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.
Supersymmetry and Supergravity
19831.0k citationsJulius Wess, Jonathan BaggerPrinceton University Press eBooksprofile →
Gauge symmetry and supersymmetry of multiple M2-branes
2008631 citationsJonathan Bagger, Neil Lambertprofile →
Precision corrections in the minimal supersymmetric standard model
1997629 citationsJonathan Bagger et al.Nuclear Physics Bprofile →
Modeling multiple M2-branes
2007467 citationsJonathan Bagger, Neil Lambertprofile →
Comments on multiple M2-branes
2008380 citationsJonathan Bagger, Neil Lambertprofile →
Peers — A (Enhanced Table)
Peers by citation overlap · career bar shows stage (early→late)
cites ·
hero ref
Countries citing papers authored by Jonathan Bagger
Since
Specialization
Citations
This map shows the geographic impact of Jonathan Bagger'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 Jonathan Bagger with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Jonathan Bagger more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers produced by Jonathan Bagger. 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 Jonathan Bagger. The network helps show where Jonathan Bagger may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of Jonathan Bagger
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Jonathan Bagger.
A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Jonathan Bagger 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 Jonathan Bagger. Jonathan Bagger 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.
Wess, Julius & Jonathan Bagger. (2020). Supersymmetry and Supergravity. Princeton University Press eBooks.69 indexed citations
2.
Bagger, Jonathan, Neil Lambert, Sunil Mukhi, & Constantinos Papageorgakis. (2012). Membranes in M-theory. arXiv (Cornell University).2 indexed citations
3.
Siegel, Warren, et al.. (2005). Concise encyclopedia of supersymmetry : and noncommutative structures in mathematics and physics. Springer eBooks.12 indexed citations
4.
Bagger, Jonathan & Richard Altendorfer. (1999). Dual Supersymmetry Algebras from Partial Supersymmetry Breaking. arXiv (Cornell University). 742.
5.
Bagger, Jonathan. (1996). Particles, strings & cosmology : proceedings of the Johns Hopkins Workshop on Current Problems in Particle Theory 19 and the PASCOS Interdisciplinary Symposium 5, Baltimore, 1995, March 22-25. WORLD SCIENTIFIC eBooks.3 indexed citations
Bagger, Jonathan, S. Dawson, & G. Valencia. (1992). EFFECTIVE FIELD THEORY OF ANOMALOUS GAUGE-BOSON COUPLINGS AT HIGH-ENERGY pp COLLIDERS.26 indexed citations
Bagger, Jonathan, Savas Dimopoulos, Eduard Massó, & Mary Hall Reno. (1985). Experimental Consequences of Family Unification. Physical Review Letters. 54(20). 2199–2202.16 indexed citations
15.
Bagger, Jonathan & Michael E. Peskin. (1985). Exotic processes in high-energye-pcollisions. Physical review. D. Particles, fields, gravitation, and cosmology/Physical review. D. Particles and fields. 31(9). 2211–2222.13 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.