World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!
Mounia Lalmas

Mounia Lalmas

D-Index & Metrics

Computer Science

D-Index
62
Citations
12377
World Ranking
2958
National Ranking
11

Mounia Lalmas 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 Mounia Lalmas 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: 479 publications — 92nd percentile

92% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Mounia Lalmas 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 Mounia Lalmas 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: 62 D-Index — 80th percentile

80% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Overview

Mounia Lalmas is affiliated with Spotify in Sweden and has contributed extensively to research in computer science, with a focus on artificial intelligence, signal processing, management science and operations research, information systems, and computer vision and pattern recognition. Their work spans 21 publications primarily in computer science and relevant subfields.

Their research covers topics including music and audio processing, advanced bandit algorithms research, recommender systems and techniques, social media and politics, misinformation and its impacts, music technology and sound studies, and complex network analysis techniques.

Frequent co-authors of Mounia Lalmas include Rishabh Mehrotra, Ghazal Fazelnia, Benjamin Carterette, Ben Carterette, and Praveen Chandar.

The scientist's work has been published in several venues, with multiple publications in arXiv (Cornell University), the Proceedings of the ACM Web Conference 2022, Companion Proceedings of the Web Conference 2020, Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media, and the Proceedings of the Fifteenth ACM International Conference on Web Search and Data Mining.

Recent notable papers include:

  • Transient News Crowds in Social Media, 2021, Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media
  • Leveraging Behavioral Heterogeneity Across Markets for Cross-Market Training of Recommender Systems, 2020, Companion Proceedings of the Web Conference 2020
  • Representativeness of Abortion Legislation Debate on Twitter: A Case Study in Argentina and Chile, 2020, Companion Proceedings of the Web Conference 2020
  • Variational User Modeling with Slow and Fast Features, 2022, Proceedings of the Fifteenth ACM International Conference on Web Search and Data Mining
  • Choice of Implicit Signal Matters: Accounting for User Aspirations in Podcast Recommendations, 2022, Proceedings of the ACM Web Conference 2022

Best Publications

  • A survey on the use of relevance feedback for information access systems

    Ian Ruthven;Mounia Lalmas

  • Models of user engagement

    Janette Lehmann;Mounia Lalmas;Elad Yom-Tov;Georges Dupret

  • Proceedings of the 38th International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval

    Ricardo Baeza-Yates;Mounia Lalmas;Alistair Moffat;Berthier Ribeiro-Neto

  • “Is this document relevant?…probably”: a survey of probabilistic models in information retrieval

    Fabio Crestani;Mounia Lalmas;Cornelis J. Van Rijsbergen;Iain Campbell

  • Towards a Fair Marketplace: Counterfactual Evaluation of the trade-off between Relevance, Fairness & Satisfaction in Recommendation Systems

    Rishabh Mehrotra;James McInerney;Hugues Bouchard;Mounia Lalmas

  • Measuring User Engagement

    Mounia Lalmas;Heather O'Brien;Elad Yom-Tov

  • Interpretable Predictions of Tree-based Ensembles via Actionable Feature Tweaking

    Gabriele Tolomei;Fabrizio Silvestri;Andrew Haines;Mounia Lalmas

  • Sound and complete relevance assessment for XML retrieval

    Benjamin Piwowarski;Andrew Trotman;Mounia Lalmas

  • Advances in XML Information Retrieval and Evaluation

    Norbert Fuhr;Mounia Lalmas;Saadia Malik;Gabriella Kazai

  • Algorithmic Effects on the Diversity of Consumption on Spotify

    Ashton Anderson;Lucas Maystre;Ian Anderson;Rishabh Mehrotra

  • Focused Access to XML Documents: 6th International Workshop of the Initiative for the Evaluation of XML Retrieval, INEX 2007 Dagstuhl Castle, Germany, December 17-19, 2007. Selected Papers

    Norbert Fuhr;Jaap Kamps;Mounia Lalmas;Andrew Trotman

  • Dempster-Shafer's theory of evidence applied to structured documents: modelling uncertainty

    Mounia Lalmas

  • User engagement in online News: Under the scope of sentiment, interest, affect, and gaze

    Ioannis Arapakis;Mounia Lalmas;Berkant Barla Cambazoglu;Mari-Carmen Marcos

  • The overlap problem in content-oriented XML retrieval evaluation

    Gabriella Kazai;Mounia Lalmas;Arjen P. de Vries

  • Social media news communities: gatekeeping, coverage, and statement bias

    Diego Saez-Trumper;Carlos Castillo;Mounia Lalmas

  • First Women, Second Sex: Gender Bias in Wikipedia

    Eduardo Graells-Garrido;Mounia Lalmas;Filippo Menczer

  • Overview of the INEX 2007 Entity Ranking Track

    Arjen P. Vries;Anne-Marie Vercoustre;James A. Thom;Nick Craswell

  • Comparative Evaluation of XML Information Retrieval Systems: 5th International Workshop of the Initiative for the Evaluation of XML Retrieval, INEX 2006 Dagstuhl Castle, Germany, December 17-20, 2006 Revised and Selected Papers

    Norbert Fuhr;Mounia Lalmas;Andrew Trotman

  • INEX 2005 evaluation measures

    Gabriella Kazai;Mounia Lalmas

  • INEX 2007 Evaluation Measures

    Jaap Kamps;Jovan Pehcevski;Gabriella Kazai;Mounia Lalmas

  • INEX 2005 evaluation measures

    Gabriella Kazai;Mounia Lalmas

  • SIGIR '06 Proceedings of the 29th annual international ACM SIGIR conference on Research and development in information retrieval

    Tobias Blanke;M. Lalmas

Frequent Co-Authors

Gabriella Kazai
Gabriella Kazai Microsoft (United States)
Norbert Fuhr
Norbert Fuhr University of Duisburg-Essen
Ricardo Baeza-Yates
Ricardo Baeza-Yates Royal Institute of Technology
Joemon M. Jose
Joemon M. Jose University of Glasgow
Ian Ruthven
Ian Ruthven University of Strathclyde
Jaap Kamps
Jaap Kamps University of Amsterdam
Fabrizio Silvestri
Fabrizio Silvestri Sapienza University of Rome
Fabio Crestani
Fabio Crestani Universita della Svizzera Italiana
Ralf Schenkel
Ralf Schenkel University of Trier
Matt Jones
Matt Jones Swansea University

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 in Computer Science opens a variety of flexible and affordable education options. Many students choose their path based on career goals, balancing practical skills with academic advancement. When choosing your next step, it’s worth reviewing the best college degrees for strong job prospects and earning potential.

If you’re looking to further your education with less time or intensity, you might consider one of the easiest masters degrees available online, which can provide relevant skills without a lengthy commitment.

For those interested in advanced research or leadership roles, pursuing the most affordable online doctoral programs can make a significant difference in both cost and career advancement.

Finally, educators or administrators may be interested in online edd programs affordable options, which offer a fast-track to a doctorate focused on education leadership.

Each pathway unlocks unique opportunities, so be sure to research requirements, costs, and career outcomes before making your choice.

Best Scientists Citing Mounia Lalmas

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles