World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Computer Science

D-Index
48
Citations
12899
World Ranking
6066
National Ranking
2735

Thomas Deselaers 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 Thomas Deselaers 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: 178 publications — 38th percentile

38% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Thomas Deselaers 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 Thomas Deselaers 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: 48 D-Index — 58th percentile

58% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Overview

Thomas Deselaers is a researcher affiliated with Apple (United States) focusing on areas within computer science. Their work spans multiple subfields including computer vision and pattern recognition, artificial intelligence, computer graphics and computer-aided design, signal processing, and computational mechanics.

The research topics covered by Thomas Deselaers include:

  • Handwritten Text Recognition Techniques
  • Natural Language Processing Techniques
  • Image Processing and 3D Reconstruction
  • Computer Graphics and Visualization Techniques
  • Music and Audio Processing
  • 3D Shape Modeling and Analysis
  • Human Motion and Animation

Thomas Deselaers has contributed to various scholarly publications, with papers appearing primarily in computer science venues. Their recent papers include:

  • Fast multi-language LSTM-based online handwriting recognition, 2020, International Journal on Document Analysis and Recognition (IJDAR)
  • CoSE: Compositional Stroke Embeddings, 2020, arXiv (Cornell University)
  • The DIDI dataset: Digital Ink Diagram data, 2020, arXiv (Cornell University)
  • CoSE: Compositional Stroke Embeddings, 2021, Repository for Publications and Research Data (ETH Zurich)
  • Data Incubation - Synthesizing Missing Data for Handwriting Recognition, 2022, ICASSP 2022 - 2022 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP)

The frequent co-authors collaborating with Thomas Deselaers consist of:

  • Emre Aksan
  • Otmar Hilliges
  • Philippe Gervais
  • Andrea Tagliasacchi
  • Jen-Hao Rick Chang

Thomas Deselaers publishes regularly in the following venues:

  • arXiv (Cornell University)
  • International Journal on Document Analysis and Recognition (IJDAR)
  • Repository for Publications and Research Data (ETH Zurich)
  • ICASSP 2022 - 2022 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP)

Their specialization in handwritten text recognition techniques is reflected in the majority of their publications, often involving novel approaches to online handwriting recognition and digital ink analysis. Their work extends into synthesis of data for recognition improvement and embedding techniques for compositional stroke analysis, overlapping with other areas such as natural language processing and computer vision.

Best Publications

  • Measuring the Objectness of Image Windows

    B. Alexe;T. Deselaers;V. Ferrari

  • What is an object

    Bogdan Alexe;Thomas Deselaers;Vittorio Ferrari

  • ClassCut for unsupervised class segmentation

    Bogdan Alexe;Thomas Deselaers;Vittorio Ferrari

  • Features for image retrieval: an experimental comparison

    Thomas Deselaers;Daniel Keysers;Hermann Ney

  • The 2005 PASCAL visual object classes challenge

    Mark Everingham;Andrew Zisserman;Christopher K. I. Williams;Luc Van Gool

  • Weakly Supervised Localization and Learning with Generic Knowledge

    Thomas Deselaers;Bogdan Alexe;Vittorio Ferrari

  • Deformation Models for Image Recognition

    D. Keysers;T. Deselaers;C. Gollan;H. Ney

  • Automatic categorization of medical images for content-based retrieval and data mining.

    Thomas M. Lehmann;Mark O. Güld;Thomas Deselaers;Daniel Keysers

  • The CLEF 2005 cross–language image retrieval track

    Paul Clough;Henning Müller;Thomas Deselaers;Michael Grubinger

  • Bag-of-visual-words models for adult image classification and filtering

    T. Deselaers;L. Pimenidis;H. Ney

  • Overview of the ImageCLEFmed 2006 medical retrieval and medical annotation tasks

    Henning Müller;Thomas Deselaers;Thomas Deserno;Paul Clough

  • Localizing objects while learning their appearance

    Thomas Deselaers;Bogdan Alexe;Vittorio Ferrari

  • ImageCLEF: Experimental Evaluation in Visual Information Retrieval

    Henning Mller;Paul Clough;Thomas Deselaers;Barbara Caputo

  • Features for Image Retrieval: A Quantitative Comparison

    Thomas Deselaers;Daniel Keysers;Hermann Ney

  • Multi-Language Online Handwriting Recognition

    Daniel Keysers;Thomas Deselaers;Henry A. Rowley;Li-Lun Wang

  • Visual and semantic similarity in ImageNet

    Thomas Deselaers;Vittorio Ferrari

  • Speech recognition techniques for a sign language recognition system.

    Philippe Dreuw;David Rybach;Thomas Deselaers;Morteza Zahedi

  • Discriminative training for object recognition using image patches

    T. Deselaers;D. Keysers;H. Ney

  • A Deep Learning Approach to Machine Transliteration

    Thomas Deselaers;Saša Hasan;Oliver Bender;Hermann Ney

  • Evaluating Systems for Multilingual and Multimodal Information Access

    Carol Peters;Thomas Deselaers;Nicola Ferro;Julio Gonzalo

  • The CLEF 2004 cross-language image retrieval track

    Paul Clough;Henning Müller;Mark Sanderson

  • Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), 2011 IEEE Conference on

    T. Deselaers;Vittorio Ferrari

Frequent Co-Authors

Daniel Keysers
Daniel Keysers Google (United States)
Hermann Ney
Hermann Ney RWTH Aachen University
Henning Müller
Henning Müller University of Applied Sciences and Arts Western Switzerland
Henry Allan Rowley
Henry Allan Rowley Google (United States)
Vittorio Ferrari
Vittorio Ferrari Google (United States)
Paul Clough
Paul Clough University of Sheffield
William R. Hersh
William R. Hersh Oregon Health & Science University
Georg Heigold
Georg Heigold German Research Centre for Artificial Intelligence
Enrique Vidal
Enrique Vidal Universitat Politècnica de València

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 various easy degrees to get online that pay well. Many students prefer online study for its flexibility and affordability, with several reputable programs offering accelerated or specialized tracks.

For those seeking management roles within the tech sector, online MBA programs are an excellent way to gain business expertise while continuing to work or study in computer science. Alternatively, individuals can consider the fastest route to advanced qualifications through online masters—many one-year programs now focus on tech and related fields.

As artificial intelligence skills are in high demand, earning a credential from one of the best online ai degree programs can further boost your career prospects. These online degrees help you develop skills that employers are searching for, all while saving on costs and gaining flexibility in your study schedule.

Best Scientists Citing Thomas Deselaers

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles