World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Computer Science

D-Index
36
Citations
7169
World Ranking
11088
National Ranking
353

Paola Mello 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 Paola Mello 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: 274 publications — 68th percentile

68% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Paola Mello 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 Paola Mello 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: 36 D-Index — 23rd percentile

23% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Overview

Paola Mello is affiliated with the University of Bologna in Italy. Their research primarily spans the fields of computer science and business, management, and accounting, with a focused interest in artificial intelligence and management information systems.

The main areas of study for this scientist include:

  • Artificial Intelligence
  • Management Information Systems
  • Information Systems
  • Computer Networks and Communications
  • Control and Systems Engineering

Paola Mello's research topics cover a range of subjects intertwined with business and technology. These include:

  • Business Process Modeling and Analysis
  • Service-Oriented Architecture and Web Services
  • Semantic Web and Ontologies
  • Logic, Reasoning, and Knowledge
  • Multi-Agent Systems and Negotiation
  • Bayesian Modeling and Causal Inference
  • Constraint Satisfaction and Optimization

Recently published papers by Paola Mello include:

  • "Declarative and Mathematical Programming approaches to Decision Support Systems for food recycling," 2020, published in Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence
  • "Process Discovery on Deviant Traces and Other Stranger Things," 2022, published in IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering
  • "A Prolog application for reasoning on maths puzzles with diagrams," 2022, published in Journal of Experimental & Theoretical Artificial Intelligence
  • "Artificial intelligence and cognitive psychology: How to solve mathematical problems," 2020, published in Archivio istituzionale della ricerca (Alma Mater Studiorum Università di Bologna)
  • "Process discovery on deviant traces and other stranger things," 2021, published in arXiv (Cornell University)

Frequent co-authors collaborating with Paola Mello are:

  • Federico Chesani
  • Daniela Loreti
  • Chiara Di Francescomarino
  • Chiara Ghidini
  • Fabrizio Maria Maggi

Paola Mello's publications appear across a variety of scholarly venues, including:

  • Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence
  • IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering
  • Journal of Experimental & Theoretical Artificial Intelligence
  • Archivio istituzionale della ricerca (Alma Mater Studiorum Università di Bologna)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)

Best Publications

  • Process Mining Manifesto

    Wil van der Aalst;Wil van der Aalst;Arya Adriansyah;Ana Karla Alves de Medeiros;Franco Arcieri

  • Image analysis and rule-based reasoning for a traffic monitoring system

    R. Cucchiara;M. Piccardi;P. Mello

  • Image analysis and rule-based reasoning for a traffic monitoring system

    R. Cucchiara;M. Piccardi;P. Mello

  • Declarative specification and verification of service choreographiess

    Marco Montali;Maja Pesic;Wil M. P. van der Aalst;Federico Chesani

  • Verifiable agent interaction in abductive logic programming: The SCIFF framework

    Marco Alberti;Federico Chesani;Marco Gavanelli;Evelina Lamma

  • Modularity in Logic Programming

    Michele Bugliesi;Evelina Lamma;Paola Mello

  • Monitoring business constraints with the event calculus

    Marco Montali;Fabrizio M. Maggi;Federico Chesani;Paola Mello

  • COMPLIANCE VERIFICATION OF AGENT INTERACTION: A LOGIC-BASED SOFTWARE TOOL

    Marco Alberti;Marco Gavanelli;Evelina Lamma;Federico Chesani

  • Exploiting Inductive Logic Programming Techniques for Declarative Process Mining

    Federico Chesani;Evelina Lamma;Paola Mello;Marco Montali

  • Specification and verification of agent interaction protocols in a logic-based system

    Marco Alberti;Davide Daolio;Paolo Torroni;Marco Gavanelli

  • Representing and monitoring social commitments using the event calculus

    Federico Chesani;Paola Mello;Marco Montali;Paolo Torroni

  • HABITAT: An IoT Solution for Independent Elderly

    Elena Borelli;Giacomo Paolini;Francesco Antoniazzi;Marina Barbiroli

  • Expressing and Verifying Business Contracts with Abductive Logic Programming

    Marco Alberti;Federico Chesani;Marco Gavanelli;Evelina Lamma

  • Applying inductive logic programming to process mining

    Evelina Lamma;Paola Mello;Fabrizio Riguzzi;Sergio Storari

  • Inducing declarative logic-based models from labeled traces

    Evelina Lamma;Paola Mello;Marco Montali;Fabrizio Riguzzi

  • Integrating constraint logic programming and operations research techniques for the crew rostering problem

    A. Caprara;F. Focacci;E. Lamma;P. Mello

  • Constraint Propagation and Value Acquisition: Why we should do it Interactively

    Evelina Lamma;Paola Mello;Michela Milano;Rita Cucchiara

  • Commitment tracking via the reactive event calculus

    Federico Chesani;Paola Mello;Marco Montali;Paolo Torroni

  • Towards data-aware constraints in declare

    Marco Montali;Federico Chesani;Paola Mello;Fabrizio M. Maggi

  • Specification and Verification of Agent Interaction using Social Integrity Constraints

    Marco Alberti;Marco Gavanelli;Evelina Lamma;Paola Mello

  • A Configurable Rete-OO Engine for Reasoning with Different Types of Imperfect Information

    Davide Sottara;Paola Mello;Mark Proctor

Frequent Co-Authors

Marco Montali
Marco Montali Free University of Bozen-Bolzano
Paolo Torroni
Paolo Torroni University of Bologna
Michela Milano
Michela Milano University of Bologna
Rita Cucchiara
Rita Cucchiara University of Modena and Reggio Emilia
Antonio Brogi
Antonio Brogi University of Pisa
Massimo Piccardi
Massimo Piccardi University of Technology Sydney
Fabrizio Maria Maggi
Fabrizio Maria Maggi Free University of Bozen-Bolzano
Stefania Montani
Stefania Montani University of Eastern Piedmont Amadeo Avogadro
Wil M. P. van der Aalst
Wil M. P. van der Aalst RWTH Aachen University
Alessandra Costanzo
Alessandra Costanzo University of Bologna

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

With the rise of remote learning, students can now access a wide range of programs in computer science and related fields through online education. For those just starting out, associates degrees online offer a flexible, affordable option to build foundational skills or launch a technical career.

Budget is often a key concern. Many cheap online colleges provide quality programs in computer science and other STEM areas, making education accessible without a heavy financial burden.

Academic history doesn’t have to be a barrier either. Students with lower GPAs can find opportunities at online colleges that accept 2.0 gpa, helping them continue their education and take important steps toward a technical career.

Additionally, computer science intersects with other disciplines, creating diverse pathways. For instance, expertise in technology can complement degrees such as an environmental science degree, enabling graduates to address critical issues like sustainability and climate change through innovative tech solutions.

Best Scientists Citing Paola Mello

Trending Scientists