World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Computer Science

D-Index
40
Citations
10656
World Ranking
9093
National Ranking
452

Tobias Hoßfeld 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 Tobias Hoßfeld 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: 330 publications — 79th percentile

79% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Tobias Hoßfeld 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 Tobias Hoßfeld 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: 40 D-Index — 37th percentile

37% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Overview

Tobias Hoßfeld is affiliated with the University of Würzburg in Germany. Their research primarily spans the fields of Computer Science and Engineering, with a significant focus on subfields such as Computer Networks and Communications, Electrical and Electronic Engineering, Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, Signal Processing, and Sociology and Political Science.

The scientist's work addresses various topics, which notably include:

  • Image and Video Quality Assessment
  • Software-Defined Networks and 5G
  • Network Traffic and Congestion Control
  • Green IT and Sustainability
  • IoT Networks and Protocols
  • Video Coding and Compression Technologies
  • IoT and Edge/Fog Computing

Tobias Hoßfeld has collaborated frequently with several coauthors, highlighting consistent partnerships in their research projects. These frequent coauthors include:

  • Stefan Geißler (19 joint publications)
  • Frank Loh (19 joint publications)
  • Michael Seufert (17 joint publications)
  • Florian Wamser (14 joint publications)
  • Fabian Poignée (10 joint publications)

The scientist has contributed to a range of publication venues. The most common among these are:

  • Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) with 10 publications
  • arXiv (Cornell University) with 7 publications
  • IEEE Communications Magazine with 5 publications
  • NOMS 2022-2022 IEEE/IFIP Network Operations and Management Symposium with 5 publications
  • IEEE Transactions on Network and Service Management with 4 publications

Selected recent papers by Tobias Hoßfeld include:

  • YouTube Dataset on Mobile Streaming for Internet Traffic Modeling and Streaming Analysis, 2022, Scientific Data
  • An Introduction to Online Video Game QoS and QoE Influencing Factors, 2022, IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials
  • Energy-Aware Service Function Chain Embedding in Edge-Cloud Environments for IoT Applications, 2021, IEEE Internet of Things Journal
  • Towards LoRaWAN without Data Loss: Studying the Performance of Different Channel Access Approaches, 2022, Sensors
  • Uplink vs. Downlink: Machine Learning-Based Quality Prediction for HTTP Adaptive Video Streaming, 2021, Sensors

This body of work reflects Tobias Hoßfeld's engagement with contemporary issues in networking, streaming technologies, and IoT, complemented by empirical studies and analysis of quality factors in communication networks and video technologies.

Best Publications

  • A generic quantitative relationship between quality of experience and quality of service

    M. Fiedler;T. Hossfeld;Phuoc Tran-Gia

  • A Survey on Quality of Experience of HTTP Adaptive Streaming

    Michael Seufert;Sebastian Egger;Martin Slanina;Thomas Zinner

  • Qualinet White Paper on Definitions of Quality of Experience

    Kjell Brunnström;Sergio Ariel Beker;Katrien de Moor;Ann Dooms

  • Quantification of YouTube QoE via Crowdsourcing

    Tobias Hoßfeld;Michael Seufert;Matthias Hirth;Thomas Zinner

  • Initial delay vs. interruptions: Between the devil and the deep blue sea

    T. Hossfeld;S. Egger;R. Schatz;M. Fiedler

  • Best Practices for QoE Crowdtesting: QoE Assessment With Crowdsourcing

    Tobias Hossfeld;Christian Keimel;Matthias Hirth;Bruno Gardlo

  • An Evaluation of QoE in Cloud Gaming Based on Subjective Tests

    Michael Jarschel;Daniel Schlosser;Sven Scheuring;Tobias Hoßfeld

  • Challenges of QoE management for cloud applications

    T. Hobfeld;R. Schatz;M. Varela;C. Timmerer

  • Interfaces, attributes, and use cases: A compass for SDN

    Michael Jarschel;Thomas Zinner;Tobias Hossfeld;Phuoc Tran-Gia

  • SOS: The MOS is not enough!

    Tobias Hobfeld;Raimund Schatz;Sebastian Egger

  • Internet video delivery in youtube: from traffic measurements to quality of experience

    Tobias Hoßfeld;Raimund Schatz;Ernst Biersack;Louis Plissonneau

  • Waiting times in quality of experience for web based services

    S. Egger;T. Hossfeld;R. Schatz;M. Fiedler

  • Anatomy of a Crowdsourcing Platform - Using the Example of Microworkers.com

    Matthias Hirth;Tobias Hoßfeld;Phuoc Tran-Gia

  • Analyzing costs and accuracy of validation mechanisms for crowdsourcing platforms

    Matthias Hirth;Tobias Hoßfeld;Phuoc Tran-Gia

  • From packets to people: quality of experience as a new measurement challenge

    Raimund Schatz;Tobias Hoßfeld;Lucjan Janowski;Sebastian Egger

  • Gaming in the clouds: QoE and the users’ perspective

    Michael Jarschel;Daniel Schlosser;Sven Scheuring;Tobias Hoßfeld

  • The memory effect and its implications on web QoE modeling

    Tobias Hosfeld;Sebastian Biedermann;Raimund Schatz;Alexander Platzer

  • Assessing effect sizes of influence factors towards a QoE model for HTTP adaptive streaming

    Tobias Hoßfeld;Michael Seufert;Christian Sieber;Thomas Zinner

  • QoE beyond the MOS: an in-depth look at QoE via better metrics and their relation to MOS

    Tobias Hoßfeld;Poul E. Heegaard;Martín Varela;Sebastian Möller

  • “Time is bandwidth”? Narrowing the gap between subjective time perception and Quality of Experience

    Sebastian Egger;Peter Reichl;Tobias Hosfeld;Raimund Schatz

  • Efficient simulation of large-scale p2p networks: packet-level vs. flow-level simulations

    Kolja Eger;Tobias Hoßfeld;Andreas Binzenhöfer;Gerald Kunzmann

  • Impact of frame rate and resolution on objective QoE metrics

    Unknown

  • A Survey of Emerging Concepts and Challenges for QoE Management of Multimedia Services

    Lea Skorin-Kapov;Martín Varela;Tobias Hoßfeld;Kuan-Ta Chen

Frequent Co-Authors

Phuoc Tran-Gia
Phuoc Tran-Gia University of Würzburg
Wolfgang Kellerer
Wolfgang Kellerer Technical University of Munich
Raimund Schatz
Raimund Schatz Austrian Institute of Technology
Burkhard Stiller
Burkhard Stiller University of Zurich
Sebastian Möller
Sebastian Möller Technical University of Berlin
Hermann de Meer
Hermann de Meer University of Passau
Kuan-Ta Chen
Kuan-Ta Chen Academia Sinica
Helen C. Purchase
Helen C. Purchase Monash University
Andreas Nüchter
Andreas Nüchter University of Würzburg
Masayuki Murata
Masayuki Murata Osaka University

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 up a diverse range of online degree options. Many students begin their journey with an online associate degree, which can provide foundational knowledge and flexible entry-level pathways to the tech industry. These programs typically take about two years and offer a strong stepping stone toward further education or immediate employment.

For those seeking a quick boost in credentials, certificate programs that pay well are a practical choice. These certifications often specialize in high-demand skills such as cybersecurity, cloud computing, or programming—enabling graduates to stand out in the job market with minimal time investment.

If advancing your career quickly is a priority, consider the fastest masters degree online options in fields related to Computer Science. These accelerated programs allow working professionals to gain advanced knowledge and leadership skills while maintaining a busy schedule.

Finally, choosing the best masters degree to get can lead to rewarding and stable careers. Specialized, in-demand master's degrees—such as those in artificial intelligence, data science, or information systems—are highly valued by employers and can open doors to senior roles and higher salaries.

Best Scientists Citing Tobias Hoßfeld

Trending Scientists