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.
An introduction to latent semantic analysis
19983.2k citationsThomas K. Landauer, Peter W. Foltz et al.Discourse Processesprofile →
The measurement of textual coherence with latent semantic analysis
1998519 citationsPeter W. Foltz, Thomas K. Landauer et al.Discourse Processesprofile →
Advancing the Science of Collaborative Problem Solving
2018223 citationsArthur C. Graesser, Samuel Greiff et al.profile →
Peers — A (Enhanced Table)
Peers by citation overlap · career bar shows stage (early→late)
cites ·
hero ref
Countries citing papers authored by Peter W. Foltz
Since
Specialization
Citations
This map shows the geographic impact of Peter W. Foltz'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 W. Foltz with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Peter W. Foltz more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers produced by Peter W. Foltz. 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 W. Foltz. The network helps show where Peter W. Foltz may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of Peter W. Foltz
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Peter W. Foltz.
A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Peter W. Foltz 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 W. Foltz. Peter W. Foltz is excluded from
the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.
Becker, Lee A., et al.. (2019). An apprenticeship model for human and AI collaborative essay grading..1 indexed citations
9.
Graesser, Arthur C., Zhiqiang Cai, Xiangen Hu, et al.. (2017). Assessment of collaborative problem solving.. Open Repository and Bibliography (University of Luxembourg).4 indexed citations
Abdelalí, Ahmed, et al.. (2006). Automated Team Discourse Modeling: Test of Performance and Generalization. eScholarship (California Digital Library). 28(28).10 indexed citations
Foltz, Peter W., Darrell Laham, & Thomas K. Landauer. (1999). Automated Essay Scoring: Applications to Educational Technology. EdMedia: World Conference on Educational Media and Technology. 1999(1). 939–944.145 indexed citations
16.
Landauer, Thomas K., Peter W. Foltz, & Darrell Laham. (1998). An introduction to latent semantic analysis. Discourse Processes. 25(2-3). 259–284.3173 indexed citations breakdown →
17.
Landauer, Thomas K., Darrell Laham, & Peter W. Foltz. (1997). Learning Human-like Knowledge by Singular Value Decomposition: A Progress Report. Neural Information Processing Systems. 10. 45–51.68 indexed citations
18.
McDonald, Jim, William C. Ogden, & Peter W. Foltz. (1997). Interactive Information Retrieval Using Term Relationship Networks.. Text REtrieval Conference. 196(500240). 379–383.6 indexed citations
19.
Foltz, Peter W., M. Anne Britt, & Charles A. Perfetti. (1996). Reasoning from multiple texts: An automatic analysis of readers' situation models. eScholarship (California Digital Library).19 indexed citations
20.
Foltz, Peter W.. (1991). Models of Human Memory and Computer Information Retrieval: Similar Approaches to Simiar Problems.2 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.