First Principles Study of the Li10GeP2S12 Lithium Super Ionic Conductor Material
- Journal
- Chemistry of Materials
In The Last Decade
doi.org/10.1021/cm203303y →Countries where authors are citing First Principles Study of the Li10GeP2S12 Lithium Super Ionic Conductor Material
This map shows the geographic impact of First Principles Study of the Li10GeP2S12 Lithium Super Ionic Conductor Material. 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 First Principles Study of the Li10GeP2S12 Lithium Super Ionic Conductor Material with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites First Principles Study of the Li10GeP2S12 Lithium Super Ionic Conductor Material more than expected).
Fields of papers citing First Principles Study of the Li10GeP2S12 Lithium Super Ionic Conductor Material
This network shows the impact of First Principles Study of the Li10GeP2S12 Lithium Super Ionic Conductor Material. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the First Principles Study of the Li10GeP2S12 Lithium Super Ionic Conductor Material.
About First Principles Study of the Li10GeP2S12 Lithium Super Ionic Conductor Material
This paper, published in 2011, received 666 indexed citations . Written by Yifei Mo, Shyue Ping Ong and Gerbrand Ceder covering the research area of Inorganic Chemistry and Electrical and Electronic Engineering. It is primarily cited by scholars working on Electrical and Electronic Engineering (619 citations), Materials Chemistry (277 citations) and Automotive Engineering (183 citations). Published in Chemistry of Materials.
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/10.1021/cm203303y.