World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Computer Science

D-Index
32
Citations
5495
World Ranking
13020
National Ranking
201

Pnina Soffer 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 Pnina Soffer 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: 140 publications — 23rd percentile

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

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

Pnina Soffer 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 Pnina Soffer 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: 32 D-Index — 10th percentile

10% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Overview

Pnina Soffer is a researcher affiliated with the University of Haifa in Israel. Their work focuses extensively on the intersection of business and computer science, particularly in the domains of business process modeling, data quality, and information systems.

The main fields of study for Soffer include Business, Management and Accounting, Computer Science, and Decision Sciences. Their work spans several subfields such as Management Information Systems, Information Systems, Artificial Intelligence, Management Science and Operations Research, and Computer Networks and Communications.

Key research topics addressed by Soffer cover Business Process Modeling and Analysis, Service-Oriented Architecture and Web Services, Big Data and Business Intelligence, Data Quality and Management, Semantic Web and Ontologies, ERP Systems Implementation and Impact, and Data Visualization and Analytics.

Notable recent publications authored by Soffer include:

  • "Why Work Around the Process? Analyzing Workarounds Through the Lens of the Theory of Planned Behavior" (2023), published in Business & Information Systems Engineering

Other relevant publications in the broader network of their research community involve works such as:

  • "Process-Data Quality: The True Frontier of Process Mining" (2023), Journal of Data and Information Quality
  • "Detecting cross-case associations in an event log: toward a pattern-based detection" (2023), Software & Systems Modeling
  • "How well did it recover? Impact-aware conformance checking" (2020), Computing
  • "Visual Analytics Meets Process Mining: Challenges and Opportunities" (2024), IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications

Soffer collaborates frequently with other researchers, including Barbara Weber, Irit Hadar, Arava Tsoury, Gal Engelberg, and Iris Reinhartz-Berger.

Their research has been published in various scholarly venues, with repeated contributions to Software & Systems Modeling, Business & Information Systems Engineering, Information Systems, SSRN Electronic Journal, and the Journal of Data and Information Quality.

In addition to journal articles, Soffer has contributed to books published by Springer Science+Business Media, including "Advanced Information Systems Engineering Workshops" (2023) and "Process Mining Workshops" (2024).

Best Publications

  • Process Mining Manifesto

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

  • ERP modeling: a comprehensive approach

    Pnina Soffer;Boaz Golany;Dov Dori

  • Enterprise, Business-Process and Information Systems Modeling

    Terry Halpin;Selmin Nurcan;John Krogstie;Pnina Soffer

  • Declarative versus imperative process modeling languages : the issue of understandability

    Dirk Fahland;Daniel Lübke;Jan Mendling;Hajo A. Reijers

  • On the notion of soft‐goals in business process modeling

    Pnina Soffer;Yair Wand

  • Taxonomy of Flexibility in Business Processes.

    Gil Regev;Pnina Soffer;Rainer Schmidt

  • Improving business process decision making based on past experience

    Johny Ghattas;Pnina Soffer;Mor Peleg

  • The role of domain knowledge in requirements elicitation via interviews: an exploratory study

    Irit Hadar;Pnina Soffer;Keren Kenzi

  • Modelling Off-the-Shelf Information Systems Requirements: An Ontological Approach

    Pnina Soffer;Boaz Golany;Dov Dori;Yair Wand

  • Variations in Conceptual Modeling: Classification and Ontological Analysis

    Irit Hadar;Pnina Soffer

  • Aligning an ERP system with enterprise requirements: An object-process based approach

    Pnina Soffer;Boaz Golany;Dov Dori

  • Goal-Driven Analysis of Process Model Validity

    Pnina Soffer;Yair Wand;Yair Wand

  • Styles in business process modeling: an exploration and a model

    Jakob Pinggera;Pnina Soffer;Dirk Fahland;Matthias Weidlich

  • Understanding Declare models: strategies, pitfalls, empirical results

    Cornelia Haisjackl;Irene Barba;Stefan Zugal;Pnina Soffer

  • Assessment of a personalized and distributed patient guidance system

    Mor Peleg;Yuval Shahar;Silvana Quaglini;Tom Broens

  • Information Systems Evolution

    Pnina Soffer;Erik Proper

  • Goal-Driven Multi-Process Analysis.

    Pnina Soffer;Yair Wand

  • Investigating expressiveness and understandability of hierarchy in declarative business process models

    Stefan Zugal;Pnina Soffer;Cornelia Haisjackl;Jakob Pinggera

  • Applying ontology-based rules to conceptual modeling: a reflection on modeling decision making

    Pnina Soffer;Irit Hadar

  • Extending the Adaptability of Reference Models

    Iris Reinhartz-Berger;Pnina Soffer;Arnon Sturm

  • Learning from Context to Improve Business Processes

    Karsten Ploesser;Mor Peleg;Pnina Soffer;Michael Rosemann

  • Using Eye Tracking to Expose Cognitive Processes in Understanding Conceptual Models

    Unknown

  • From event streams to process models and back: Challenges and opportunities

    Pnina Soffer;Annika Hinze;Agnes Koschmider;Holger Ziekow

Frequent Co-Authors

Barbara Weber
Barbara Weber University of St. Gallen
Mor Peleg
Mor Peleg University of Haifa
Yair Wand
Yair Wand University of British Columbia
John Krogstie
John Krogstie Norwegian University of Science and Technology
Jan Mendling
Jan Mendling Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin
Dirk Fahland
Dirk Fahland Eindhoven University of Technology
Matthias Weidlich
Matthias Weidlich Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin
Manfred Reichert
Manfred Reichert University of Ulm
Marcello La Rosa
Marcello La Rosa University of Melbourne
Henderik A. Proper
Henderik A. Proper Association for Computing Machinery

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 computer science in the USA opens doors to many online degree options and emerging career pathways. It’s essential to choose online degree programs accredited by recognized bodies to ensure quality education and better job prospects.

Beyond traditional computer science, specialized paths such as the video game design degree offer creative outlets for tech enthusiasts interested in digital artistry and interactive experiences.

As cybersecurity threats grow, demand for experts with an online cyber security degree is on the rise. These programs equip students with the latest skills to protect digital infrastructures across industries.

Technology is also transforming fields like construction. Combining tech skills with project management through construction degrees allows graduates to lead innovation on complex building projects.

Choosing the right online degree can set you on a path tailored to your interests—from coding and gaming to cybersecurity and beyond.

Best Scientists Citing Pnina Soffer

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles