World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Computer Science

D-Index
44
Citations
10543
World Ranking
7449
National Ranking
3244

Lucian Popa 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 Lucian Popa 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: 144 publications — 24th percentile

24% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Lucian Popa 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 Lucian Popa 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: 44 D-Index — 48th percentile

48% 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

  • 2017 - ACM Distinguished Member
  • 2012 - ACM Senior Member

Overview

Lucian Popa is affiliated with IBM in the United States and has contributed extensively to the field of computer science. Their primary focus lies in artificial intelligence, with significant work also spanning computer vision and pattern recognition, management science and operations research, molecular biology, and information systems.

Their scholarly output includes research centered on various topics such as topic modeling, natural language processing techniques, data quality and management, explainable artificial intelligence (XAI), machine learning and data classification, multimodal machine learning applications, and biomedical text mining and ontologies.

Notable recent publications by Lucian Popa include:

  • Global Table Extractor (GTE): A Framework for Joint Table Identification and Cell Structure Recognition Using Visual Context, 2020, arXiv (Cornell University)
  • AUTOMATA: Gradient Based Data Subset Selection for Compute-Efficient Hyper-parameter Tuning, 2022, arXiv (Cornell University)
  • PARTNER: Human-in-the-Loop Entity Name Understanding with Deep Learning, 2020, Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence
  • Leveraging Abstract Meaning Representation for Knowledge Base Question Answering, 2020, arXiv (Cornell University)
  • Ontology-Enriched Query Answering on Relational Databases, 2021, Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence

Frequently collaborating with Lucian Popa are the following coauthors:

  • Krishnateja Killamsetty
  • Ganesh Ramakrishnan
  • Rishabh Iyer
  • Yunyao Li
  • Guttu Sai Abhishek

Their research has appeared predominantly in venues such as:

  • arXiv (Cornell University)
  • Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence
  • 2022 IEEE International Conference on Big Data (Big Data)

Lucian Popa's professional recognition includes being named an ACM Distinguished Member in 2017 and an ACM Senior Member in 2012.

Best Publications

  • Data exchange: semantics and query answering

    Ronald Fagin;Phokion G. Kolaitis;Renée J. Miller;Lucian Popa

  • Data Exchange: Semantics and Query Answering

    Ronald Fagin;Phokion G. Kolaitis;Renée J. Miller;Lucian Popa

  • Translating web data

    Lucian Popa;Yannis Velegrakis;Mauricio A. Hernández;Renée J. Miller

  • Data exchange: getting to the core

    Ronald Fagin;Phokion G. Kolaitis;Lucian Popa

  • The Clio project: managing heterogeneity

    Renée J. Miller;Mauricio A. Hernández;Laura M. Haas;Lingling Yan

  • Composing schema mappings: second-order dependencies to the rescue

    Ronald Fagin;Phokion G. Kolaitis;Lucian Popa;Wang-Chiew Tan

  • Clio grows up: from research prototype to industrial tool

    Laura M. Haas;Mauricio A. Hernández;Howard Ho;Lucian Popa

  • Clio: Schema Mapping Creation and Data Exchange

    Ronald Fagin;Laura M. Haas;Mauricio Hernández;Renée J. Miller

  • Constraint-based XML query rewriting for data integration

    Cong Yu;Lucian Popa

  • Mapping adaptation under evolving schemas

    Yannis Velegrakis;Renée J. Miller;Lucian Popa

  • Nested mappings: schema mapping reloaded

    Ariel Fuxman;Mauricio A. Hernandez;Howard Ho;Renee J. Miller

  • Semantic adaptation of schema mappings when schemas evolve

    Cong Yu;Lucian Popa

  • Global Table Extractor (GTE): A Framework for Joint Table Identification and Cell Structure Recognition Using Visual Context

    Xinyi Zheng;Douglas Burdick;Lucian Popa;Xu Zhong

  • Method for schema mapping and data transformation

    Ronald Fagin;Laura Myers Haas;Mauricio Antonio Hernandez-Sherrington;Renee J. Miller

  • Query reformulation with constraints

    Alin Deutsch;Lucian Popa;Val Tannen

  • Physical Data Independence, Constraints, and Optimization with Universal Plans

    Alin Deutsch;Lucian Popa;Val Tannen

  • Low-resource Deep Entity Resolution with Transfer and Active Learning

    Jungo Kasai;Kun Qian;Sairam Gurajada;Yunyao Li

  • Quasi-inverses of schema mappings

    Ronald Fagin;Phokion G. Kolaitis;Lucian Popa;Wang-Chiew Tan

  • Preserving mapping consistency under schema changes

    Yannis Velegrakis;J. Miller;Lucian Popa

  • Composing schema mappings: Second-order dependencies to the rescue

    Unknown

  • Leveraging Abstract Meaning Representation for Knowledge Base Question Answering

    Pavan Kapanipathi;Ibrahim Abdelaziz;Srinivas Ravishankar;Salim Roukos

Frequent Co-Authors

Phokion G. Kolaitis
Phokion G. Kolaitis University of California, Santa Cruz
Ronald Fagin
Ronald Fagin IBM (United States)
Renée J. Miller
Renée J. Miller University of Toronto
Wang-Chiew Tan
Wang-Chiew Tan Facebook (United States)
Val Tannen
Val Tannen University of Pennsylvania
Georgia Koutrika
Georgia Koutrika Athena Research Center
Shivakumar Vaithyanathan
Shivakumar Vaithyanathan IBM (United States)
Alin Deutsch
Alin Deutsch University of California, San Diego
Laura M. Haas
Laura M. Haas University of Massachusetts Amherst
Felix Naumann
Felix Naumann Hasso Plattner Institute

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 related to Computer Science opens up flexible opportunities to build specialized skills, often with lower tuition fees. Many students consider expanding their expertise through programs like an environmental engineering online degree, which combines computer science principles with sustainable engineering approaches. This can lead to careers addressing real-world environmental challenges.

For those interested in technology’s practical applications, options like the cheapest mechanical engineering degree online can provide a strong foundation in design, manufacturing, and robotics. If theoretical applications are your preference, an online theoretical physics degree is an excellent way to deepen analytical and problem-solving skills sought after in research and tech industries.

Data-driven careers are another popular pathway. Pursuing the cheapest data science masters in usa equips you with critical skills in AI, statistics, and big data. All these flexible degree options empower students to pursue interdisciplinary roles and adapt to evolving tech landscapes from anywhere in the world.

Best Scientists Citing Lucian Popa

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles