World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Neuroscience

D-Index
97
Citations
79511
World Ranking
813
National Ranking
442

Computer Science

D-Index
87
Citations
72478
World Ranking
697
National Ranking
369

Scott Makeig 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 Scott Makeig 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: 270 publications — 67th percentile

67% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Scott Makeig 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 Scott Makeig 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: 87 D-Index — 95th percentile

95% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Overview

Scott Makeig is affiliated with the University of California, San Diego in the United States. Their research primarily spans the field of Neuroscience, with a focus on subfields such as Cognitive Neuroscience, Signal Processing, Neurology, Artificial Intelligence, and Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging.

The scientist's work covers a range of topics including:

  • EEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces
  • Functional Brain Connectivity Studies
  • Neural dynamics and brain function
  • Blind Source Separation Techniques
  • Neuroscience and Music Perception
  • Advanced MRI Techniques and Applications
  • Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Studies

Recent publications illustrate the diversity and focus of Makeig's research. These include:

  • "Midfrontal Theta Activity in Psychiatric Illness: An Index of Cognitive Vulnerabilities Across Disorders," 2021, published in Biological Psychiatry
  • "The Lab Streaming Layer for Synchronized Multimodal Recording," 2024, published in bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)
  • "The open EEGLAB portal Interface: High-Performance computing with EEGLAB," 2020, published in NeuroImage
  • "From BIDS-Formatted EEG Data to Sensor-Space Group Results: A Fully Reproducible Workflow With EEGLAB and LIMO EEG," 2021, published in Frontiers in Neuroscience
  • "Brain Activity Response to Visual Cues for Gait Impairment in Parkinson's Disease: An EEG Study," 2021, published in Neurorehabilitation and Neural Repair

Frequently publishing in venues that specialize in neuroscience and related domains, Makeig's work appears repeatedly in:

  • bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
  • NeuroImage
  • Scientific Data
  • Biological Psychiatry

Collaboration plays a significant role in Makeig's research. Frequent co-authors include:

  • Arnaud Delorme
  • Dung Truong
  • Kay A. Robbins
  • Makoto Miyakoshi
  • Seyed Yahya Shirazi

Best Publications

  • EEGLAB: an open source toolbox for analysis of single-trial EEG dynamics including independent component analysis.

    Arnaud Delorme;Scott Makeig

  • Removing electroencephalographic artifacts by blind source separation.

    Tzyy-Ping Jung;Tzyy-Ping Jung;Scott Makeig;Colin Humphries;Te-Won Lee;Te-Won Lee

  • Independent Component Analysis of Electroencephalographic Data

    Scott Makeig;Anthony J. Bell;Tzyy-Ping Jung;Terrence J. Sejnowski

  • Analysis of fMRI data by blind separation into independent spatial components

    Martin J. Mckeown;Scott Makeig;Greg G. Brown;Tzyy-Ping Jung

  • Dynamic Brain Sources of Visual Evoked Responses

    S. Makeig;M. Westerfield;T.-P. Jung;S. Enghoff

  • ICLabel: An automated electroencephalographic independent component classifier, dataset, and website.

    Luca Pion-Tonachini;Kenneth Kreutz-Delgado;Scott Makeig

  • Enhanced detection of artifacts in EEG data using higher-order statistics and independent component analysis

    Arnaud Delorme;Terrence J. Sejnowski;Scott Makeig

  • Mining event-related brain dynamics.

    Scott Makeig;Stefan Debener;Julie Onton;Arnaud Delorme

  • Removal of eye activity artifacts from visual event-related potentials in normal and clinical subjects

    Tzyy-Ping Jung;Scott Makeig;Marissa Westerfield;Marissa Westerfield;Jeanne Townsend;Jeanne Townsend

  • A 40-Hz auditory potential recorded from the human scalp

    Robert Galambos;Scott Makeig;Peter J. Talmachoff

  • Blind separation of auditory event-related brain responses into independent components

    Scott Makeig;Tzyy-Ping Jung;Anthony J. Bell;Dara Ghahremani

  • Auditory Event-Related Dynamics of the EEG Spectrum and Effects of Exposure to Tones

    Scott Makeig

  • Frontal midline EEG dynamics during working memory.

    Julie Onton;Arnaud Delorme;Scott Makeig

  • Independent EEG sources are dipolar.

    Arnaud Delorme;Arnaud Delorme;Arnaud Delorme;Jason Palmer;Julie Onton;Robert Oostenveld

  • Analysis and visualization of single-trial event-related potentials

    Tzyy Ping Jung;Scott Makeig;Scott Makeig;Marissa Westerfield;Marissa Westerfield;Jeanne Townsend;Jeanne Townsend

  • Imaging human EEG dynamics using independent component analysis.

    Julie Onton;Marissa Westerfield;Jeanne Townsend;Scott Makeig

  • Real-Time Neuroimaging and Cognitive Monitoring Using Wearable Dry EEG

    Tim R. Mullen;Christian A. E. Kothe;Yu Mike Chi;Alejandro Ojeda

  • EEGLAB, SIFT, NFT, BCILAB, and ERICA: new tools for advanced EEG processing

    Arnaud Delorme;Tim Mullen;Christian Kothe;Zeynep Akalin Acar

  • Imaging brain dynamics using independent component analysis

    T.-P. Jung;S. Makeig;M.J. McKeown;A.J. Bell

  • Estimating alertness from the EEG power spectrum

    Tzyy-Ping Jung;S. Makeig;M. Stensmo;T.J. Sejnowski

  • Frontal midline theta and the error-related negativity: neurophysiological mechanisms of action regulation.

    Phan Luu;Don M Tucker;Scott Makeig

Frequent Co-Authors

Tzyy-Ping Jung
Tzyy-Ping Jung University of California, San Diego
Terrence J. Sejnowski
Terrence J. Sejnowski Salk Institute for Biological Studies
Arnaud Delorme
Arnaud Delorme University of California, San Diego
Kenneth Kreutz-Delgado
Kenneth Kreutz-Delgado University of California, San Diego
Klaus Gramann
Klaus Gramann Technical University of Berlin
Jeanne Townsend
Jeanne Townsend University of California, San Diego
Eric Courchesne
Eric Courchesne University of California, San Diego
Martin J. McKeown
Martin J. McKeown University of British Columbia
Mateusz Gola
Mateusz Gola University of California, San Diego
Gert Cauwenberghs
Gert Cauwenberghs University of California, San Diego

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:

Best Scientists Citing Scott Makeig

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles