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.
Complete protein sequence and identification of structural domains of human apolipoprotein B
1986533 citationsTimothy J. Knott, Richard J. Pease et al.Natureprofile →
Peers — A (Enhanced Table)
Peers by citation overlap · career bar shows stage (early→late)
cites ·
hero ref
Countries citing papers authored by Michael Fuller
Since
Specialization
Citations
This map shows the geographic impact of Michael Fuller'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 Fuller with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Michael Fuller more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers produced by Michael Fuller. 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 Fuller. The network helps show where Michael Fuller may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of Michael Fuller
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Michael Fuller.
A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Michael Fuller 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 Fuller. Michael Fuller is excluded from
the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.
Fuller, Michael, Jacqueline Hayes, John Cavenagh, et al.. (2015). Saturday 25 July 2015. Journal of Medical Radiation Sciences. 62(S1). 37–75.
5.
Nadelson, Louis S., et al.. (2012). The Tension Between Teacher Accountability and Flexibility: The Paradox of Standards-Based Reform. Scholar Works (Boise State University). 25(2). 196–220.9 indexed citations
Wu, Mingfang, Michael Fuller, & Ross Wilkinson. (2000). The role of a judge in a user based retrieval experiment.. International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval. 331–333.2 indexed citations
12.
D’Souza, Daryl, et al.. (2000). Melbourne TREC-9 Experiments.. Text REtrieval Conference.6 indexed citations
Fuller, Michael, et al.. (1999). The RMIT/CSIRO Ad Hoc, Q&A, Web, Interactive, and Speech Experiments at TREC 8.. Text REtrieval Conference.9 indexed citations
15.
Fuller, Michael, Marcin Kaszkiel, John Robertson, et al.. (1998). TREC 7 Ad Hoc, Speech, and Interactive tracks at MDS/CSIRO.. Text REtrieval Conference. 404–413.10 indexed citations
16.
Fuller, Michael, et al.. (1997). MDS TREC6 report. Text REtrieval Conference. 241–257.5 indexed citations
17.
Fuller, Michael, et al.. (1995). The ELF Data Model and SCGL Query Language for Structured Document Databases.. Australasian Database Conference. 17–26.7 indexed citations
Fuller, Michael, et al.. (1993). Coherent Answers for a Large Structured Document Collection.. International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval. 204–213.4 indexed citations
20.
Knott, Timothy J., Richard J. Pease, Lynn M. Powell, et al.. (1986). Complete protein sequence and identification of structural domains of human apolipoprotein B. Nature. 323(6090). 734–738.533 indexed citations breakdown →
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.