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.
Completion of the 2011 National Land Cover Database for the Conterminous United States – Representing a Decade of Land Cover Change Information
20152.2k citationsCollin G. Homer, Jon Dewitz et al.Photogrammetric Engineering & Remote Sensingprofile →
This map shows the geographic impact of Jon Dewitz'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 Jon Dewitz with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Jon Dewitz more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers produced by Jon Dewitz. 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 Jon Dewitz. The network helps show where Jon Dewitz may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of Jon Dewitz
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Jon Dewitz.
A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Jon Dewitz 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 Jon Dewitz. Jon Dewitz is excluded from
the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.
Wickham, James, Stephen V. Stehman, Daniel G. Sorenson, Leila Gass, & Jon Dewitz. (2021). Thematic accuracy assessment of the NLCD 2016 land cover for the conterminous United States. Remote Sensing of Environment. 257. 112357–112357.174 indexed citations breakdown →
7.
Homer, Collin G., Jon Dewitz, Suming Jin, et al.. (2020). Conterminous United States land cover change patterns 2001–2016 from the 2016 National Land Cover Database. ISPRS Journal of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing. 162. 184–199.457 indexed citations breakdown →
Homer, Collin G., et al.. (2019). National Land Cover Database (NLCD) 2016 Science Research Products. AGU Fall Meeting Abstracts. 2019.8 indexed citations
10.
Jin, Suming, Collin G. Homer, Limin Yang, et al.. (2019). Overall Methodology Design for the United States National Land Cover Database 2016 Products. Remote Sensing. 11(24). 2971–2971.232 indexed citations breakdown →
11.
Shi, Yanhong, George Xian, Jon Dewitz, & Zhengying Wu. (2018). Assessment of Performances of Different Remotely Sensed Data in Impervious Surface Mapping. AGUFM. 2018.1 indexed citations
12.
Danielson, Patrick, et al.. (2018). Overall Method Design for NLCD 2016: 2001-2016 Land Cover and Land Cover Change. AGU Fall Meeting Abstracts. 2018.1 indexed citations
McKerrow, Alexa J., et al.. (2016). A comparison of NLCD 2011 and LANDFIRE EVT 2010: Regional and national summaries..3 indexed citations
16.
Homer, Collin G., Jon Dewitz, Limin Yang, et al.. (2015). Completion of the 2011 National Land Cover Database for the Conterminous United States – Representing a Decade of Land Cover Change Information. Photogrammetric Engineering & Remote Sensing. 81(5). 345–354.2178 indexed citations breakdown →
Xian, George, Collin G. Homer, Jon Dewitz, et al.. (2011). Change of impervious surface area between 2001 and 2006 in the conterminous United States. Photogrammetric Engineering & Remote Sensing. 77(8). 758–762.225 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.