World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Discipline name D-Index World Ranking Current World Ranking National Ranking Current National Ranking Publications Citations
Computer Science 80 1074 1039 578 556 285 27419

Thomas Zimmermann publications per year

The chart shows the history of publications by Thomas Zimmermann between 1999 and 2025, highlighting the no. of papers published in each year and offering an overview of the publication velocity of this scholar. Thomas Zimmermann published across 27 years, from 1999 to 2025, averaging 12.3 papers a year. Output peaked at 29 publications in 2021. 21 of the 332 publications appeared in the last two years.

No. of publications
5 10 15 20 25
Bar chart. Horizontal axis: year, 1999 to 2025. Vertical axis: number of publications, 0 to 29. Peak 29 publications in 2021. 1999: 1 publication 2000: 0 publications 2001: 1 publication 2002: 0 publications 2003: 2 publications 2004: 3 publications 2005: 12 publications 2006: 14 publications 2007: 19 publications 2008: 15 publications 2009: 20 publications 2010: 16 publications 2011: 19 publications 2012: 15 publications 2013: 18 publications 2014: 20 publications 2015: 19 publications 2016: 15 publications 2017: 9 publications 2018: 7 publications 2019: 8 publications 2020: 12 publications 2021: 29 publications 2022: 18 publications 2023: 19 publications 2024: 9 publications 2025: 12 publications
1999 2025

332 publications in total across all disciplines

View publications per year as a table
Thomas Zimmermann: publications per year, 1999 to 2025
Year Publications
1999 1
2000 0
2001 1
2002 0
2003 2
2004 3
2005 12
2006 14
2007 19
2008 15
2009 20
2010 16
2011 19
2012 15
2013 18
2014 20
2015 19
2016 15
2017 9
2018 7
2019 8
2020 12
2021 29
2022 18
2023 19
2024 9
2025 12
Total 332
Download as CSV

Thomas Zimmermann 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 Zimmermann sits on this spectrum.

No. of scientists
200 400 600
Bar chart with 97 bars. Horizontal axis: publications, 32–41 to 991+. Vertical axis: number of scientists, 0 to 609. Most scientists, 609, have 142–151 publications. The last bar groups every scientist with 991 publications or more. The highlighted bar, 282–291 publications, is where this scientist sits. 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
32–41 publications 991+

This scientist: 285 publications — 71st percentile

71% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

View publications distribution as a table
Number of Computer Science scientists by publication count, Research.com 2026 ranking edition. Based on 14,188 ranked scientists.
Publications Scientists This scientist
32–41 7
42–51 22
52–61 82
62–71 134
72–81 249
82–91 324
92–101 421
102–111 420
112–121 497
122–131 544
132–141 555
142–151 609
152–161 559
162–171 534
172–181 556
182–191 583
192–201 519
202–211 508
212–221 490
222–231 437
232–241 423
242–251 408
252–261 377
262–271 301
272–281 335
282–291 320 285
292–301 293
302–311 250
312–321 238
322–331 206
332–341 209
342–351 208
352–361 162
362–371 176
372–381 127
382–391 158
392–401 128
402–411 104
412–421 94
422–431 99
432–441 83
442–451 108
452–461 73
462–471 77
472–481 69
482–491 84
492–501 62
502–511 54
512–521 57
522–531 51
532–541 51
542–551 32
552–561 38
562–571 28
572–581 43
582–591 33
592–601 41
602–611 32
612–621 28
622–631 25
632–641 27
642–651 17
652–661 20
662–671 17
672–681 15
682–691 14
692–701 21
702–711 13
712–721 12
722–731 19
732–741 14
742–751 12
752–761 10
762–771 10
772–781 11
782–791 10
792–801 11
802–811 8
812–821 8
822–831 7
832–841 11
842–851 10
852–861 5
862–871 9
872–881 4
882–891 6
892–901 3
902–911 6
912–921 3
922–931 2
932–941 2
942–951 2
952–961 3
962–971 3
972–981 3
982–990 5
991+ 100
Download as CSV

Thomas Zimmermann 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 Zimmermann sits on this spectrum.

No. of scientists
200 400 600 800
Bar chart with 52 bars. Horizontal axis: D-Index, 30–31 to 131+. Vertical axis: number of scientists, 0 to 990. Most scientists, 990, have 36–37 D-Index. The last bar groups every scientist with 131 D-Index or more. The highlighted bar, 80–81 D-Index, is where this scientist sits. 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
30–31 D-Index 131+

This scientist: 80 D-Index — 93rd percentile

93% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

View D-Index distribution as a table
Number of Computer Science scientists by D-index, Research.com 2026 ranking edition. Based on 14,188 ranked scientists.
D-Index Scientists This scientist
30–31 879
32–33 983
34–35 918
36–37 990
38–39 968
40–41 907
42–43 821
44–45 763
46–47 689
48–49 543
50–51 543
52–53 518
54–55 500
56–57 458
58–59 400
60–61 337
62–63 308
64–65 292
66–67 249
68–69 213
70–71 192
72–73 189
74–75 165
76–77 139
78–79 119
80–81 121 80
82–83 113
84–85 88
86–87 87
88–89 75
90–91 69
92–93 57
94–95 46
96–97 38
98–99 34
100–101 36
102–103 27
104–105 37
106–107 18
108–109 31
110–111 19
112–113 16
114–115 12
116–117 20
118–119 15
120–121 5
122–123 20
124–125 8
126–127 5
128–129 7
130 3
131+ 98
Download as CSV

Research.com Recognitions

  • 2021 - IEEE Fellow For contributions to data science in software engineering, research and practice
  • 2017 - ACM Distinguished Member
  • 2013 - ACM Senior Member

Overview

Thomas Zimmermann is a researcher affiliated with Microsoft in the United States. Their work primarily focuses on computer science, with a detailed emphasis on information systems, computer science applications, computer networks and communications, civil and structural engineering, and information systems and management.

