World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Computer Science

D-Index
60
Citations
13695
World Ranking
3254
National Ranking
54

Mooly Sagiv 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 Mooly Sagiv 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: 196 publications — 45th percentile

45% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Mooly Sagiv 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 Mooly Sagiv 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: 60 D-Index — 78th percentile

78% 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

  • 2015 - ACM Fellow For contributions to the theory and practice of automated analysis and verification of software.

Overview

Mooly Sagiv is affiliated with Tel Aviv University in Israel and has contributed extensively to the field of computer science. Their research spans multiple subfields, with a strong focus on formal methods, security, and distributed systems.

The main field of study is Computer Science, encompassing various specialized domains. Their subfields of study include:

  • Artificial Intelligence
  • Computer Networks and Communications
  • Computational Theory and Mathematics
  • Information Systems
  • Signal Processing

The primary topics covered in their work involve:

  • Formal Methods in Verification
  • Security and Verification in Computing
  • Distributed Systems and Fault Tolerance
  • Logic, Programming, and Type Systems
  • Blockchain Technology Applications and Security
  • Advanced Malware Detection Techniques
  • Machine Learning and Algorithms

Several papers reflect the scope and depth of their research, including:

  • "Taming callbacks for smart contract modularity," 2020, Proceedings of the ACM on Programming Languages
  • "Relaxed Effective Callback Freedom: A Parametric Correctness Condition for Sequential Modules With Callbacks," 2022, IEEE Transactions on Dependable and Secure Computing
  • "Property-directed reachability as abstract interpretation in the monotone theory," 2022, Proceedings of the ACM on Programming Languages
  • "Blockaid: Data Access Policy Enforcement for Web Applications," 2022, arXiv (Cornell University)
  • "Practical Verification of Smart Contracts using Memory Splitting," 2024, Proceedings of the ACM on Programming Languages

Frequent collaborators in their research include:

  • Sharon Shoham
  • Shelly Grossman
  • Yotam M. Y. Feldman
  • James R. Wilcox
  • Kenneth L. McMillan

Publishing venues where Mooly Sagiv frequently appears include:

  • arXiv (Cornell University)
  • Proceedings of the ACM on Programming Languages
  • IEEE Transactions on Dependable and Secure Computing
  • Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases
  • Lecture Notes in Computer Science

Mooly Sagiv was recognized as an ACM Fellow in 2015 for contributions to the theory and practice of automated analysis and verification of software.

Best Publications

  • Precise interprocedural dataflow analysis via graph reachability

    Thomas Reps;Susan Horwitz;Mooly Sagiv

  • Parametric shape analysis via 3-valued logic

    Mooly Sagiv;Thomas Reps;Reinhard Wilhelm

  • Parametric shape analysis via 3-valued logic

    Mooly Sagiv;Thomas Reps;Reinhard Wilhelm

  • Solving shape-analysis problems in languages with destructive updating

    Mooly Sagiv;Thomas Reps;Reinhard Wilhelm

  • Precise interprocedural dataflow analysis with applications to constant propagation

    Mooly Sagiv;Thomas Reps;Susan Horwitz

  • CSSV: towards a realistic tool for statically detecting all buffer overflows in C

    Nurit Dor;Michael Rodeh;Mooly Sagiv

  • Speeding up slicing

    Thomas Reps;Susan Horwitz;Mooly Sagiv;Genevieve Rosay

  • VeriCon: towards verifying controller programs in software-defined networks

    Thomas Ball;Nikolaj Bjørner;Aaron Gember;Shachar Itzhaky

  • Demand interprocedural dataflow analysis

    Susan Horwitz;Thomas Reps;Mooly Sagiv

  • Verifying Properties of Binarized Deep Neural Networks.

    Nina Narodytska;Shiva Prasad Kasiviswanathan;Leonid Ryzhyk;Mooly Sagiv

  • A framework for numeric analysis of array operations

    Denis Gopan;Thomas Reps;Mooly Sagiv

  • Ivy: safety verification by interactive generalization

    Oded Padon;Kenneth L. McMillan;Aurojit Panda;Mooly Sagiv

  • Online Detection of Effectively Callback Free Objects with Applications to Smart Contracts

    Shelly Grossman;Ittai Abraham;Guy Golan-Gueta;Yan Michalevsky

  • Symbolic Implementation of the Best Transformer

    Thomas Reps;Mooly Sagiv;Greta Yorsh

  • Putting static analysis to work for verification: A case study

    Tal Lev-Ami;Thomas Reps;Mooly Sagiv;Reinhard Wilhelm

  • Local reasoning for storable locks and threads

    Alexey Gotsman;Josh Berdine;Byron Cook;Noam Rinetzky

  • A semantics for procedure local heaps and its abstractions

    Noam Rinetzky;Jörg Bauer;Thomas Reps;Mooly Sagiv

  • Edge profiling versus path profiling: the showdown

    Thomas Ball;Peter Mataga;Mooly Sagiv

  • Comparison under abstraction for verifying linearizability

    Daphna Amit;Noam Rinetzky;Thomas Reps;Mooly Sagiv

  • Predicate abstraction and canonical abstraction for singly-linked lists

    Roman Manevich;E. Yahav;G. Ramalingam;Mooly Sagiv

Frequent Co-Authors

Thomas Reps
Thomas Reps University of Wisconsin–Madison
Eran Yahav
Eran Yahav Technion – Israel Institute of Technology
Reinhard Wilhelm
Reinhard Wilhelm Saarland University
Neil Immerman
Neil Immerman University of Massachusetts Amherst
Alex Aiken
Alex Aiken Stanford University
Aurojit Panda
Aurojit Panda New York University
Scott Shenker
Scott Shenker University of California, Berkeley
Kenneth L. McMillan
Kenneth L. McMillan Microsoft (United States)
Elliot K. Kolodner
Elliot K. Kolodner IBM (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

A Computer Science education unlocks diverse career possibilities beyond traditional programming roles. For students seeking closely related or interdisciplinary fields, numerous flexible online degree options are now available at affordable rates.

Those looking to explore the ever-growing tech security sector may benefit from a cyber security degree, which prepares graduates for roles in defending digital infrastructure. Similarly, leadership and technology skills intersect in construction management. An online construction management masters can lead to lucrative project management opportunities as technology transforms the building industry.

For those interested in law, technology, and societal safety, a criminal justice degree online cost comparison helps future professionals evaluate paths in cybersecurity, forensics, and law enforcement. Meanwhile, aspiring tech-driven accountants can boost career prospects by enrolling in comprehensive accounting classes online to develop advanced analytics and auditing skills.

These alternatives allow students to tailor their skills to rapidly evolving industries, expand career options, and pursue affordable, high-quality education online.

Best Scientists Citing Mooly Sagiv

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles