Peter Vergeer

1.6k total citations · 1 hit paper
31 papers, 1.3k citations indexed

About

Peter Vergeer is a scholar working on Genetics, Materials Chemistry and Radiation. According to data from OpenAlex, Peter Vergeer has authored 31 papers receiving a total of 1.3k indexed citations (citations by other indexed papers that have themselves been cited), including 11 papers in Genetics, 10 papers in Materials Chemistry and 5 papers in Radiation. Recurrent topics in Peter Vergeer's work include Forensic and Genetic Research (11 papers), Luminescence Properties of Advanced Materials (6 papers) and Forensic Fingerprint Detection Methods (5 papers). Peter Vergeer is often cited by papers focused on Forensic and Genetic Research (11 papers), Luminescence Properties of Advanced Materials (6 papers) and Forensic Fingerprint Detection Methods (5 papers). Peter Vergeer collaborates with scholars based in Netherlands, United States and Denmark. Peter Vergeer's co-authors include Andries Meijerink, Thijs J. H. Vlugt, Jan P. J. M. van der Eerden, Martien I. den Hertog, Marianne H. F. Kox, Jacob P. Hoogenboom, Alfons van Blaaderen, Ivo Alberink, Peter Lodahl and Daniël Vanmaekelbergh and has published in prestigious journals such as The Journal of Chemical Physics, Physical Review B and Scientific Reports.

In The Last Decade

Peter Vergeer

30 papers receiving 1.3k citations

Hit Papers

Quantum cutting by cooperative energy transfer inYbxY1−xP... 2005 2026 2012 2019 2005 100 200 300 400 500

Peers — A (Enhanced Table)

Peers by citation overlap · career bar shows stage (early→late) cites · hero ref

Name h Career Trend Papers Cites
Peter Vergeer Netherlands 15 899 540 244 224 115 31 1.3k
Hergen Eilers United States 22 1.2k 1.3× 839 1.6× 524 2.1× 398 1.8× 32 0.3× 96 1.9k
Jingkui Liang China 19 558 0.6× 188 0.3× 151 0.6× 44 0.2× 15 0.1× 86 1.1k
Zdravko Siketić Croatia 17 493 0.5× 317 0.6× 81 0.3× 31 0.1× 4 0.0× 108 1.1k
A. Goswami India 23 707 0.8× 607 1.1× 556 2.3× 50 0.2× 6 0.1× 97 2.1k
J. Hegarty Ireland 25 663 0.7× 1.2k 2.3× 1.6k 6.4× 228 1.0× 63 0.5× 129 2.3k
K. E. Johansson Sweden 14 234 0.3× 228 0.4× 67 0.3× 70 0.3× 26 0.2× 54 816
Ziqin Wu China 16 302 0.3× 243 0.5× 359 1.5× 27 0.1× 15 0.1× 49 1.2k
R.H. Prince Canada 18 668 0.7× 268 0.5× 276 1.1× 21 0.1× 5 0.0× 63 1.1k
Jan-Peter Meyn Germany 23 352 0.4× 1.2k 2.2× 1.1k 4.4× 146 0.7× 37 0.3× 69 1.5k
Michael J. Curley United States 15 457 0.5× 248 0.5× 159 0.7× 62 0.3× 6 0.1× 67 869

Countries citing papers authored by Peter Vergeer

Since Specialization
Citations

This map shows the geographic impact of Peter Vergeer'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 Vergeer with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Peter Vergeer more than expected).

Fields of papers citing papers by Peter Vergeer

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers produced by Peter Vergeer. 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 Vergeer. The network helps show where Peter Vergeer may publish in the future.

Co-authorship network of co-authors of Peter Vergeer

This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Peter Vergeer. A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Peter Vergeer 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 Vergeer. Peter Vergeer is excluded from the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.

All Works

20 of 20 papers shown
1.
Vergeer, Peter, et al.. (2024). From data to a validated score-based LR system: A practitioner’s guide. Forensic Science International. 357. 111994–111994. 4 indexed citations
2.
Baiker, Martin, Ivo Alberink, L.V. van der Ham, et al.. (2023). Automated interpretation of comparison scores for firearm toolmarks on cartridge case primers. Forensic Science International. 353. 111858–111858. 2 indexed citations
3.
Ruifrok, Arnout, et al.. (2022). From facial images of different quality to score based LR. Forensic Science International. 332. 111201–111201. 9 indexed citations
4.
Vergeer, Peter, et al.. (2021). Measuring calibration of likelihood-ratio systems: A comparison of four metrics, including a new metric devPAV. Forensic Science International. 321. 110722–110722. 13 indexed citations
5.
Vergeer, Peter, et al.. (2020). Evaluation of glass evidence at activity level: A new distribution for the background population. Forensic Science International. 316. 110431–110431. 5 indexed citations
6.
Moultos, Othonas A., et al.. (2020). Artificial intelligence and thermodynamics help solving arson cases. Scientific Reports. 10(1). 20502–20502. 2 indexed citations
7.
Vergeer, Peter, Ivo Alberink, Marjan Sjerps, & Rolf J.F. Ypma. (2020). Why calibrating LR-systems is best practice. A reaction to “The evaluation of evidence for microspectrophotometry data using functional data analysis”, in FSI 305. Forensic Science International. 314. 110388–110388. 11 indexed citations
8.
Vergeer, Peter, et al.. (2020). A method for forensic gasoline comparison in fire debris samples: A numerical likelihood ratio system. Science & Justice. 60(5). 438–450. 10 indexed citations
9.
Sjerps, Marjan, et al.. (2019). Combining evidence in complex cases - a practical approach to interdisciplinary casework. Science & Justice. 60(1). 20–29. 10 indexed citations
10.
Stoel, Reinoud D., et al.. (2018). Decision support for using mobile Rapid DNA analysis at the crime scene. Science & Justice. 59(1). 29–45. 15 indexed citations
11.
Wiarda, Wim, et al.. (2017). Implementation and assessment of a likelihood ratio approach for the evaluation of LA-ICP-MS evidence in forensic glass analysis. Science & Justice. 57(3). 181–192. 51 indexed citations
12.
Meuwly, Didier, et al.. (2017). Performance Study of a Score‐based Likelihood Ratio System for Forensic Fingermark Comparison. Journal of Forensic Sciences. 62(3). 626–640. 40 indexed citations
13.
Vergeer, Peter, et al.. (2016). Numerical likelihood ratios outputted by LR systems are often based on extrapolation: When to stop extrapolating?. Science & Justice. 56(6). 482–491. 42 indexed citations
14.
Vergeer, Peter, et al.. (2015). Towards source level evaluation of the evidential value of fibre examinations. Forensic Science International. 250. 57–67. 4 indexed citations
15.
Sjerps, Marjan, Ivo Alberink, Annabel Bolck, et al.. (2015). Uncertainty and LR: to integrate or not to integrate, that’s the question. Law Probability and Risk. 15(1). 23–29. 22 indexed citations
16.
Vergeer, Peter, et al.. (2014). Likelihood ratio methods for forensic comparison of evaporated gasoline residues. Science & Justice. 54(6). 401–411. 31 indexed citations
17.
Haraksim, Rudolf, et al.. (2013). Assignment of the evidential value of a fingermark general pattern using a Bayesian network. UvA-DARE (University of Amsterdam). 212. 1–11. 3 indexed citations
18.
Carlier, Ingrid V. E., et al.. (2012). Development and validation of the 48-item Symptom Questionnaire (SQ-48) in patients with depressive, anxiety and somatoform disorders. Psychiatry Research. 200(2-3). 904–910. 47 indexed citations
19.
Meijerink, Andries, R. T. Wegh, Peter Vergeer, & Thijs J. H. Vlugt. (2005). Photon management with lanthanides. Optical Materials. 28(6-7). 575–581. 1 indexed citations
20.
Hoogenboom, Jacob P., Peter Vergeer, & Alfons van Blaaderen. (2003). A real-space analysis of colloidal crystallization in a gravitational field at a flat bottom wall. The Journal of Chemical Physics. 119(6). 3371–3383. 53 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.

Explore authors with similar magnitude of impact

Rankless by CCL
2026