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.
Review of NDT methods in the assessment of concrete and masonry structures
2001505 citationsD. M. McCann, M. C. Fordeprofile →
Assessing Damage of Reinforced Concrete Beam Using “b -value” Analysis of Acoustic Emission Signals
2003420 citationsIan Main, M. C. Forde et al.profile →
Peers — A (Enhanced Table)
Peers by citation overlap · career bar shows stage (early→late)
cites ·
hero ref
This map shows the geographic impact of M. C. Forde'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 M. C. Forde with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites M. C. Forde more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers produced by M. C. Forde. 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 M. C. Forde. The network helps show where M. C. Forde may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of M. C. Forde
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of M. C. Forde.
A scholar is included among the top collaborators of M. C. Forde 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 M. C. Forde. M. C. Forde is excluded from
the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.
Forde, M. C., et al.. (2010). New Analysis of Ground Penetrating Radar Testing of a Mixed Railway Trackbed. Transportation Research Board 89th Annual MeetingTransportation Research Board.5 indexed citations
10.
Forde, M. C.. (2008). Nondestructive Testing as Tool for Inspection of Concrete and Masonry Arch Bridges: International Practice. Transportation Research Board 87th Annual MeetingTransportation Research Board.1 indexed citations
Forde, M. C., et al.. (2003). APPLICATION OF AET TO CONCRETE BRIDGES: PRACTICAL CONSIDERATIONS AND A CASE STUDY.1 indexed citations
13.
Clark, M. R., et al.. (2003). CASE STUDY OF RADAR LABORATORY WORK ON THE MASONRY ARCH BRIDGE.1 indexed citations
14.
Forde, M. C., et al.. (2003). AE MONITORING OF CONCRETE BRIDGE BEAMS IN SITU. The Structural engineer. 81(23). 41–46.3 indexed citations
15.
Colla, Camilla, D. M. McCann, & M. C. Forde. (2002). USING CONSTRUCTION HISTORY AS AN AID TO MASONRY BRIDGE ASSESSMENT.1 indexed citations
16.
Binda, L., et al.. (2001). RILEM TC 127-MS: Non-destructive tests for masonry materials and structures. Materials and Structures. 34. 134–143.11 indexed citations
17.
Forde, M. C., et al.. (1993). Impulse radar testing of structures. Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers - Structures and Buildings. 99(1). 96–99.8 indexed citations
18.
Forde, M. C., et al.. (1988). Conference diary. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering. 26(1). 291–292.1 indexed citations
19.
Davies, Simon, et al.. (1986). LOAD TEST TO COLLAPSE ON A MASONRY ARCH BRIDGE AT BARGOWER, STRATHCLYDE. OpenGrey (Institut de l'Information Scientifique et Technique).5 indexed citations
20.
Forde, M. C., et al.. (1977). THE USE OF TIME-LAPSE CINEMATOGRAPHY FOR THE MOVING CAR OBSERVER METHOD. Traffic engineering & control. 18(3). 103–105.
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.