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.
An orchestrated survey of methodologies for automated software test case generation
2013413 citationsWolfgang Grieskamp et al.profile →
Peers — A (Enhanced Table)
Peers by citation overlap · career bar shows stage (early→late)
cites ·
hero ref
Countries citing papers authored by Wolfgang Grieskamp
Since
Specialization
Citations
This map shows the geographic impact of Wolfgang Grieskamp'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 Wolfgang Grieskamp with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Wolfgang Grieskamp more than expected).
Fields of papers citing papers by Wolfgang Grieskamp
This network shows the impact of papers produced by Wolfgang Grieskamp. 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 Wolfgang Grieskamp. The network helps show where Wolfgang Grieskamp may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of Wolfgang Grieskamp
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Wolfgang Grieskamp.
A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Wolfgang Grieskamp 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 Wolfgang Grieskamp. Wolfgang Grieskamp is excluded from
the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.
Veanes, Margus, et al.. (2007). Testing of Software and Communicating Systems: Work-in Progress and Position Papers, Tool Demonstrations, and Tutorial Abstracts of TestCom/FATES 2007. Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS).1 indexed citations
4.
Grieskamp, Wolfgang. (2006). Model-Based Testing in the Field: Lessons Learned.. GI Jahrestagung (2). 189–196.3 indexed citations
5.
Grieskamp, Wolfgang & Carsten Weise. (2006). Formal Approaches to Software Testing: 5th International Workshop, FATES 2005, Edinburgh, UK, July 11, 2005, Revised Selected Papers (Lecture Notes in Computer Science). Springer eBooks.1 indexed citations
Campbell, Colin, Wolfgang Grieskamp, Lev Nachmanson, et al.. (2005). Testing concurrent object-oriented systems with Spec Explorer.5 indexed citations
10.
Brinksma, Ed, Wolfgang Grieskamp, & Jan Tretmans. (2005). Perspectives of model-based testing. Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS).3 indexed citations
11.
Barnett, Mike, et al.. (2003). Serious Specification for Composing Components.7 indexed citations
12.
Barnett, Mike, Wolfgang Grieskamp, Yuri Gurevich, et al.. (2003). Scenario-oriented Modeling in AsmL and its Instrumentation for Testing. International Conference on Software Engineering. 8–14.10 indexed citations
13.
Barnett, Mike, Wolfgang Grieskamp, Lev Nachmanson, et al.. (2003). Model-Based Testing with AsmL .NET. 12–19.10 indexed citations
Grieskamp, Wolfgang, et al.. (2000). Integrated Formal Methods. Lecture notes in computer science.17 indexed citations
20.
Grieskamp, Wolfgang, et al.. (1998). An Open Environment for the Integration of Heterogeneous Modelling Techniques and Tools. Publikationsdatenbank der Fraunhofer-Gesellschaft (Fraunhofer-Gesellschaft).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.