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.
Development of a sweet pepper harvesting robot
2020295 citationsBoaz Arad, J. Balendonck et al.Journal of Field Roboticsprofile →
Peers — A (Enhanced Table)
Peers by citation overlap · career bar shows stage (early→late)
cites ·
hero ref
Countries citing papers authored by Thomas Hellström
Since
Specialization
Citations
This map shows the geographic impact of Thomas Hellström'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 Thomas Hellström with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Thomas Hellström more than expected).
Fields of papers citing papers by Thomas Hellström
This network shows the impact of papers produced by Thomas Hellström. 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 Thomas Hellström. The network helps show where Thomas Hellström may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of Thomas Hellström
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Thomas Hellström.
A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Thomas Hellström 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 Thomas Hellström. Thomas Hellström is excluded from
the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.
Arad, Boaz, J. Balendonck, R. Barth, et al.. (2020). Development of a sweet pepper harvesting robot. Journal of Field Robotics. 37(6). 1027–1039.295 indexed citations breakdown →
7.
Hellström, Thomas, Virginia Dignum, & Suna Bensch. (2020). Bias in machine learning - what is it good for?. DiVA at Umeå University (Umeå University). 3–10.2 indexed citations
8.
Singh, Avinash Kumar, et al.. (2019). Towards Verbal Explanations by Collaborating Robot Teams.1 indexed citations
Lindroos, Ola, et al.. (2015). Estimating the position of the harvester head : a key step towards the precision forestry of the future?. Croatian journal of forest engineering. 36(2). 147–164.42 indexed citations
12.
Bensch, Suna, Frank Drewes, & Thomas Hellström. (2015). Grammatical Inference of Graph Transformation Rules. 73–90.
13.
Bensch, Suna, et al.. (2015). Inferring Robot Actions from Verbal Commands Using Shallow Semantic Parsing. International Conference on Artificial Intelligence. 28–34.1 indexed citations
14.
Hellström, Thomas, et al.. (2014). Detection of Trees Based on Quality Guided Image Segmentation. 531–540.3 indexed citations
Hellström, Thomas. (2011). Kinematics Equations for Differential Drive and Articulated Steering. KTH Publication Database DiVA (KTH Royal Institute of Technology).16 indexed citations
18.
Hellström, Thomas. (2002). Trends and Calendar Effects in Stock Returns.2 indexed citations
19.
Hellström, Thomas. (2001). Techniques and Software for Development and Evaluation of Trading Strategies.2 indexed citations
20.
Hellström, Thomas & Kenneth Holmström. (1998). Predicting the Stock Market.15 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.