World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Computer Science

D-Index
35
Citations
5574
World Ranking
11656
National Ranking
388

Marco Torchiano 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 Marco Torchiano 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: 250 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: 560 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: 424 scientists 242–251 publications: 408 scientists 252–261 publications: 378 scientists 262–271 publications: 300 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: 222 publications — 54th percentile

54% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Marco Torchiano 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 Marco Torchiano sits on this spectrum.

30–31 D-Index: 879 scientists 32–33 D-Index: 984 scientists 34–35 D-Index: 918 scientists 36–37 D-Index: 990 scientists 38–39 D-Index: 969 scientists 40–41 D-Index: 907 scientists 42–43 D-Index: 821 scientists 44–45 D-Index: 765 scientists 46–47 D-Index: 689 scientists 48–49 D-Index: 543 scientists 50–51 D-Index: 543 scientists 52–53 D-Index: 517 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: 35 D-Index — 20th percentile

20% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Overview

Marco Torchiano is affiliated with the Polytechnic University of Turin in Italy and has developed a research portfolio primarily within the field of Computer Science, encompassing 57 publications.

Their work covers several subfields including:

  • Information Systems
  • Artificial Intelligence
  • Computer Science Applications
  • Developmental and Educational Psychology
  • Software

The main topics addressed in their research are:

  • Software Engineering Research
  • Educational Games and Gamification
  • Teaching and Learning Programming
  • Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
  • Imbalanced Data Classification Techniques
  • Software Engineering Techniques and Practices
  • Advanced Malware Detection Techniques

Recent papers authored or coauthored by Torchiano include:

  • "Empirical Standards for Software Engineering Research," 2020, published in arXiv (Cornell University)
  • "Effectiveness of Kotlin vs. Java in android app development tasks," 2020, published in Information and Software Technology
  • "A Review on Tools, Mechanics, Benefits, and Challenges of Gamified Software Testing," 2023, published in ACM Computing Surveys
  • "A data quality approach to the identification of discrimination risk in automated decision making systems," 2021, published in Government Information Quarterly
  • "Translation from layout-based to visual android test scripts: An empirical evaluation," 2020, published in Journal of Systems and Software

Frequent coauthors in their research collaborations include:

  • Riccardo Coppola
  • Luca Ardito
  • Antonio Vetrò
  • Mariachiara Mecati
  • Tommaso Fulcini

Their publications have appeared multiple times in the following venues:

  • arXiv (Cornell University)
  • Journal of Systems and Software
  • Journal of Data and Information Quality
  • Software & Systems Modeling
  • Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)

In addition to journal and conference papers, Marco Torchiano has contributed to book publications with Springer Science+Business Media, including the book Product-Focused Software Process Improvement published in 2020 and 2021.

Best Publications

  • On the effectiveness of the test-first approach to programming

    H. Erdogmus;M. Morisio;M. Torchiano

  • Open data quality measurement framework: Definition and application to Open Government Data

    Antonio Vetrò;Lorenzo Canova;Marco Torchiano;Camilo Orozco Minotas

  • Soft-error detection through software fault-tolerance techniques

    M. Rebaudengo;M. Sonza Reorda;M. Torchiano;M. Violante

  • Overlooked aspects of COTS-based development

    M. Torchiano;M. Morisio

  • Empirical studies in reverse engineering: state of the art and future trends

    Paolo Tonella;Marco Torchiano;Bart Du Bois;Tarja Systä

  • A source-to-source compiler for generating dependable software

    M. Rebaudengo;M.S. Reorda;M. Violante;M. Torchiano

  • Definition and Classification of COTS: A Proposal

    Maurizio Morisio;Marco Torchiano

  • Relevance, benefits, and problems of software modelling and model driven techniques-A survey in the Italian industry

    Marco Torchiano;Federico Tomassetti;Filippo Ricca;Alessandro Tiso

  • Development with Off-the-Shelf Components: 10 Facts

    Jingyue Li;R. Conradi;C. Bunse;M. Torchiano

  • A State-of-the-Practice Survey of Risk Management in Development with Off-the-Shelf Software Components

    Jingyue Li;O.P.N. Slyngstad;M. Torchiano;M. Morisio

  • A family of experiments to assess the effectiveness and efficiency of source code obfuscation techniques

    Mariano Ceccato;Massimiliano Penta;Paolo Falcarin;Filippo Ricca

  • How Developers' Experience and Ability Influence Web Application Comprehension Tasks Supported by UML Stereotypes: A Series of Four Experiments

    F. Ricca;M. Di Penta;M. Torchiano;P. Tonella

  • An in-vehicle infotainment software architecture based on google android

    Gianpaolo Macario;Marco Torchiano;Massimo Violante

  • The Role of Experience and Ability in Comprehension Tasks Supported by UML Stereotypes

    F. Ricca;M. Di Penta;M. Torchiano;P. Tonella

  • The effectiveness of source code obfuscation: An experimental assessment

    Mariano Ceccato;Massimiliano Di Penta;Jasvir Nagra;Paolo Falcarin

  • Empirical Standards for Software Engineering Research

    Paul Ralph;Nauman bin Ali;Sebastian Baltes;Domenico Bianculli

  • Using acceptance tests as a support for clarifying requirements: A series of experiments

    Filippo Ricca;Marco Torchiano;Massimiliano Di Penta;Mariano Ceccato

  • COTS products characterization

    Marco Torchiano;Letizia Jaccheri;Carl-Fredrik Sørensen;Alf Inge Wang

  • Assessing the Effect of Screen Mockups on the Comprehension of Functional Requirements

    Filippo Ricca;Giuseppe Scanniello;Marco Torchiano;Gianna Reggio

  • Maturity of software modelling and model driven engineering: A survey in the Italian industry

    Federico Tomassetti;Marco Torchiano;Alessandro Tiso;Filippo Ricca

  • Understanding Green Software Development: A Conceptual Framework

    Luca Ardito;Giuseppe Procaccianti;Marco Torchiano;Antonio Vetro

Frequent Co-Authors

Maurizio Morisio
Maurizio Morisio Polytechnic University of Turin
Filippo Ricca
Filippo Ricca University of Genoa
Paolo Tonella
Paolo Tonella Universita della Svizzera Italiana
Massimiliano Di Penta
Massimiliano Di Penta University of Sannio
Reidar Conradi
Reidar Conradi Norwegian University of Science and Technology
Oscar Corcho
Oscar Corcho Technical University of Madrid
Massimo Violante
Massimo Violante Polytechnic University of Turin
Jeffrey C. Carver
Jeffrey C. Carver University of Alabama
Andrea De Lucia
Andrea De Lucia University of Salerno
Filippo Lanubile
Filippo Lanubile University of Bari Aldo Moro

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

Pursuing a Computer Science degree in the USA opens doors to a range of flexible education and career options. For those seeking a fast entry into the tech workforce, consider quick certifications that pay well. These programs offer practical skills, often completed in months, and can boost your employability without a long-term commitment.

If you want to advance your education quickly, explore quick masters degrees online. These accelerated programs let you earn a graduate credential in a year or less, helping you qualify for specialized roles or higher salaries. Choosing graduate degrees that are worth it is also key—look for those with high market demand to maximize your investment.

Not ready for a full bachelor’s or master’s program? Associate degree online programs offer a strong foundation in computer science fundamentals, often within two years, and serve as stepping-stones to further study or entry-level jobs.

Best Scientists Citing Marco Torchiano

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles