Peter Diener
- Astronomy and Astrophysics top 5%
- Nuclear and High Energy Physics top 10%
- Geophysics
- Oceanography
- Computer Networks and Communications
- Co-authors
- Manuela CampanelliEloisa BentivegnaIan HinderTanja BodeErik SchnetterJoshua A. FaberGabrielle AllenRoland Haas
- Topics
- Pulsars and Gravitational Waves Research (2 papers)Scientific Computing and Data Management (1 paper)Gamma-ray bursts and supernovae (1 paper)
- Journals
- Classical and Quantum GravityCivil War Book ReviewPhysical review. D. Particles, fields, gravitation, and cosmology/Physical review. D. Particles and fields
- Partner nations
- GermanyCanadaUnited States
In The Last Decade
Peter Diener
3 papers receiving 459 citations
Hit Papers
Peers
Comparison fields: 5 of 22
- Astronomy and Astrophysics 441
- Nuclear and High Energy Physics 171
- Geophysics 53
- Oceanography 23
- Computer Networks and Communications 17
Countries citing papers authored by Peter Diener
This map shows the geographic impact of Peter Diener'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 Peter Diener with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Peter Diener more than expected).
Fields of papers citing papers by Peter Diener
This network shows the impact of papers produced by Peter Diener. 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 Peter Diener. The network helps show where Peter Diener may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of Peter Diener
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Peter Diener. A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Peter Diener 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 Peter Diener. Peter Diener is excluded from the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.
All Works
| # | Work | Indexed citations |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | The Einstein Toolkit: a community computational infrastructure for relativistic astrophysicsbreakdown → | 410 |
| 2 | 2 | |
| 3 | 0 | |
| 4 | 58 |
About Peter Diener
Peter Diener is a scholar working on Computer Graphics and Computer-Aided Design, Astronomy and Astrophysics and Nuclear and High Energy Physics, having authored 4 papers that have together received 470 indexed citations. Recurring topics across this work include Pulsars and Gravitational Waves Research (2 papers), Scientific Computing and Data Management (1 paper) and Gamma-ray bursts and supernovae (1 paper). The work is most often cited by research in Astronomy and Astrophysics (441 citations), Nuclear and High Energy Physics (171 citations) and Geophysics (53 citations). Peter Diener has collaborated with scholars based in Germany, Canada and United States. Frequent co-authors include Manuela Campanelli, Eloisa Bentivegna, Ian Hinder, Tanja Bode, Erik Schnetter, Joshua A. Faber, Gabrielle Allen, Roland Haas, Bruno C. Mundim and Christian D. Ott. Their work appears in journals such as Classical and Quantum Gravity, Civil War Book Review and Physical review. D. Particles, fields, gravitation, and cosmology/Physical review. D. Particles and fields.
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.