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.
Countries citing papers authored by Jay M. Tenenbaum
Since
Specialization
Citations
This map shows the geographic impact of Jay M. Tenenbaum'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 Jay M. Tenenbaum with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Jay M. Tenenbaum more than expected).
Fields of papers citing papers by Jay M. Tenenbaum
This network shows the impact of papers produced by Jay M. Tenenbaum. 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 Jay M. Tenenbaum. The network helps show where Jay M. Tenenbaum may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of Jay M. Tenenbaum
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Jay M. Tenenbaum.
A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Jay M. Tenenbaum 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 Jay M. Tenenbaum. Jay M. Tenenbaum 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.
Vidwans, Smruti J., Keith T. Flaherty, David E. Fisher, et al.. (2011). A Melanoma Molecular Disease Model. PLoS ONE. 6(3). e18257–e18257.67 indexed citations
Tenenbaum, Jay M. & Andrew Witkin. (1984). Perceptual organization as building blocks for vision (A). 1. 1216.1 indexed citations
8.
Witkin, Andrew & Jay M. Tenenbaum. (1983). What is perceptual organization for. International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence. 63(5). 1023–1026.14 indexed citations
Barrow, Harry G., et al.. (1977). Experiments in map-guided photo interpretation. International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence. 696.4 indexed citations
Garvey, Thomas D. & Jay M. Tenenbaum. (1976). Application of Interactive Scene Analysis Techniques to Cartography. Defense Technical Information Center (DTIC).1 indexed citations
Tenenbaum, Jay M., et al.. (1975). MSYS: A System for Reasoning About Scenes.. Defense Technical Information Center (DTIC).41 indexed citations
16.
Firschein, Oscar, Martin A. Fischler, L. Stephen Coles, & Jay M. Tenenbaum. (1973). Forecasting and assessing the impact of artificial intelligence on society. International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence. 105–120.21 indexed citations
17.
Tenenbaum, Jay M., Alan Kay, Thomas O. Binford, et al.. (1971). A Laboratory for Hand-Eye Research.. IFIP Congress. 206–210.10 indexed citations
18.
Tenenbaum, Jay M., et al.. (1971). Representation and Execution of Searchers Over Large Tree-Structured Data Bases.. IFIP Congress. 460–472.1 indexed citations
19.
Tenenbaum, Jay M., et al.. (1971). An accommodating edge follower. International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence. 1–7.20 indexed citations
20.
Tenenbaum, Jay M., B. Arad, G. Ben-David, & R. Moreh. (1967). NEUTRON CAPTURE GAMMA RAYS FROM NATURAL TITANIUM.. OSTI OAI (U.S. Department of Energy Office of Scientific and Technical Information). 3(1). e114–e114.2 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.