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 Future of U.S. Agricultural Cooperatives: A Neo‐Institutional Approach
This map shows the geographic impact of Michael Cook'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 Michael Cook with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Michael Cook more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers produced by Michael Cook. 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 Michael Cook. The network helps show where Michael Cook may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of Michael Cook
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Michael Cook.
A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Michael Cook 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 Michael Cook. Michael Cook is excluded from
the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.
Cook, Michael & Simon Colton. (2018). Neighbouring Communities: Interaction, Lessons and Opportunities.. Falmouth University Research Repository (FURR) (Falmouth University). 256–263.2 indexed citations
4.
Powley, Edward J., et al.. (2017). Wevva: Democratising Game Design. Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Interactive Digital Entertainment. 13(1). 273–275.3 indexed citations
5.
Cook, Michael. (2017). A Vision for Continuous Automated Game Design. Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Interactive Digital Entertainment. 13(2). 54–60.3 indexed citations
Cook, Michael & Simon Colton. (2015). Generating Code For Expressing Simple Preferences: Moving On From Hardcoding And Randomness. ICCC. 8–16.7 indexed citations
9.
Colton, Simon, et al.. (2015). The Painting Fool Sees! New Projects with the Automated Painter.. ICCC. 189–196.25 indexed citations
10.
Cook, Michael. (2015). Make Something That Makes Something: A Report On The First Procedural Generation Jam. ICCC. 197–203.2 indexed citations
11.
Cook, Michael. (2014). The American alliance and the shaping of the world. Quadrant. 58(4). 20.
12.
Colton, Simon, et al.. (2014). On acid drops and teardrops: observer issues in computational creativity. Discovery Research Portal (University of Dundee).9 indexed citations
13.
Sturtevant, Nathan, Jeff Orkin, Michael Cook, et al.. (2014). Playable Experiences at AIIDE 2014. Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Interactive Digital Entertainment. 10(1). 203–210.3 indexed citations
Cook, Michael, Simon Colton, & Alison Pease. (2012). Aesthetic Considerations for Automated Platformer Design. Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Interactive Digital Entertainment. 8(1). 124–129.26 indexed citations
Cook, Michael & Constantine Iliopoulos. (2000). Ill-defined property rights in collective action: the case of US agricultural cooperatives. Chapters.3 indexed citations
20.
Cook, Michael. (1996). The hospital utilisation and costs study 1991-92.. PubMed. 19(3). 138–42.7 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.