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.
Practical estimates of rock mass strength
19972.6k citationsE. Hoek, E.T. BrownInternational Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciencesprofile →
Empirical Strength Criterion for Rock Masses
19801.3k citationsE. Hoek, E.T. BrownJournal of the Geotechnical Engineering Divisionprofile →
This map shows the geographic impact of E. Hoek'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 E. Hoek with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites E. Hoek more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers produced by E. Hoek. 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 E. Hoek. The network helps show where E. Hoek may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of E. Hoek
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of E. Hoek.
A scholar is included among the top collaborators of E. Hoek 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 E. Hoek. E. Hoek is excluded from
the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.
All Works
20 of 20 papers shown
1.
Hoek, E.. (2016). The role of Experts in Tunnelling projects.1 indexed citations
2.
Hoek, E., et al.. (2013). Quantification of the Geological Strength Index Chart.150 indexed citations
3.
Hoek, E., et al.. (2006). Support Decision Critieria for Tunnels in Fault Zones. 24(5). 51–57.1 indexed citations
4.
Hoek, E., et al.. (2006). Greece's Egnatia Highway Tunnels. DSpace - NTUA (National Technical University of Athens).5 indexed citations
Hoek, E., et al.. (2004). Geological risk in the use of TBMs in heterogeneous rock masses - The case of "Metro do Porto" and the measures adopted.13 indexed citations
8.
Hoek, E., et al.. (2000). Rock Slopes In Civil And Mining Engineering. ISRM International Symposium.28 indexed citations
Hoek, E. & J.W. Bray. (1989). ROCK SLOPES DESIGN, EXCAVATION, STABILIZATION..10 indexed citations
14.
Hoek, E.. (1987). General two-dimensional slope stability analysis. Pages. 95128.23 indexed citations
15.
Hoek, E. & E.T. Brown. (1982). EMPIRICAL STRENGTH CRITERION FOR ROCK MASSES. DISCUSSION AND CLOSURE. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering. 108.1 indexed citations
Hoek, E.. (1972). The Teaching of Rock Mechanics. Rock Mechanics and Rock Engineering. 4(3). 135–138.1 indexed citations
18.
Hoek, E. & Z.T. Bieniawski. (1966). Fracture Propagation Mechanism In Hard Rock.26 indexed citations
19.
Hoek, E., et al.. (1966). Rock mechanics applied to the study of rockbursts.. Journal of the Southern African Institute of Mining and Metallurgy. 66(10). 435–528.194 indexed citations
20.
Hoek, E.. (1964). Fracture of Anisotropic Rock. Journal of the Southern African Institute of Mining and Metallurgy. 64(10). 501–518.151 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.