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.
Towards a single definition of armed conflict in international humanitarian law: A critique of internationalized armed conflict
This map shows the geographic impact of James Stewart'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 James Stewart with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites James Stewart more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers produced by James Stewart. 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 James Stewart. The network helps show where James Stewart may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of James Stewart
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of James Stewart.
A scholar is included among the top collaborators of James Stewart 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 James Stewart. James Stewart 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.
Banerjee, Susana, Jonathan Lim, Anna‐Marie Stevens, et al.. (2020). The Impact of COVID-19 on Wellbeing and Work Ability in the NHS Oncology Workforce: Initial Results of the COVID-NOW Study. Lancaster EPrints (Lancaster University).1 indexed citations
2.
Stewart, James. (2018). Calculus: Early Transcendentals. Medical Entomology and Zoology.37 indexed citations
3.
Stewart, James, et al.. (2016). Biocalculus : calculus, probability, and statistics for the life sciences. Medical Entomology and Zoology.11 indexed citations
4.
Stewart, James. (2014). The Turn to Corporate Criminal Liability for International Crimes: Transcending the Alien Tort Statute. eYLS (Yale Law School). 47(1). 121–206.6 indexed citations
5.
Stewart, James. (2012). Calculus : Early Transcendentals Single Variable.4 indexed citations
6.
Stewart, James. (2012). Single Variable Essential Calculus: Early Transcendentals. Medical Entomology and Zoology.23 indexed citations
7.
Stewart, James. (2010). Single variable calculus : concepts and contexts.10 indexed citations
8.
Stewart, James. (2005). Rethinking Guantánamo. Journal of International Criminal Justice. 4(1). 12–30.2 indexed citations
Stewart, James. (2001). Multivariable Calculus Concepts and Contexts. Medical Entomology and Zoology.15 indexed citations
11.
Stewart, James, et al.. (1999). Study guide for Stewart's Single variable calculus, early transcendentals fourth edition.2 indexed citations
12.
Stewart, James. (1997). Calculus: Concepts and Contexts. Bulletin of Miscellaneous Information (Royal Gardens Kew).75 indexed citations
13.
Cole, William G., et al.. (1988). Automatic Classification of Medical Text: The Influence of Publication Form. PubMed Central. 196–200.1 indexed citations
14.
Cole, William G., et al.. (1987). Patterns of Hierarchical Structure in the Medical Lexicon. PubMed Central. 121–127.1 indexed citations
Fournier, John J. F. & James Stewart. (1985). Amalgams of 𝐿^{𝑝} and 𝑙^{𝑞}. Bulletin of the American Mathematical Society. 13(1). 1–21.123 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.