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.
Would You Trust a (Faulty) Robot?
2015307 citationsMaha Salem, Gabriella Lakatos 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 Maha Salem'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 Maha Salem with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Maha Salem more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers produced by Maha Salem. 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 Maha Salem. The network helps show where Maha Salem may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of Maha Salem
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Maha Salem.
A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Maha Salem 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 Maha Salem. Maha Salem is excluded from
the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.
Salem, Maha, Astrid Weiss, & Paul Baxter. (2016). New Frontiers in Human-Robot Interaction. Interaction Studies Social Behaviour and Communication in Biological and Artificial Systems. 17(3). 405–407.1 indexed citations
11.
Salem, Maha & Kerstin Dautenhahn. (2015). Evaluating Trust and Safety in HRI : Practical Issues and Ethical Challenges. University of Hertfordshire Research Archive (University of Hertfordshire).20 indexed citations
Webster, Matt, Clare Dixon, Michael Fisher, et al.. (2014). Formal Verification of an Autonomous Personal Robotic Assistant. Research Explorer (The University of Manchester). 74–79.16 indexed citations
14.
Amirabdollahian, Farshid, Kerstin Dautenhahn, Clare Dixon, et al.. (2013). Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics).1 indexed citations
Salem, Maha. (2013). Conceptual Motorics - Generation and Evaluation of Communicative Robot Gesture. PUB – Publications at Bielefeld University (Bielefeld University).3 indexed citations
17.
Amirabdollahian, Farshid, Kerstin Dautenhahn, Clare Dixon, et al.. (2013). Can you trust your robotic assistant. Research Explorer (The University of Manchester). 571–573.4 indexed citations
Salem, Maha, Stefan Kopp, Ipke Wachsmuth, & Frank Joublin. (2011). A Multimodal Scheduler for Synchronized Humanoid Robot Gesture and Speech. PUB – Publications at Bielefeld University (Bielefeld University).3 indexed citations
20.
Salem, Maha, Stefan Kopp, Ipke Wachsmuth, & Frank Joublin. (2010). Generating multi-modal robot behavior based on a virtual agent framework. PUB – Publications at Bielefeld University (Bielefeld University).6 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.