Scott E. Field

3.3k total citations · 1 hit paper
44 papers, 1.7k citations indexed

About

Scott E. Field is a scholar working on Astronomy and Astrophysics, Nuclear and High Energy Physics and Statistical and Nonlinear Physics. According to data from OpenAlex, Scott E. Field has authored 44 papers receiving a total of 1.7k indexed citations (citations by other indexed papers that have themselves been cited), including 40 papers in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 9 papers in Nuclear and High Energy Physics and 7 papers in Statistical and Nonlinear Physics. Recurrent topics in Scott E. Field's work include Pulsars and Gravitational Waves Research (38 papers), Astrophysical Phenomena and Observations (24 papers) and Gamma-ray bursts and supernovae (17 papers). Scott E. Field is often cited by papers focused on Pulsars and Gravitational Waves Research (38 papers), Astrophysical Phenomena and Observations (24 papers) and Gamma-ray bursts and supernovae (17 papers). Scott E. Field collaborates with scholars based in United States, Germany and United Kingdom. Scott E. Field's co-authors include Chad R. Galley, Mark Scheel, Manuel Tiglio, Jonathan Blackman, Larry Kidder, Harald Pfeiffer, Vijay Varma, Jan S. Hesthaven, R. J. E. Smith and Béla Szilágyi and has published in prestigious journals such as Physical Review Letters, Journal of Computational Physics and Physical review. D.

In The Last Decade

Scott E. Field

42 papers receiving 1.7k citations

Hit Papers

Surrogate model of hybridized numerical relativity binary... 2019 2026 2021 2023 2019 50 100 150

Peers — A (Enhanced Table)

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

Name h Career Trend Papers Cites
Scott E. Field United States 21 1.6k 361 279 251 144 44 1.7k
Manuel Tiglio United States 25 1.6k 1.0× 207 0.6× 734 2.6× 160 0.6× 166 1.2× 49 1.8k
Peter Diener United States 23 2.3k 1.4× 223 0.6× 915 3.3× 135 0.5× 176 1.2× 41 2.4k
Ian Hinder United States 19 2.7k 1.7× 351 1.0× 885 3.2× 200 0.8× 84 0.6× 34 2.8k
Denis Pollney United States 28 3.4k 2.1× 390 1.1× 1.2k 4.2× 273 1.1× 89 0.6× 47 3.5k
Roland Haas United States 27 2.5k 1.6× 291 0.8× 985 3.5× 150 0.6× 54 0.4× 57 2.7k
V. Raymond United Kingdom 23 2.0k 1.3× 430 1.2× 322 1.2× 385 1.5× 68 0.5× 35 2.0k
Geoffrey Lovelace United States 23 2.2k 1.4× 316 0.9× 759 2.7× 195 0.8× 74 0.5× 39 2.3k
John G. Baker United States 25 2.8k 1.7× 237 0.7× 981 3.5× 176 0.7× 55 0.4× 48 2.8k
Thomas W. Baumgarte United States 34 4.2k 2.7× 442 1.2× 1.8k 6.3× 295 1.2× 95 0.7× 114 4.4k
Nikolaos Stergioulas Greece 34 3.3k 2.0× 750 2.1× 755 2.7× 497 2.0× 48 0.3× 98 3.4k

Countries citing papers authored by Scott E. Field

Since Specialization
Citations

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

Fields of papers citing papers by Scott E. Field

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers produced by Scott E. Field. 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 Scott E. Field. The network helps show where Scott E. Field may publish in the future.

Co-authorship network of co-authors of Scott E. Field

This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Scott E. Field. A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Scott E. Field 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 Scott E. Field. Scott E. Field 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.
Khanna, Gaurav, et al.. (2025). Phenomenology and origin of late-time tails in eccentric binary black hole mergers. Physical review. D. 112(2). 7 indexed citations
2.
Thomas, L. M., Katerina Chatziioannou, Vijay Varma, & Scott E. Field. (2025). Optimizing neural network surrogate models: Application to black hole merger remnants. Physical review. D. 111(10).
3.
Stein, Leo C., Keefe Mitman, Scott E. Field, et al.. (2025). High-precision ringdown surrogate model for nonprecessing binary black holes. Physical review. D. 112(2). 4 indexed citations
4.
Gadre, B. U., M. Pürrer, Scott E. Field, Serguei Ossokine, & Vijay Varma. (2024). Fully precessing higher-mode surrogate model of effective-one-body waveforms. Physical review. D. 110(12). 3 indexed citations
6.
Field, Scott E., et al.. (2023). Remnant black hole properties from numerical-relativity-informed perturbation theory and implications for waveform modeling. Physical review. D. 108(6). 3 indexed citations
7.
Yoo, J., Keefe Mitman, Vijay Varma, et al.. (2023). Numerical relativity surrogate model with memory effects and post-Newtonian hybridization. Physical review. D. 108(6). 27 indexed citations
8.
Field, Scott E., et al.. (2023). Survey of gravitational wave memory in intermediate mass ratio binaries. Physical review. D. 108(2). 9 indexed citations
9.
Field, Scott E., et al.. (2021). Improved analysis of GW190412 with a precessing numerical relativity surrogate waveform model. Physical review. D. 103(10). 18 indexed citations
10.
Field, Scott E., et al.. (2020). Genetic-algorithm-optimized neural networks for gravitational wave classification. arXiv (Cornell University). 15 indexed citations
11.
Lange, Jacob, Scott E. Field, R. O’Shaughnessy, et al.. (2020). Impact of subdominant modes on the interpretation of gravitational-wave signals from heavy binary black hole systems. Physical review. D. 101(12). 30 indexed citations
12.
Kumar, P., Jonathan Blackman, Scott E. Field, et al.. (2019). Constraining the parameters of GW150914 and GW170104 with numerical relativity surrogates. Physical review. D. 99(12). 32 indexed citations
13.
Antil, Harbir, et al.. (2018). A Note on QR-Based Model Reduction: Algorithm, Software, and Gravitational Wave Applications. Computing in Science & Engineering. 20(4). 10–25. 5 indexed citations
15.
Pürrer, M., R. J. E. Smith, Scott E. Field, et al.. (2017). Accelerating parameter estimation of gravitational waves from black hole binaries with reduced order quadratures. MPG.PuRe (Max Planck Society). 2015–2018. 1 indexed citations
16.
Blackman, Jonathan, Scott E. Field, Chad R. Galley, et al.. (2015). Fast and Accurate Prediction of Numerical Relativity Waveforms from Binary Black Hole Coalescences Using Surrogate Models. Physical Review Letters. 115(12). 121102–121102. 140 indexed citations
17.
Field, Scott E. & Stephen R. Lau. (2015). Fast Evaluation of Far-Field Signals for Time-Domain Wave Propagation. Journal of Scientific Computing. 64(3). 647–669. 7 indexed citations
18.
Cañizares, P., Scott E. Field, Jonathan R. Gair, et al.. (2015). Accelerated Gravitational Wave Parameter Estimation with Reduced Order Modeling. Physical Review Letters. 114(7). 71104–71104. 84 indexed citations
19.
Field, Scott E.. (2011). Applications of Discontinuous Galerkin Methods to Computational General Relativity. Brown Digital Repository. 1 indexed citations
20.
Field, Scott E., Jan S. Hesthaven, Stephen R. Lau, & Abdul Mroué. (2010). Discontinuous Galerkin method for the spherically reduced Baumgarte-Shapiro-Shibata-Nakamura system with second-order operators. Physical review. D. Particles, fields, gravitation, and cosmology. 82(10). 14 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