Hit papers significantly outperform the citation benchmark for their cohort. A paper qualifies
if it has ≥500 total citations, achieves ≥1.5× the top-1% citation threshold for papers in the
same subfield and year (this is the minimum needed to enter the top 1%, not the average
within it), or reaches the top citation threshold in at least one of its specific research
topics.
The Canada-France Redshift Survey: The Luminosity Density and Star Formation History of the Universe to [ITAL]z[/ITAL] ∼ 1
1996625 citationsS. J. Lilly, J. Perea et al.The Astrophysical Journalprofile →
Peers — A (Enhanced Table)
Peers by citation overlap · career bar shows stage (early→late)
cites ·
hero ref
This map shows the geographic impact of D. Crampton's research. It shows the number of citations coming from papers published by authors working in each country. You can also color the map by specialization and compare the number of citations received by D. Crampton with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites D. Crampton more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers produced by D. Crampton. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the papers produced by D. Crampton. The network helps show where D. Crampton may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of D. Crampton
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of D. Crampton.
A scholar is included among the top collaborators of D. Crampton based on the total number of
citations received by their joint publications. Widths of edges
represent the number of papers authors have co-authored together.
Node borders
signify the number of papers an author published with D. Crampton. D. Crampton is excluded from
the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.
Brodwin, M., S. J. Lilly, C. Porciani, et al.. (2004). The Canada-France Deep Fields-Photometric Redshift Survey: An Investigation of Galaxy Evolution Using Photometric Redshifts. TSpace. 205.1 indexed citations
Rieke, Marcia, Stefi A. Baum, Charles Beichman, et al.. (2003). NGST NIRCam Scientific Program and Design Concept. Proceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE. 4850. 478–478.12 indexed citations
8.
Allington‐Smith, J. R., Graham J. Murray, Roger B. Davies, et al.. (2002). The GMOS Integral Field Unit: First Integral Field Spectroscopy with an 8m Telescope (Invited Talk). ASPC. 282. 415.3 indexed citations
9.
McCarthy, Patrick M., Karl Glazebrook, Roberto Abraham, et al.. (2002). The Gemini Deep Deep Survey. 264.4 indexed citations
10.
McCracken, H. J., O. Le Fèvre, M. Brodwin, et al.. (2001). The Canada-France deep fields survey. Astronomy and Astrophysics. 376(3). 756–774.29 indexed citations
Hammer, F., J. Perea, L. Tresse, S. Lilly, & D. Crampton. (1995). Spectroscopic survey of 600 ultra-faint galaxies at CFHT: first results. 31. 49.
13.
Crampton, D.. (1991). The space distribution of quasars. Astronomical Society of the Pacific eBooks. 21.6 indexed citations
14.
Shafter, A. W., E. L. Robinson, D. Crampton, & B. Warner. (1987). Photometric and Spectroscopic Observations of V795 Her (PG1711+336). Bulletin of the American Astronomical Society. 19. 1058.1 indexed citations
Crampton, D. & R. O. Redman. (1974). The Galactic Distribution of H II Regions.. Bulletin of the American Astronomical Society. 6. 345.1 indexed citations
19.
Crampton, D., et al.. (1974). Spectroscopic observations of stars in H II regions.. 14. 283.2 indexed citations
20.
Crampton, D. & A. D. Thackeray. (1971). HDE 322417 and the H II region near IC 4628. Observatory. 91. 109–110.1 indexed citations
Rankless uses publication and citation data sourced from OpenAlex, an open and comprehensive
bibliographic database. While OpenAlex provides broad and valuable coverage of the global
research landscape, it—like all bibliographic datasets—has inherent limitations. These include
incomplete records, variations in author disambiguation, differences in journal indexing, and
delays in data updates. As a result, some metrics and network relationships displayed in
Rankless may not fully capture the entirety of a scholar's output or impact.