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.
Uncertainty Quantification and Polynomial Chaos Techniques in Computational Fluid Dynamics
2008583 citationsHabib N. NajmAnnual Review of Fluid Mechanicsprofile →
On the Adequacy of Certain Experimental Observables as Measurements of Flame Burning Rate
This map shows the geographic impact of Habib N. Najm'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 Habib N. Najm with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Habib N. Najm more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers produced by Habib N. Najm. 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 Habib N. Najm. The network helps show where Habib N. Najm may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of Habib N. Najm
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Habib N. Najm.
A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Habib N. Najm 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 Habib N. Najm. Habib N. Najm is excluded from
the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.
Safta, Cosmin, Bert Debusschere, Habib N. Najm, & Khachik Sargsyan. (2010). Advanced methods for uncertainty quantification in tail regions of climate model predictions.. AGUFM. 2010.1 indexed citations
14.
Najm, Habib N.. (2008). Uncertainty Quantification and Polynomial Chaos Techniques in Computational Fluid Dynamics. Annual Review of Fluid Mechanics. 41(1). 35–52.583 indexed citations breakdown →
15.
Sargsyan, Khachik, Bert Debusschere, Habib N. Najm, & Youssef Marzouk. (2008). Predictability Assessment in Stochastic Reaction Networks.. Journal of Computational and Theoretical Nanoscience.
16.
Valorani, Mauro, Francesco Creta, F. Donato, Habib N. Najm, & Dimitris A. Goussis. (2006). A CSP-BASED SKELETAL MECHANISM GENERATION PROCEDURE: AUTO-IGNITION AND PREMIXED LAMINAR FLAMES IN N-HEPTANE/AIR MIXTURES. Research Repository (Delft University of Technology).10 indexed citations
17.
Frenklach, Michael, Mauro Valorani, Dimitris A. Goussis, et al.. (2004). On chain branching and its role in homogeneous ignition and premixed flame propagation.. 13(4). 292–3.7 indexed citations
18.
Debusschere, Bert, et al.. (2003). STUDY OF SAMPLE DISPERSION MECHANISMS IN AN ELECTROOSMOTICALLY PUMPED MICROCHANNEL. TechConnect Briefs. 1(2003). 154–157.2 indexed citations
19.
Debusschere, Bert, Roger Ghanem, Omar Knio, et al.. (2002). Uncertainty Quantification in a Reacting Electrochemical Microchannel Flow Model. TechConnect Briefs. 1(2002). 384–387.5 indexed citations
20.
Ghanem, Roger, Omar Knio, Olivier Le Maı̂tre, & Habib N. Najm. (2001). A Stochastic Projection Method for Microchannel Flow. TechConnect Briefs. 1(2001). 246–249.3 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.