On the calculation of multiplet energies by the hartree-fock-slater method
- Journal
- Theoretical Chemistry Accounts
In The Last Decade
doi.org/10.1007/bf00551551 →Countries where authors are citing On the calculation of multiplet energies by the hartree-fock-slater method
This map shows the geographic impact of On the calculation of multiplet energies by the hartree-fock-slater method. 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 On the calculation of multiplet energies by the hartree-fock-slater method with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites On the calculation of multiplet energies by the hartree-fock-slater method more than expected).
Fields of papers citing On the calculation of multiplet energies by the hartree-fock-slater method
This network shows the impact of On the calculation of multiplet energies by the hartree-fock-slater method. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the On the calculation of multiplet energies by the hartree-fock-slater method.
About On the calculation of multiplet energies by the hartree-fock-slater method
This paper, published in 1977, received 810 indexed citations . Written by Tom Ziegler, Arvi Rauk and Evert Jan Baerends covering the research area of Atomic and Molecular Physics, and Optics and Physical and Theoretical Chemistry. It is primarily cited by scholars working on Atomic and Molecular Physics, and Optics (530 citations), Materials Chemistry (258 citations) and Physical and Theoretical Chemistry (220 citations). Published in Theoretical Chemistry Accounts.
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.
This paper is also available at doi.org/10.1007/bf00551551.