World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Computer Science

D-Index
34
Citations
4919
World Ranking
12184
National Ranking
1504

Xin Peng 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 Xin Peng 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: 276 publications — 69th percentile

69% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Xin Peng 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 Xin Peng 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: 34 D-Index — 16th percentile

16% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Best Publications

  • Fault Analysis and Debugging of Microservice Systems: Industrial Survey, Benchmark System, and Empirical Study

    Xiang Zhou;Xin Peng;Tao Xie;Jun Sun

  • Latent error prediction and fault localization for microservice applications by learning from system trace logs

    Xiang Zhou;Xin Peng;Tao Xie;Jun Sun

  • MicroHECL: High-Efficient Root Cause Localization in Large-Scale Microservice Systems

    Unknown

  • DeepTraLog

    Unknown

  • Poster: Benchmarking Microservice Systems for Software Engineering Research

    Xiang Zhou;Xin Peng;Tao Xie;Jun Sun

  • Collaborative Software Development Platforms for Crowdsourcing

    Xin Peng;Muhammad Ali Babar;Christof Ebert

  • Interactive and guided architectural refactoring with search-based recommendation

    Yun Lin;Xin Peng;Yuanfang Cai;Danny Dig

  • What help do developers seek, when and how?

    Hongwei Li;Zhenchang Xing;Xin Peng;Wenyun Zhao

  • Exploring the Potential of ChatGPT in Automated Code Refinement: An Empirical Study

    Unknown

  • Graph-based trace analysis for microservice architecture understanding and problem diagnosis

    Xiaofeng Guo;Xin Peng;Hanzhang Wang;Wanxue Li

  • Demystifying the vulnerability propagation and its evolution via dependency trees in the NPM ecosystem

    Unknown

  • Enjoy your observability: an industrial survey of microservice tracing and analysis

    Bowen Li;Xin Peng;Qilin Xiang;Hanzhang Wang

  • An Empirical Study of Usages, Updates and Risks of Third-Party Libraries in Java Projects

    Ying Wang;Bihuan Chen;Kaifeng Huang;Bowen Shi

  • Evaluating Large Language Models in Class-Level Code Generation

    Unknown

  • Improving API Caveats Accessibility by Mining API Caveats Knowledge Graph

    Hongwei Li;Sirui Li;Jiamou Sun;Zhenchang Xing

  • Ontology-Based feature modeling and application-oriented tailoring

    Unknown

  • Detecting differences across multiple instances of code clones

    Yun Lin;Zhenchang Xing;Yinxing Xue;Yang Liu

  • Evaluating and Improving ChatGPT for Unit Test Generation

    Unknown

  • Self-adaptation through incremental generative model transformations at runtime

    Bihuan Chen;Xin Peng;Yijun Yu;Bashar Nuseibeh

  • An exploratory study of feature location process: Distinct phases, recurring patterns, and elementary actions

    Jinshui Wang;Xin Peng;Zhenchang Xing;Wenyun Zhao

Frequent Co-Authors

Zhenchang Xing
Zhenchang Xing Australian National University
Jun Sun
Jun Sun Singapore Management University
Yijun Yu
Yijun Yu The Open University
Tao Xie
Tao Xie Peking University
John Mylopoulos
John Mylopoulos University of Ottawa
Bashar Nuseibeh
Bashar Nuseibeh The Open University
Andrian Marcus
Andrian Marcus The University of Texas at Dallas
Christoph Treude
Christoph Treude Singapore Management University
Yuanfang Cai
Yuanfang Cai Drexel University
Gang Zhang
Gang Zhang Agency for Science, Technology and Research

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 Xin Peng