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.
The TESS science processing operations center
2016380 citationsJon M. Jenkins, Joseph D. Twicken et al.profile →
KeplerPresearch Data Conditioning II - A Bayesian Approach to Systematic Error Correction
2012349 citationsJeffrey C. Smith, Martin C. Stumpe et al.Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacificprofile →
Peers — A (Enhanced Table)
Peers by citation overlap · career bar shows stage (early→late)
cites ·
hero ref
Countries citing papers authored by Jeffrey C. Smith
Since
Specialization
Citations
This map shows the geographic impact of Jeffrey C. Smith'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 Jeffrey C. Smith with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Jeffrey C. Smith more than expected).
Fields of papers citing papers by Jeffrey C. Smith
This network shows the impact of papers produced by Jeffrey C. Smith. 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 Jeffrey C. Smith. The network helps show where Jeffrey C. Smith may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of Jeffrey C. Smith
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Jeffrey C. Smith.
A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Jeffrey C. Smith 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 Jeffrey C. Smith. Jeffrey C. Smith is excluded from
the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.
Smith, Jeffrey C., Robert Morris, Jon M. Jenkins, et al.. (2016). Finding Optimal Apertures inKeplerData. Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific. 128(970). 124501–124501.7 indexed citations
Smith, Jeffrey C., Martin C. Stumpe, J. Van Cleve, et al.. (2012). Removing the Noise and Systematics while Preserving the Signal - An Empirical Bayesian Approach to Kepler Light Curve Systematic Error Correction. AAS. 220.
Aßmann, R., Chiara Bracco, O. Brandt, et al.. (2011). Evaluation of Beam Losses And Energy Deposition for a Possible Phase II Design for LHC Collimation. University of North Texas Digital Library (University of North Texas).
16.
Smith, Jeffrey C., et al.. (2010). Mechanical and Thermal Prototype Testing for a Rotatable Collimator for the LHC Phase II Collimation Upgrade. University of North Texas Digital Library (University of North Texas).2 indexed citations
17.
Smith, Jeffrey C., et al.. (2010). Design of a Rotatable Copper Collimator for the LHC Phase II Collimation Upgrade. OSTI OAI (U.S. Department of Energy Office of Scientific and Technical Information).5 indexed citations
18.
Smith, Jeffrey C., R. Aßmann, V. Previtali, Vladimir Shiltsev, & Alexander Valishev. (2009). PROSPECTS FOR INTEGRATING A HOLLOW ELECTRON LENS INTO THE LHC COLLIMATION SYSTEM. University of North Texas Digital Library (University of North Texas).1 indexed citations
19.
Sagan, D. & Jeffrey C. Smith. (2006). The TAO Accelerator Simulation Program. Proceedings of the 2005 Particle Accelerator Conference. 4159–4161.5 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.