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.
Model Parameter Estimation Experiment (MOPEX): An overview of science strategy and major results from the second and third workshops
2005536 citationsHoshin V. Gupta, Lauren E. Hay et al.profile →
Peers — A (Enhanced Table)
Peers by citation overlap · career bar shows stage (early→late)
cites ·
hero ref
This map shows the geographic impact of T. S. Hogue'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 T. S. Hogue with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites T. S. Hogue more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers produced by T. S. Hogue. 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 T. S. Hogue. The network helps show where T. S. Hogue may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of T. S. Hogue
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of T. S. Hogue.
A scholar is included among the top collaborators of T. S. Hogue 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 T. S. Hogue. T. S. Hogue is excluded from
the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.
Rust, Ashley, et al.. (2020). Modelling Post-Fire Hydrologic Recovery in Snow Dominated Catchments in Colorado's San Juan Mountains. AGU Fall Meeting Abstracts. 2020.1 indexed citations
Saxe, Samuel, William Farmer, Jessica M. Driscoll, & T. S. Hogue. (2019). Implications of Model Selection: Inter-Comparison of Publicly-Available CONUS Extent Hydrologic Component Estimates. AGU Fall Meeting Abstracts. 2019.1 indexed citations
8.
Alamdari, Nasrin, et al.. (2019). Assessing Climate Change Impacts on Urban Stromwater Control Measures in the Los Angeles Basin. AGU Fall Meeting Abstracts. 2019.1 indexed citations
Hogue, T. S., et al.. (2017). Stormwater Infrastructure at Risk: Predicting the Impacts of Increased Imperviousness due to Infill Development in a Semi-arid Urban Neighborhood. AGU Fall Meeting Abstracts. 2017.1 indexed citations
11.
Clark, Martyn, Marc F. P. Bierkens, Ximing Cai, et al.. (2017). A vision for Water Resources Research. Water Resources Research. 53(6). 4530–4532.1 indexed citations
12.
Wolfand, Jordyn M., T. S. Hogue, & Richard G. Luthy. (2016). Predicting Fecal Indicator Bacteria Fate and Removal in Urban Stormwater at the Watershed Scale. AGU Fall Meeting Abstracts. 2016.1 indexed citations
Hogue, T. S., et al.. (2009). Contaminant Flushing From An Urban Fringe Watershed: Insight Into Hydrologic and Soil Dynamics During the Wet Season. AGUFM. 2009.1 indexed citations
18.
Hogue, T. S., et al.. (2008). Regional Parameter Sensitivity and Uncertainty Estimates for the NWS SACramento Soil Moisture Accounting Model (SAC-SMA). AGUFM. 2008.1 indexed citations
19.
Meixner, T., et al.. (2005). Changes in Nutrient Concentrations After a Chaparral Wildfire. AGU Fall Meeting Abstracts. 2005.1 indexed citations
20.
Sorooshian, Soroosh, et al.. (1999). A multi-step automatic calibration scheme (MACS) for river forecasting models utilizing the national weather service river forecast system (NWSRFS). UA Campus Repository (The University of Arizona).3 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.