 53 works, with a significant focus on artificial intelligence, plant science, cardiology, biomedical engineering, and cognitive neuroscience.

Their research spans various subfields, notably:

  • Artificial Intelligence
  • Plant Science
  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine
  • Biomedical Engineering
  • Cognitive Neuroscience

Key topics addressed in their work include:

  • ECG Monitoring and Analysis
  • Smart Agriculture and AI
  • EEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces
  • Non-Invasive Vital Sign Monitoring
  • Privacy-Preserving Technologies in Data
  • Plant Disease Management Techniques
  • Emotion and Mood Recognition

Yearwood has published frequently in several venues, with multiple papers appearing in:

  • arXiv (Cornell University)
  • Knowledge-Based Systems
  • IEEE Access
  • Information Sciences
  • Computers, materials & continua/Computers, materials & continua (Print)

Frequent collaborators include:

  • Sutharshan Rajasegarar
  • Selvarajah Thuseethan
  • Chandan Karmakar
  • Sivasubramaniam Janarthan
  • Ahsan Habib

Recent papers published by Yearwood include:

  • "Blockchain-enabled Federated Learning: A Survey," 2022, ACM Computing Surveys
  • "Deep Metric Learning Based Citrus Disease Classification With Sparse Data," 2020, IEEE Access
  • "Precision psychiatry with immunological and cognitive biomarkers: a multi-domain prediction for the diagnosis of bipolar disorder or schizophrenia using machine learning," 2020, Translational Psychiatry
  • "Robustness of electrocardiogram signal quality indices," 2022, Journal of The Royal Society Interface
  • "LGAttNet: Automatic micro-expression detection using dual-stream local and global attentions," 2020, Knowledge-Based Systems

Best Publications

  • Guidelines for Developing and Reporting Machine Learning Predictive Models in Biomedical Research: A Multidisciplinary View.

    Wei Luo;Dinh Phung;Truyen Tran;Sunil Gupta

  • Cayley graphs as classifiers for data mining: The influence of asymmetries

    Andrei Kelarev;Joe Ryan;John Yearwood

  • Blockchain-enabled Federated Learning: A Survey

    Unknown

  • A hybrid feature selection with ensemble classification for imbalanced healthcare data: A case study for brain tumor diagnosis

    Shamsul Huda;John Yearwood;Herbert F. Jelinek;Mohammad Mehedi Hassan

  • An algorithm for minimization of pumping costs in water distribution systems using a novel approach to pump scheduling

    Adil M. Bagirov;A. F. Barton;H. Mala-Jetmarova;A. Al Nuaimat

  • A new nonsmooth optimization algorithm for minimum sum-of-squares clustering problems

    Adil M. Bagirov;John Yearwood

  • Unsupervised and supervised data classification via nonsmooth and global optimization

    A. M. Bagirov;A. M. Rubinov;N. V. Soukhoroukova;J. Yearwood

  • Hybrids of support vector machine wrapper and filter based framework for malware detection

    Shamsul Huda;Jemal Abawajy;Mamoun Alazab;Mali Abdollalihian

  • Heterogeneous Cooperative Co-Evolution Memetic Differential Evolution Algorithm for Big Data Optimization Problems

    Nasser R. Sabar;Jemal Abawajy;John Yearwood

  • On the Limitations of Scalarisation for Multi-objective Reinforcement Learning of Pareto Fronts

    Peter Vamplew;John Yearwood;Richard Dazeley;Adam Berry

  • Protection of Privacy in Biometric Data

    Iynkaran Natgunanathan;Abid Mehmood;Yong Xiang;Gleb Beliakov

  • Detection of epileptic seizure based on entropy analysis of short-term EEG.

    Peng Li;Chandan Karmakar;Chandan Karmakar;John Yearwood;Svetha Venkatesh

  • Securing the operations in SCADA-IoT platform based industrial control system using ensemble of deep belief networks

    Shamsul Huda;John Yearwood;Mohammad Mehedi Hassan;Ahmad Almogren

  • Defending unknown attacks on cyber-physical systems by semi-supervised approach and available unlabeled data

    Shamsul Huda;Suruz Miah;Mohammad Mehedi Hassan;Rafiqul Islam

  • Does the Delphi process lead to increased accuracy in group-based judgmental forecasts or does it simply induce consensus amongst judgmental forecasters ?

    Fergus Bolger;Andrew Stranieri;George Wright;John Yearwood

  • New algorithms for multi-class cancer diagnosis using tumor gene expression signatures

    Adil M. Bagirov;Brent Ferguson;Sasha Ivkovic;G. Saunders

  • A Framework for Software Defect Prediction and Metric Selection

    Shamsul Huda;Sultan Alyahya;Mohsin Ali;Shafiq Ahmad

  • Predicting Australian stock market index using neural networks exploiting dynamical swings and intermarket influences

    Heping Pan;Chandima Tilakaratne;John Leighton Yearwood

  • Deep metric learning based citrus disease classification with sparse data

    Sivasubramaniam Janarthan;Selvarajah Thuseethan;Sutharshan Rajasegarar;Qiang Lyu

  • A Global Optimization Approach to Classification

    Adil M. Bagirov;Alexander M. Rubinov;John Yearwood

  • Consensus clustering and supervised classification for profiling phishing emails in internet commerce security

    Richard Dazeley;John L. Yearwood;Byeong H. Kang;Andrei V. Kelarev

  • Defending unknown attacks on cyber-physical systems by semi-supervised approach and available unlabelled data

    Rafiqul Islam;Shamsul Huda;Mohammad Mehedi Hassan;Suruz Miah

Frequent Co-Authors

Jemal H. Abawajy
Jemal H. Abawajy Deakin University
Paul A. Watters
Paul A. Watters La Trobe University
Sutharshan Rajasegarar
Sutharshan Rajasegarar Deakin University
Gleb Beliakov
Gleb Beliakov Deakin University
Svetha Venkatesh
Svetha Venkatesh Deakin University
Mohammad Mehedi Hassan
Mohammad Mehedi Hassan King Saud University
Dinh Phung
Dinh Phung Monash University
Ron Borland
Ron Borland University of Melbourne
Mamoun Alazab
Mamoun Alazab Charles Darwin University
Helen Christensen
Helen Christensen University of New South Wales

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

Pursuing a Computer Science degree in the USA opens the door to a broad range of online degrees and career opportunities in related fields. Many students combine their computing knowledge with other disciplines to improve their employability and expand their technical expertise.

For those interested in the intersection between technology and environmental solutions, consider enrolling in an online environmental engineering degree. Similarly, if you want to develop a strong foundation in designing machinery or systems, an online degree in mechanical engineering is a fitting choice.

Science-oriented learners might benefit from pursuing a physics degree online, which emphasizes analytical and problem-solving skills valued in many tech roles. Additionally, the demand for experts who can analyze large data sets continues to rise; a data science degree can help you enter one of today’s fastest-growing industries.

Best Scientists Citing John Yearwood

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles