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 Hubble Deep Field: Observations, Data Reduction, and Galaxy Photometry
1996574 citationsR. E. Williams, Mark Dickinson et al.The Astronomical Journalprofile →
Author Peers
Peers are selected by citation overlap in the author's most active subfields.
citations ·
hero ref
This map shows the geographic impact of Marc Postman'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 Marc Postman with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Marc Postman more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers produced by Marc Postman. 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 Marc Postman. The network helps show where Marc Postman may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of Marc Postman
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Marc Postman.
A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Marc Postman 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 Marc Postman. Marc Postman is excluded from
the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.
Kartaltepe, Jeyhan S., Caitlin M. Casey, Mark Dickinson, et al.. (2019). Assembly of the Most Massive Clusters at Cosmic Noon. Bulletin of the American Astronomical Society. 51(3). 395.1 indexed citations
5.
Tumlinson, Jason, Jonathan W. Arenberg, Matt Mountain, et al.. (2019). The Next Great Observatories: How Can We Get There?. Bulletin of the American Astronomical Society. 51(7). 173.
Tumlinson, Jason, Sara Seager, Julianne J. Dalcanton, et al.. (2015). Beyond JWST: Science Drivers for the Next Great UVOIR Space Telescope. 225.1 indexed citations
Sparks, W. B., Victoria Meadows, P. R. McCullough, et al.. (2010). Lunar Based Observations of the Earth as a Planet. 1538. 5397.5 indexed citations
13.
Koekemoer, Anton M., D. Batcheldor, Marc Postman, & Rachel S. Somerville. (2010). Tracing the Mass Buildup of Supermassive Black Holes and their Host Galaxies. 2010. 157.
14.
Postman, Marc, et al.. (2010). The Science Cases for an Advanced Technology Large-Aperture Space Telescope (ATLAST). 215.3 indexed citations
15.
Bertone, Serena, Joel N. Bregman, Renyue Cen, et al.. (2009). The Cosmic Web. 2010. 270.1 indexed citations
16.
Ebbets, Dennis, et al.. (2009). Gigapixel Focal Plane Arrays for Large UVOIR Space Telescopes. 213.1 indexed citations
17.
Annis, J., S. Kent, F. J. Castander, et al.. (1999). The maxBCG technique for finding galaxy clusters in SDSS data. AAS. 195.6 indexed citations
18.
Postman, Marc, L. M. Lubin, J. E. Gunn, et al.. (1995). The Palomar Distant Cluster Survey. American Astronomical Society Meeting Abstracts. 187.1 indexed citations
19.
Ford, H. C., Tom Broadhurst, Paul D. Feldman, et al.. (1995). The Advanced Camera for the Hubble Space Telescope. 186.5 indexed citations
20.
Williams, R. E., Mark Dickinson, Mauro Giavalisco, et al.. (1995). The Hubble Deep Field: Images. American Astronomical Society Meeting Abstracts. 187.
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.