World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Computer Science

D-Index
31
Citations
3969
World Ranking
13688
National Ranking
270

Mannes Poel 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 Mannes Poel 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: 168 publications — 34th percentile

34% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Mannes Poel 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 Mannes Poel 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: 31 D-Index — 6th percentile

6% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Overview

Mannes Poel is affiliated with the University of Twente in the Netherlands. Their research primarily spans the fields of computer science, engineering, and medicine, with a focus on specialized subfields such as artificial intelligence, biomedical engineering, computer vision and pattern recognition, radiology, nuclear medicine and imaging, and cognitive neuroscience.

The scientist's main research topics involve reinforcement learning in robotics, anomaly detection techniques and applications, robotics and sensor-based localization, robotic path planning algorithms, EEG and brain-computer interfaces, optical imaging and spectroscopy techniques, and heart rate variability and autonomic control.

Frequent venues where Mannes Poel's work has been published include:

  • arXiv (Cornell University)
  • Frontiers in Computer Science
  • Neurocomputing
  • Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
  • BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making

Frequent collaborators in their research include the following coauthors:

  • Nicolò Botteghi
  • Christoph Brüne
  • Beril Sırmaçek
  • Stefano Stramigioli
  • Nattapong Thammasan

Selected recent publications by Mannes Poel demonstrate a variety of research interests and interdisciplinary approaches:

  • An ensemble of autonomous auto-encoders for human activity recognition, 2021, Neurocomputing
  • Perceived Mental Workload Classification Using Intermediate Fusion Multimodal Deep Learning, 2021, Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
  • Exploratory application of machine learning methods on patient reported data in the development of supervised models for predicting outcomes, 2022, BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
  • On Reward Shaping for Mobile Robot Navigation: A Reinforcement Learning and SLAM Based Approach, 2020, arXiv (Cornell University)
  • Exploring the Brain Activity Related to Missing Penalty Kicks: An fNIRS Study, 2021, Frontiers in Computer Science

Best Publications

  • Concurrency Verification: Introduction to Compositional and Non-compositional Methods

    Willem-Paul de Roever;Frank de Boer;Ulrich Hanneman;Jozef Hooman

  • Brain-Computer Interfacing and Games

    Danny Plass-Oude Bos;Boris Reuderink;Bram van de Laar;Hayrettin Gürkök

  • Distributed Event Detection in Wireless Sensor Networks for Disaster Management

    Majid Bahrepour;Nirvana Meratnia;Mannes Poel;Zahra Taghikhaki

  • Valence, arousal and dominance in the EEG during game play

    Boris Reuderink;Christian Mühl;Mannes Poel

  • Experiencing BCI Control in a Popular Computer Game

    B. van de Laar;H. Gurkok;Danny Plass-Oude Bos;M. Poel

  • Outlier detection in healthcare fraud: A case study in the Medicaid dental domain

    Guido Cornelis van Capelleveen;Mannes Poel;Roland Mueller;Dallas Thornton;Dallas Thornton

  • Action Systems and Action Refinement in the Development of Parallel Systems - An Algebraic Approach

    Wil Janssen;Mannes Poel;Job Zwiers

  • Human-Computer Interaction for BCI Games: Usability and User Experience

    Danny Plass-Oude Bos;Boris Reuderink;Bram van de Laar;Hayrettin Gurkok

  • Opening the Black Box of Electronic Health: Collecting, Analyzing, and Interpreting Log Data.

    Floor Sieverink;Saskia Kelders;Saskia Kelders;Mannes Poel;Lisette van Gemert-Pijnen

  • Usability of three electroencephalogram headsets for brain-computer interfaces: a within subject comparison

    Femke Nijboer;Femke Nijboer;Bram van de Laar;Steven Gerritsen;Anton Nijholt

  • Affective Pacman: A Frustrating Game for Brain-Computer Interface Experiments

    Boris Reuderink;Anton Nijholt;Mannes Poel

  • Comparison of silhouette shape descriptors for example-based human pose recovery

    R. Poppe;M. Poel

  • Bacteria Hunt: Evaluating multi-paradigm BCI interaction

    Christian Mühl;Hayrettin Gürkök;Danny Plass-Oude Bos;Marieke E. Thurlings

  • Comparison of feature and classifier algorithms for online automatic sleep staging based on a single EEG signal.

    Mustafa Radha;Gary Garcia-Molina;Mannes Poel;Giulio Tononi

  • An Ensemble of Autonomous Auto-Encoders for Human Activity Recognition

    Kemilly Dearo Garcia;Claudio Frederico Pinho Rebelo de Sá;Mannes Poel;Thiago Carvalho

  • Robustness of the Common Spatial Patterns algorithm in the BCI-pipeline

    B. Reuderink;Mannes Poel

  • ParleE: An Adaptive Plan Based Event Appraisal Model of Emotions

    Dirk Heylen;Mannes Poel;Anton Nijholt

  • Generation of Facial Expressions from Emotion Using a Fuzzy Rule Based System

    Dirk Heylen;Mannes Poel;Anton Nijholt

  • Evaluation of three machine learning models for self-referral decision support on low back pain in primary care.

    Wendeline Oude Nijeweme-d'Hollosy;Lex van Velsen;Mannes Poel;Catharina G.M. Groothuis-Oudshoorn

  • Bacteria Hunt: A multimodal, multiparadigm BCI game

    C. Mühl;Hayrettin Gürkök;D. Plass Oude Bos;M.E. Thurlings

  • A subject-independent brain-computer interface based on smoothed, second-order baselining

    Boris Reuderink;Jason Farquhar;Mannes Poel;Anton Nijholt

Frequent Co-Authors

Anton Nijholt
Anton Nijholt University of Twente
Dirk Heylen
Dirk Heylen University of Twente
Stefano Stramigioli
Stefano Stramigioli University of Twente
Saskia Marion Kelders
Saskia Marion Kelders University of Twente
Maja Pantic
Maja Pantic Imperial College London
André C. P. L. F. de Carvalho
André C. P. L. F. de Carvalho Universidade de São Paulo
Jan B. F. van Erp
Jan B. F. van Erp University of Twente
Jean-Marc Odobez
Jean-Marc Odobez Idiap Research Institute
Hervé Bourlard
Hervé Bourlard Idiap Research Institute
Steve Renals
Steve Renals University of Edinburgh

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

Expanding your education in Computer Science opens the door to a range of related fields and flexible study options. Many students choose interdisciplinary studies, such as pursuing a bachelor of science in physics online to deepen their foundation in technical and analytical skills.

For those interested in data analysis, enrolling in the cheapest data science masters in usa is an affordable way to access one of the fastest-growing tech fields. Specializations like data science are in high demand and offer competitive salaries.

If your interests lean more toward applied technology, an online electrical engineering career outcomes program can prepare you for roles in automation, robotics, and electronics—fields closely connected to computer science.

Not ready for a full degree? There are also many certificate programs that pay well that can boost your employability in a short time. These online credentials focus on in-demand skills and provide a fast track into the tech workforce.

Best Scientists Citing Mannes Poel

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles