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.
This map shows the geographic impact of Edward Thomas'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 Edward Thomas with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Edward Thomas more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers produced by Edward Thomas. 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 Edward Thomas. The network helps show where Edward Thomas may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of Edward Thomas
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Edward Thomas.
A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Edward Thomas 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 Edward Thomas. Edward Thomas is excluded from
the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.
Thomas, Edward, Jeff Z. Pan, Stuart Taylor, & Yuan Ren. (2010). Lightweight Reasoning and the Web of Data for Web Science. Web Science.1 indexed citations
3.
Parreiras, Fernando Silva, Tobias Walter, Christian Wende, & Edward Thomas. (2010). Bridging software languages and ontology technologies. Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research). 311–315.1 indexed citations
4.
Pan, Jeff Z., et al.. (2010). Completeness Guaranteed Approximation for OWL DL Query Answering.3 indexed citations
5.
Pan, Jeff Z., Edward Thomas, & Yuting Zhao. (2009). Completeness Guaranteed Approximations for OWL-DL Query Answering.. 477(3). 1–12.9 indexed citations
6.
Pan, Jeff Z., Stuart Taylor, & Edward Thomas. (2009). MusicMash2: Mashing Linked Music Data via An OWL DL Web Ontology. Web Science.1 indexed citations
7.
Thomas, Edward, et al.. (2008). Aberdeen University Ontology Reuse Stack. Aberdeen University Research Archive (Aberdeen University). 83.2 indexed citations
8.
Pan, Jeff Z., Giorgos Stamou, Giorgos Stoilos, Stuart Taylor, & Edward Thomas. (2008). Scalable querying services over fuzzy ontologies. DSpace - NTUA (National Technical University of Athens). 575–584.39 indexed citations
9.
Thomas, Edward, Jeff Z. Pan, & Derek H. Sleeman. (2007). ONTOSEARCH2: Searching ontologies semantically. 258. 1–10.29 indexed citations
10.
Pan, Jeff Z. & Edward Thomas. (2007). Approximating OWL-DL ontologies. National Conference on Artificial Intelligence. 1434–1439.35 indexed citations
11.
Pan, Jeff Z., Edward Thomas, & Derek Sleeman. (2006). Ontosearch2: Searching and querying web ontologies.23 indexed citations
12.
Thomas, Edward, Harith Alani, Derek Sleeman, & Christopher Brewster. (2005). Searching and Ranking Ontologies on the Semantic Web. ePrints Soton (University of Southampton).8 indexed citations
Saint‐James, D., G. Sarma, Edward Thomas, & Peter J. Silverman. (1969). Type II superconductivity. CERN Document Server (European Organization for Nuclear Research).606 indexed citations breakdown →
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.