World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Computer Science

D-Index
47
Citations
20484
World Ranking
6292
National Ranking
2814

Leonardo de Moura 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 Leonardo de Moura 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: 97 publications — 8th percentile

8% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Leonardo de Moura 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 Leonardo de Moura 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: 47 D-Index — 56th percentile

56% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Overview

Leonardo de Moura is a researcher affiliated with Microsoft in the United States with a focus on computer science. Their scholarly work spans several core areas including artificial intelligence, computational theory and mathematics, computer networks and communications, and information systems.

The scientist has contributed extensively to topics such as logic, programming, and type systems; formal methods in verification; logic, reasoning, and knowledge; mathematics, computing, and information processing; software engineering research; advanced database systems and queries; and security and verification in computing.

Key recent publications include:

  • Lean Formalization of Completeness Proof for Coalition Logic with Common Knowledge, 2024, Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (Schloss Dagstuhl)
  • Use and Abuse of Instance Parameters in the Lean Mathematical Library, 2022, Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (Schloss Dagstuhl)
  • 'do' unchained: embracing local imperativity in a purely functional language (functional pearl), 2022, Proceedings of the ACM on Programming Languages
  • Beyond Notations: Hygienic Macro Expansion for Theorem Proving Languages, 2022, Logical Methods in Computer Science
  • Universal Policies for Software-Defined MDPs, 2020, arXiv (Cornell University)

These publications commonly appear in venues such as Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (Schloss Dagstuhl), Proceedings of the ACM on Programming Languages, arXiv (Cornell University), Logical Methods in Computer Science, and the Journal of Automated Reasoning.

Leonardo de Moura collaborates frequently with several co-authors, including Sebastian Ullrich, Daniel Selsam, Jeremy Avigad, Soonho Kong, and Cody Roux.

Best Publications

  • Z3: an efficient SMT solver

    Leonardo De Moura;Nikolaj Bjørner

  • Clone detection using abstract syntax trees

    I.D. Baxter;A. Yahin;L. Moura;M. Sant'Anna

  • A fast linear-arithmetic solver for DPLL(T)

    Bruno Dutertre;Leonardo De Moura

  • Satisfiability modulo theories: introduction and applications

    Leonardo De Moura;Nikolaj Bjørner

  • The YICES SMT Solver

    Bruno Dutertre;Leonardo de Moura

  • The Lean Theorem Prover (System Description)

    Leonardo Mendonça de Moura;Soonho Kong;Jeremy Avigad;Floris van Doorn

  • Solving non-linear arithmetic

    Dejan Jovanović;Leonardo de Moura

  • Efficient E-Matching for SMT Solvers

    Leonardo Moura;Nikolaj Bjørner

  • Complete Instantiation for Quantified Formulas in Satisfiabiliby Modulo Theories

    Yeting Ge;Leonardo Moura

  • Satisfiability Modulo Theories: An Appetizer

    Leonardo Moura;Nikolaj Bjørner

  • Learning a SAT Solver from Single-Bit Supervision

    Daniel Selsam;Matthew Lamm;Benedikt Bünz;Percy Liang

  • Bounded Model Checking and Induction: From Refutation to Verification

    Leonardo Mendonça de Moura;Harald Rueß;Maria Sorea

  • Lazy Theorem Proving for Bounded Model Checking over Infinite Domains

    Leonardo M. de Moura;Harald Rueß;Maria Sorea;Maria Sorea

  • Generalized, efficient array decision procedures

    Leonardo de Moura;Nikolaj Bjorner

  • Efficiently solving quantified bit-vector formulas

    Christoph M. Wintersteiger;Youssef Hamadi;Leonardo Moura

  • Lazy theorem proving for bounded model checking over infinite domains

    Leonardo De Moura;Harald Ruess;Maria Sorea

  • Generating efficient test sets with a model checker

    G. Hamon;L. de Moura;J. Rushby

  • The SAL Language Manual

    Leonardo de Moura;Sam Owre;N. Shankar

  • The Lean 4 Theorem Prover and Programming Language.

    Leonardo de Moura;Sebastian Ullrich

  • A Model-Constructing Satisfiability Calculus

    Leonardo Moura;Dejan Jovanović

  • Bounded model checking and induction: From refutation to verification

    Leonardo De Moura;Harald Ruess;Maria Sorea

Frequent Co-Authors

Nikolaj Bjørner
Nikolaj Bjørner Microsoft (United States)
Clark Barrett
Clark Barrett Stanford University
Natarajan Shankar
Natarajan Shankar SRI International
Thomas Ball
Thomas Ball Microsoft (United States)
Percy Liang
Percy Liang Stanford University
John Rushby
John Rushby SRI International
David L. Dill
David L. Dill Stanford University
Christopher S. Lynch
Christopher S. Lynch University of California, Riverside
Cesare Tinelli
Cesare Tinelli University of Iowa
Margus Veanes
Margus Veanes Microsoft (United States)

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 diverse academic and professional options. Many students start with an associates degree, which provides foundational knowledge and can be completed quickly and affordably online.

For those aiming for advanced roles, pursuing one of the affordable master degree programs can offer in-depth expertise and improve job prospects without incurring heavy debt.

Leadership-oriented professionals might consider the cheapest online doctorate in organizational leadership, which equips graduates for top executive positions and organizational transformation. Similarly, educators can enhance their credentials with ed.d educational leadership programs, focusing on effective administration and policy.

The evolution of online education ensures flexible access to a variety of degree pathways, helping you align your education with your chosen career while balancing affordability and quality.

Best Scientists Citing Leonardo de Moura

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles