World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Computer Science

D-Index
36
Citations
7063
World Ranking
11096
National Ranking
85

Koen Claessen 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 Koen Claessen 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: 127 publications — 17th percentile

17% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Koen Claessen 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 Koen Claessen 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: 36 D-Index — 23rd percentile

23% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Overview

Koen Claessen is affiliated with Chalmers University of Technology in Sweden and has contributed extensively to the field of computer science. Their research spans several interconnected domains including software, artificial intelligence, hardware and architecture, computational theory and mathematics, and signal processing.

Their main areas of study focus on formal methods in verification, software testing and debugging techniques, logic, programming, and type systems, model-driven software engineering techniques, logic, reasoning and knowledge, advanced malware detection techniques, and embedded systems design techniques.

Claessen has frequently published their work in venues such as Proceedings of the ACM on Programming Languages, IEEE Transactions on Computer-Aided Design of Integrated Circuits and Systems, IFAC-PapersOnLine, Formal Methods in System Design, and EPJ Web of Conferences.

Recent publications include:

  • "Multiple Objective Functions for Falsification of Cyber-Physical Systems," 2020, IFAC-PapersOnLine
  • "SAT modulo discrete event simulation applied to railway design capacity analysis," 2021, Formal Methods in System Design
  • "The Verse Calculus: A Core Calculus for Deterministic Functional Logic Programming," 2023, Proceedings of the ACM on Programming Languages
  • "Enhancing Temporal Logic Falsification with Specification Transformation and Valued Booleans," 2020, Chalmers Research (Chalmers University of Technology)
  • "Testing Cyber-Physical Systems Using a Line-Search Falsification Method," 2021, IEEE Transactions on Computer-Aided Design of Integrated Circuits and Systems

Frequent collaborators in Claessen's research include Zahra Ramezani, Knut Åkesson, Nicholas Smallbone, Johan Lidén Eddeland, and Martin Fabian.

Best Publications

  • QuickCheck: a lightweight tool for random testing of Haskell programs

    Koen Claessen;John Hughes

  • QuickCheck: a lightweight tool for random testing of Haskell programs

    Unknown

  • Lava: hardware design in Haskell

    Per Bjesse;Koen Claessen;Mary Sheeran;Satnam Singh

  • New Techniques that Improve MACE-style Finite Model Finding

    Koen Claessen

  • SAT-Based Verification without State Space Traversal

    Per Bjesse;Koen Claessen

  • Testing an optimising compiler by generating random lambda terms

    Michał H. Pałka;Koen Claessen;Alejandro Russo;John Hughes

  • Static contract checking for Haskell

    Dana N. Xu;Simon Peyton Jones;Koen Claessen

  • Feldspar: A domain specific language for digital signal processing algorithms

    Emil Axelsson;Koen Claessen;Gergely Devai;Zoltan Horvath

  • A library for light-weight information-flow security in haskell

    Alejandro Russo;Koen Claessen;John Hughes

  • Observable Sharing for Functional Circuit Description

    Koen Claessen;David Sands

  • Automating inductive proofs using theory exploration

    Koen Claessen;Moa Johansson;Dan Rosén;Nicholas Smallbone

  • A poor man's concurrency monad

    Koen Claessen

  • New Techniques that Improve MACE-style Model Finding

    Koen Lindström Claessen;Niklas Sörensson

  • Testing monadic code with QuickCheck

    Koen Claessen;John Hughes

  • Finding race conditions in Erlang with QuickCheck and PULSE

    Koen Claessen;Michal Palka;Nicholas Smallbone;John Hughes

  • QuickSpec: guessing formal specifications using testing

    Koen Claessen;Nicholas Smallbone;John Hughes

  • Using the TPTP language for writing derivations and finite interpretations

    Geoff Sutcliffe;Stephan Schulz;Koen Claessen;Allen Van Gelder

  • Testing monadic code with QuickCheck

    Koen Claessen;John Hughes

  • Expressive array constructs in an embedded GPU kernel programming language

    Koen Claessen;Mary Sheeran;Bo Joel Svensson

  • The TPTP typed first-order form with arithmetic

    Geoff Sutcliffe;Stephan Schulz;Koen Claessen;Peter Baumgartner

  • The design and implementation of feldspar an embedded language for digital signal processing

    Emil Axelsson;Koen Claessen;Mary Sheeran;Josef Svenningsson

Frequent Co-Authors

John Hughes
John Hughes Chalmers University of Technology
Geoff Sutcliffe
Geoff Sutcliffe University of Miami
Bengt Lennartson
Bengt Lennartson Chalmers University of Technology
Allen Van Gelder
Allen Van Gelder University of California, Santa Cruz
Simon Jones
Simon Jones Microsoft (United States)
Nir Piterman
Nir Piterman University of Gothenburg
Guy E. Blelloch
Guy E. Blelloch Carnegie Mellon University
Nikhil Swamy
Nikhil Swamy Microsoft (United States)
Robert Bruce Findler
Robert Bruce Findler Northwestern 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 online degrees in Computer Science opens doors to many high-demand and lucrative tech fields. For students seeking a fast track to employment, there are quick degrees online that pay well, offering practical skills and strong salary prospects in just a short period.

With the rise of Artificial Intelligence, more students are considering degrees in ai. These programs teach foundational knowledge and cutting-edge AI skills for roles like data scientist, machine learning engineer, and more.

Choosing the right course of study is crucial. Check the majors in college that align with emerging job markets for long-term career growth in technology.

For those considering advanced study, there are options for easiest masters degrees that can be completed online. These programs may provide a smoother academic path, while still enhancing your technical expertise and career prospects.

Best Scientists Citing Koen Claessen

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles