World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!
Walter Daelemans

Walter Daelemans

D-Index & Metrics

Computer Science

D-Index
72
Citations
18740
World Ranking
1696
National Ranking
21

Walter Daelemans 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 Walter Daelemans 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: 531 publications — 94th percentile

94% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Walter Daelemans 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 Walter Daelemans 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: 72 D-Index — 89th percentile

89% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Overview

Walter Daelemans is affiliated with the University of Antwerp in Belgium. Their research primarily spans the field of Computer Science, with a strong focus on Artificial Intelligence. Other notable subfields of study include Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, Communication, Human-Computer Interaction, and Sociology and Political Science.

Their work extensively covers topics such as Hate Speech and Cyberbullying Detection, Topic Modeling, Natural Language Processing Techniques, Social Media and Politics, Digital Communication and Language, Misinformation and Its Impacts, and Electoral Systems and Political Participation.

Frequent publication venues for Walter Daelemans include:

  • arXiv (Cornell University)
  • Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
  • Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence
  • BMJ Open
  • Language Resources and Evaluation

Some of their recent papers are:

  • Current limitations in cyberbullying detection: On evaluation criteria, reproducibility, and data scarcity, 2020, Language Resources and Evaluation
  • Ensemble Methods for Personality Recognition, 2021, Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media
  • Influence of the COVID-19 pandemic and social media on the behaviour of pregnant and lactating women towards vaccination: a scoping review, 2023, BMJ Open
  • Linguistic Accommodation in Teenagers' Social Media Writing: Convergence Patterns in Mixed-gender Conversations, 2020, Journal of Quantitative Linguistics
  • The European Language Technology Landscape in 2020: Language-Centric and Human-Centric AI for Cross-Cultural Communication in Multilingual Europe, 2020, arXiv (Cornell University)

Walter Daelemans frequently collaborates with a range of co-authors including:

  • Mike Kestemont
  • Nikolay Banar
  • Pierre Geurts
  • Karine Lasaracina
  • Ehsan Lotfi

Best Publications

  • TiMBL: Tilburg Memory-Based Learner

    Ilk;Walter Daelemans;Jakub Zavrel;Ko van der Sloot

  • Proceedings of the 2014 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP)

    Alessandro Moschitti;Bo Pang;Walter Daelemans

  • Memory-based language processing

    W. Daelemans;A. van den Bosch

  • Pattern for python

    Tom De Smedt;Walter Daelemans

  • Predicting age and gender in online social networks

    Claudia Peersman;Walter Daelemans;Leona Van Vaerenbergh

  • MBT: A Memory-Based Part of Speech Tagger-Generator

    Walter Daelemans;Jakub Zavrel;Peter Berck;Steven Gillis

  • Automatic detection of cyberbullying in social media text

    Cynthia Van Hee;Gilles Jacobs;Chris Emmery;Bart Desmet

  • Forgetting Exceptions is Harmful in Language Learning

    Walter Daelemans;Antal Van Den Bosch;Jakub Zavrel

  • Improving accuracy in word class tagging through the combination of machine learning systems

    Hans van Halteren;Walter Daelemans;Jakub Zavrel

  • An efficient memory-based morphosyntactic tagger and parser for Dutch

    Antal van den Bosch;Bertjan Busser;Sander Canisius;Walter Daelemans

  • IGTree: using trees for compression and classification in lazy learning algorithms

    Walter Daelemans;Antal van den Bosch;Ton Weijters

  • Overview of the 4th Author Profiling Task at PAN 2016: Cross-genre Evaluations

    Francisco Manuel Rangel Pardo;Paolo Rosso;Ben Verhoeven;Walter Daelemans

  • TiMBL : Tilburg Memory Based Learner, version 5.0, Reference Guide

    W. Daelemans;J. Zavrel;K. van der Sloot;A. van den Bosch

  • Overview of the author identification task at PAN 2014

    Efstathios Stamatatos;Walter Daelemans;Ben Verhoeven;Benno Stein

  • Authorship Attribution and Verification with Many Authors and Limited Data

    Kim Luyckx;Walter Daelemans

  • Overview of the Author Identification Task at PAN 2015.

    Efstathios Stamatatos;Walter Daelemans;Ben Verhoeven;Patrick Juola

  • Detection and Fine-Grained Classification of Cyberbullying Events

    Cynthia Van Hee;Els Lefever;Ben Verhoeven;Julie Mennes

  • The effect of author set size and data size in authorship attribution

    Kim Luyckx;Walter Daelemans

  • TiMBL: Tilburg Memory Based Learner, version 5.1, Reference Guide

    W. Daelemans;J. Zavrel;K. van der Sloot;A. van den Bosch

  • Generalization performance of backpropagation learning on a syllabification task

    W.M.P. Daelemans;A.P.J. van den Bosch

  • Memory-Based Shallow Parsing

    Walter Daelemans;Sabine Buchholz;Jorn Veenstra

  • Memory-based language processing

    Walter Daelemans;Antal van den Bosch

Frequent Co-Authors

Antal van den Bosch
Antal van den Bosch Radboud University
Veronique Hoste
Veronique Hoste Ghent University
Martin Potthast
Martin Potthast Leipzig University
Benno Stein
Benno Stein Bauhaus University, Weimar
Efstathios Stamatatos
Efstathios Stamatatos University of the Aegean
Bart Goethals
Bart Goethals University of Antwerp
Emiel Krahmer
Emiel Krahmer Tilburg University
Helmer Strik
Helmer Strik Radboud University
Catia Cucchiarini
Catia Cucchiarini Radboud 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 related online degrees and certifications can greatly enhance your Computer Science education and open up additional career pathways in the USA. Many students opt for the online master’s in electrical engineering degree to deepen their technical expertise and broaden their job prospects in industries like robotics, energy, and telecommunications.

If you’re looking for faster ways to boost your credentials, consider easy certifications to get online. These can be completed quickly and often deliver a high return on investment, enabling you to specialize in in-demand areas without committing to a full degree.

For those who want to advance their careers quickly, there are options for the quickest online masters degree programs. These accelerated degrees let you gain advanced knowledge and start reaping the benefits in the workplace sooner.

Finally, choosing the right graduate program is crucial. Researching which master's degree is most in demand in usa can help you align your education with the evolving needs of the job market, improving your employment opportunities and career growth.

Best Scientists Citing Walter Daelemans

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles