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.
Microbially induced carbonate precipitation (MICP) for soil strengthening: A comprehensive review
Countries citing papers authored by Stuart K. Haigh
Since
Specialization
Citations
This map shows the geographic impact of Stuart K. Haigh'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 Stuart K. Haigh with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Stuart K. Haigh more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers produced by Stuart K. Haigh. 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 Stuart K. Haigh. The network helps show where Stuart K. Haigh may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of Stuart K. Haigh
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Stuart K. Haigh.
A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Stuart K. Haigh 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 Stuart K. Haigh. Stuart K. Haigh is excluded from
the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.
Haigh, Stuart K., et al.. (2013). Centrifuge Testing of Monopiles for Offshore Wind Turbines. Cambridge University Engineering Department Publications Database.4 indexed citations
12.
Haigh, Stuart K.. (2012). Reply to the discussion by prakash on "mechanics of the casagrande liquid limit test". Cambridge University Engineering Department Publications Database.2 indexed citations
13.
Haigh, Stuart K., et al.. (2012). Development of a new apparatus for modeling deep excavation related problems in geotechnical centrifuge. Cambridge University Engineering Department Publications Database.2 indexed citations
14.
Wang, Junjia, Stuart K. Haigh, & NI Thusyanthan. (2009). Uplift resistance of buried pipelines in blocky clay backfill. Cambridge University Engineering Department Publications Database.9 indexed citations
15.
Coelho, Paulo, Stuart K. Haigh, & Spg Madabhushi. (2004). Centrifuge modelling of the effects of earthquake-induced liquefaction on bridge foundations. Cambridge University Engineering Department Publications Database.4 indexed citations
16.
Coelho, Paulo, Stuart K. Haigh, & Spg Madabhushi. (2004). Centrifuge modelling of earthquake effects in uniform deposits of saturated sand. Cambridge University Engineering Department Publications Database.1 indexed citations
17.
Coelho, Paulo, et al.. (2003). On the use of densification as a liquefaction resistance measure. ePrints Soton (University of Southampton).2 indexed citations
18.
Madabhushi, Spg & Stuart K. Haigh. (2002). The EEFIT field investigation of the Bhuj earthquake of 26th January 2001. Cambridge University Engineering Department Publications Database.1 indexed citations
19.
Haigh, Stuart K. & Spg Madabhushi. (2002). Dynamic earth pressures on piles due to lateral spreading. Cambridge University Engineering Department Publications Database.1 indexed citations
20.
Haigh, Stuart K., et al.. (2000). Lateral spreading during centrifuge model earthquakes. Cambridge University Engineering Department Publications Database.5 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.