World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Computer Science

D-Index
43
Citations
8735
World Ranking
7921
National Ranking
3416

Leon J. Osterweil 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 Leon J. Osterweil 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: 315 publications — 76th percentile

76% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Leon J. Osterweil 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 Leon J. Osterweil 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: 43 D-Index — 46th percentile

46% 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

  • 1998 - ACM Fellow For fundamental contributions in software engineering, particularly in testing and analysis, environments and process, and leadership in the computer science community.

Overview

Leon J. Osterweil is affiliated with the University of Massachusetts Amherst in the United States. Their research spans multiple fields, primarily within computer science and medicine. Osterweil's work focuses on areas such as parallel computing and optimization techniques, distributed and parallel computing systems, advanced data storage technologies, and electronic health records systems. In addition, they explore topics related to mobile health and mHealth applications, telemedicine and telehealth implementation, and human-automation interaction and safety.

Osterweil has contributed to various recent publications, demonstrating active engagement in both computing and health-related research. These publications include:

  • "AAP4All: An Adaptive Auto Parallelization of Serial Code for HPC Systems," published in 2021 in Intelligent Automation & Soft Computing
  • "A Coding Framework for Usability Evaluation of Digital Health Technologies," published in 2022 in Lecture Notes in Computer Science
  • "A novel multimodal, intraoperative cognitive workload assessment of cardiac surgery team members," published in 2024 in the Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery
  • "Computational Predictors in Online Social Deliberations," published in 2021 in Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media

The scientist frequently collaborates with several coauthors, including Heather M. Conboy, Lori A. Clarke, Lauren R. Kennedy-Metz, George S. Avrunin, and Marco A. Zenati. Collaboration with these researchers has resulted in multiple joint contributions across various projects.

Osterweil's work has been published in venues such as Intelligent Automation & Soft Computing, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, the Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, and the Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media, highlighting an interdisciplinary research profile crossing computing and health sciences.

Among honors, Osterweil was named an ACM Fellow in 1998 for fundamental contributions in software engineering, particularly in testing and analysis, environments and process, and leadership within the computer science community.

Best Publications

  • Software processes are software too

    L. Osterweil

  • Data Flow Analysis in Software Reliability

    Lloyd D. Fosdick;Leon J. Osterweil

  • Foundations for the Arcadia environment architecture

    Richard N. Taylor;Frank C. Belz;Lori A. Clarke;Leon Osterweil

  • On Two Problems in the Generation of Program Test Paths

    H.N. Gabow;S.N. Maheshwari;L.J. Osterweil

  • Little-JIL/Juliette: a process definition language and interpreter

    A.G. Cass;A.S. Lerner;E.K. McCall;L.J. Osterweil

  • PROPEL: an approach supporting property elucidation

    Rachel L. Smith;George S. Avrunin;Lori A. Clarke;Leon J. Osterweil

  • Dave—a validation error detection and documentation system for fortran programs†

    Leon J. Osterweil;Lloyd D. Fosdick

  • Exception Handling Patterns for Process Modeling

    B.S. Lerner;S. Christov;L.J. Osterweil;R. Bendraou

  • Language constructs for managing change in process-centered environments

    Stanley M. Sutton;Dennis Heimbigner;Leon J. Osterweil

  • The design of a next-generation process language

    Stanley M. Sutton;Leon J. Osterweil

  • Software processes are software too, revisited: an invited talk on the most influential paper of ICSE 9

    Leon J. Osterweil

  • Strategic directions in software quality

    Leon Osterweil

  • APPL/A: a language for software process programming

    Stanley M. Sutton;Dennis Heimbigner;Leon J. Osterweil

  • Cecil: a sequencing constraint language for automatic static analysis generation

    K.M. Olender;L.J. Osterweil

  • Using Little-JIL to coordinate agents in software engineering

    A. Wise;A.G. Cass;B.S. Lerner;E.K. McCall

  • ISPW-6 Software Process Example

    M.I. Kellner;P.H. Feiler;A. Finkelstein;T. Katayama

  • Anomaly Detection in Concurrent Software by Static Data Flow Analysis

    R.N. Taylor;L.J. Osterweil

  • Software Process Modeling Example Problem

    M.I. Kellner;P.H. Feiler;A. Finkelstein;T. Katayama

  • Applying static analysis to software architectures

    Gleb Naumovich;George S. Avrunin;Lori A. Clarke;Leon J. Osterweil

  • Proceedings of the 28th international conference on Software engineering

    Leon J. Osterweil;Dieter Rombach;Mary Lou Soffa

  • DAVE -- A Validation, Error Detection and Documentation System for Fortran Programs ; CU-CS-071-75

    Leon J Osterweil;Lloyd D Fosdick

  • APPL/A: A Language for Software-Process Programming ; CU-CS-727-94

    Stanley M Sutton Jr.;Dennis M Heimbigner;Leon J Osterweil

Frequent Co-Authors

Lori A. Clarke
Lori A. Clarke University of Massachusetts Amherst
Richard N. Taylor
Richard N. Taylor University of California, Irvine
Barry Boehm
Barry Boehm University of Southern California
Matt Bishop
Matt Bishop University of California, Davis
Yuriy Brun
Yuriy Brun University of Massachusetts Amherst
Aaron M. Ellison
Aaron M. Ellison Harvard University
Alexander L. Wolf
Alexander L. Wolf University of California, Santa Cruz
Jeff Kramer
Jeff Kramer Imperial College London
Liming Zhu
Liming Zhu Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation
Lei Zhang
Lei Zhang Hong Kong Polytechnic 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 a wealth of degree and career options suited for various backgrounds. If you’re considering advancing your studies, choosing what masters program should I do is crucial. Specializing in fields like data science, cybersecurity, or artificial intelligence can increase demand and earning potential.

For those new to higher education or looking for a quicker entry point, there are many online associates programs available. These flexible and affordable pathways provide foundational knowledge, enabling students to jumpstart their careers or continue toward a bachelor’s degree.

Cost is often a major concern. Fortunately, students can find affordable online degree programs offered by reputable institutions across the country. These programs deliver quality education without the burden of excessive debt.

If your academic record is a worry, don’t let a lower GPA limit your aspirations. Many best online colleges that accept low GPA are committed to supporting non-traditional students and helping them achieve their education goals.

Best Scientists Citing Leon J. Osterweil

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles