Nathan Day
About
In The Last Decade
Nathan Day
9 papers receiving 462 citations
Peers
Comparison fields: 5 of 63
- Molecular Biology 300
- Ecology 215
- Plant Science 77
- Microbiology 64
- Epidemiology 60
Countries citing papers authored by Nathan Day
This map shows the geographic impact of Nathan Day'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 Nathan Day with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Nathan Day more than expected).
Fields of papers citing papers by Nathan Day
This network shows the impact of papers produced by Nathan Day. 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 Nathan Day. The network helps show where Nathan Day may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of Nathan Day
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Nathan Day. A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Nathan Day 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 Nathan Day. Nathan Day is excluded from the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.
All Works
| # | Work | Indexed citations |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | 0 | |
| 2 | 13 | |
| 3 | 1 | |
| 4 | OSC at TREC 2020 - News track's Background Linking Task. | 1 |
| 5 | 13 | |
| 6 | 42 | |
| 7 | 6 | |
| 8 | 216 | |
| 9 | 103 | |
| 10 | 80 |
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.