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.
Synthesis and Activity of Ruthenium Alkylidene Complexes Coordinated with Phosphine and N-Heterocyclic Carbene Ligands
Countries citing papers authored by Thomas Wilhelm
Since
Specialization
Citations
This map shows the geographic impact of Thomas Wilhelm'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 Wilhelm with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Thomas Wilhelm more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers produced by Thomas Wilhelm. 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 Wilhelm. The network helps show where Thomas Wilhelm may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of Thomas Wilhelm
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Thomas Wilhelm.
A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Thomas Wilhelm 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 Wilhelm. Thomas Wilhelm is excluded from
the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.
Wilhelm, Thomas, et al.. (2020). Measuring students' interest in physics. The Physics Video Demonstration Database (Cornell University). 111–116.1 indexed citations
Lutz, Wolfgang, et al.. (2020). Digitale Unterrichtsmaterialien zum Elektronengasmodell. 1.1 indexed citations
9.
Wilhelm, Thomas, et al.. (2019). Re-Design des Frankfurter Unterrichtskonzepts im Rahmen von EPo-EKo. Unipub UB Graz (Universität Graz). 1. 253–260.1 indexed citations
10.
Vogt, Patrik, et al.. (2015). Physics on the Road: Smartphone-Experimente im Straßenverkehr.1 indexed citations
11.
Wilhelm, Thomas, et al.. (2015). Akzeptanzbefragung zum Elektronengasmodell.1 indexed citations
12.
Wenzel, Michael & Thomas Wilhelm. (2015). Erhebung zum Einsatz Neuer Medien bei Physik-Gymnasiallehrern.1 indexed citations
13.
Wilhelm, Thomas, et al.. (2012). Chemnitz at the CHiC Evaluation Lab 2012: Creating an Xtrieval Module for Semantic Enrichment..1 indexed citations
14.
Körner, Thomas, et al.. (2011). A Two-step Approach to Video Retrieval based on ASR transcriptions.. MediaEval.2 indexed citations
15.
Wilhelm, Thomas, et al.. (2011). Physik im Freizeitpark – Möglichkeiten und Vergleich von Videoanalyse, Beschleunigungsmessung und GPS.1 indexed citations
16.
Wilhelm, Thomas, et al.. (2010). Einsatzmöglichkeiten von Hochgeschwindigkeitskameras im Physikunterricht.1 indexed citations
17.
Hopf, Martin, et al.. (2010). Dynamischer Mechanikunterricht - Ergebnisse einer quantitativen Vergleichsstudie.1 indexed citations
18.
Wilhelm, Thomas, et al.. (2008). The Xtrieval Framework at CLEF 2008: ImageCLEF Wikipedia MM task. CLEF (Working Notes).1 indexed citations
19.
Wilhelm, Thomas. (2006). Google Book Search: Fair Use or Fairly Useful Infringement?. 33(1). 107.1 indexed citations
20.
Wilhelm, Thomas. (2005). Verständnis der Newtonschen Mechanik bei bayerischen Elftklässlern - Ergebnisse beim Test "Force Concept Inventory" in herkömmlichen Klassen und im Würzburger Kinematik-/Dynamikunterricht. 2(4). 47–56.2 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.