Their main research topics encompass software engineering techniques and practices, software engineering research, software system performance and reliability, open source software innovations, scientific computing and data management, usability and user interface design, and personal information management and user behavior.

Zimmermann has contributed to a variety of publication venues, including:

  • arXiv (Cornell University)
  • Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
  • IEEE Software
  • ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology
  • IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering

Some of their recent papers include:

  • "A Tale of Two Cities: Software Developers Working from Home during the COVID-19 Pandemic" (2021, ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology)
  • "Taking Flight with Copilot" (2022, Queue)
  • "The SPACE of Developer Productivity" (2021, Queue)
  • "Accessibility in Software Practice: A Practitioner's Perspective" (2022, ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology)
  • "Practitioners' expectations on automated code comment generation" (2022, Proceedings of the 44th International Conference on Software Engineering)

Frequent collaborators in Zimmermann's research include Denae Ford, Christian Bird, Nicole Forsgren, Margaret-Anne Storey, and Jenna Butler.

Recognition for their work includes awards such as:

  • IEEE Fellow (2021) for contributions to data science in software engineering, research and practice
  • ACM Distinguished Member (2017)
  • ACM Senior Member (2013)

Best Publications

  • Mining version histories to guide software changes

    T. Zimmermann;A. Zeller;P. Weissgerber;S. Diehl

  • When do changes induce fixes

    Jacek Śliwerski;Thomas Zimmermann;Andreas Zeller

  • Software engineering for machine learning: a case study

    Saleema Amershi;Andrew Begel;Christian Bird;Robert DeLine

  • Predicting Defects for Eclipse

    Thomas Zimmermann;Rahul Premraj;Andreas Zeller

  • Cross-project defect prediction: a large scale experiment on data vs. domain vs. process

    Thomas Zimmermann;Nachiappan Nagappan;Harald Gall;Emanuel Giger

  • What makes a good bug report

    Nicolas Bettenburg;Sascha Just;Adrian Schröter;Cathrin Weiss

  • Mining version histories to guide software changes

    T. Zimmermann;P. Weibgerber;S. Diehl;A. Zeller

  • Predicting defects using network analysis on dependency graphs

    Thomas Zimmermann;Nachiappan Nagappan

  • Predicting Faults from Cached History

    Sunghun Kim;T. Zimmermann;E.J. Whitehead;A. Zeller

  • Improving bug triage with bug tossing graphs

    Gaeul Jeong;Sunghun Kim;Thomas Zimmermann

  • Recommendation Systems for Software Engineering

    Martin Robillard;Robert Walker;Thomas Zimmermann

  • Persuasive technology in the real world: a study of long-term use of activity sensing devices for fitness

    Thomas Fritz;Elaine M. Huang;Gail C. Murphy;Thomas Zimmermann

  • Predicting vulnerable software components

    Stephan Neuhaus;Thomas Zimmermann;Christian Holler;Andreas Zeller

  • How Long Will It Take to Fix This Bug

    Cathrin Weiss;Rahul Premraj;Thomas Zimmermann;Andreas Zeller

  • DynaMine: finding common error patterns by mining software revision histories

    Benjamin Livshits;Thomas Zimmermann

  • Automatic Identification of Bug-Introducing Changes

    Sunghun Kim;T. Zimmermann;Kai Pan;E.J. Whitehead

  • What Makes a Good Bug Report

    Thomas Zimmermann;Rahul Premraj;Nicolas Bettenburg;Sascha Just

  • Duplicate bug reports considered harmful … really?

    N. Bettenburg;R. Premraj;T. Zimmermann;Sunghun Kim

  • Characterizing and predicting which bugs get fixed: an empirical study of Microsoft Windows

    Philip J. Guo;Thomas Zimmermann;Nachiappan Nagappan;Brendan Murphy

  • Do Crosscutting Concerns Cause Defects

    M. Eaddy;T. Zimmermann;K.D. Sherwood;V. Garg

  • When do changes induce fixes? On Fridays

    Jacek Sliwerski;Thomas Zimmermann;Andreas Zeller

  • Predicting faults from cached history

    Sunghun Kim;Thomas Zimmermann;E. James Whitehead;Andreas Zeller

Frequent Co-Authors

Christian Bird
Christian Bird Microsoft (United States)
Nachiappan Nagappan
Nachiappan Nagappan Facebook (United States)
Andreas Zeller
Andreas Zeller Saarland University
Andrew Begel
Andrew Begel Carnegie Mellon University
Brendan Murphy
Brendan Murphy Microsoft (United States)
Tim Menzies
Tim Menzies North Carolina State University
Sunghun Kim
Sunghun Kim Hong Kong University of Science and Technology
Robert DeLine
Robert DeLine Microsoft (United States)
Miryung Kim
Miryung Kim University of California, Los Angeles
Emerson Murphy-Hill
Emerson Murphy-Hill Google (United States)

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

Studying Computer Science in the USA opens up a diverse range of online degree and career opportunities. Today, many students are turning to the best online accredited universities for flexibility and quality, allowing them to balance study with other commitments.

The technology sector is rapidly evolving, and specialized areas such as cybersecurity and game design are in high demand. If you’re interested in digital entertainment, a game art degree online can lead to exciting careers in interactive media and game development. For those seeking to guard against digital threats, exploring cybersecurity online degrees is a smart move in a field with strong job growth.

Computer Science skills are also highly valued in sectors like construction, especially as organizations adopt advanced technologies. The best online construction management degree programs blend project management with technical expertise, creating new opportunities in a traditionally hands-on industry.

Best Scientists Citing Thomas Zimmermann

Trending Scientists