Molecular Dynamics: Survey of Methods for Simulating the Activity of Proteins
- Journal
- Chemical Reviews
In The Last Decade
doi.org/10.1021/cr040426m →Countries where authors are citing Molecular Dynamics: Survey of Methods for Simulating the Activity of Proteins
This map shows the geographic impact of Molecular Dynamics: Survey of Methods for Simulating the Activity of Proteins. 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 Molecular Dynamics: Survey of Methods for Simulating the Activity of Proteins with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Molecular Dynamics: Survey of Methods for Simulating the Activity of Proteins more than expected).
Fields of papers citing Molecular Dynamics: Survey of Methods for Simulating the Activity of Proteins
This network shows the impact of Molecular Dynamics: Survey of Methods for Simulating the Activity of Proteins. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the Molecular Dynamics: Survey of Methods for Simulating the Activity of Proteins.
About Molecular Dynamics: Survey of Methods for Simulating the Activity of Proteins
This paper, published in 2006, received 908 indexed citations . Written by Stewart A. Adcock and J. Andrew McCammon covering the research area of Molecular Biology and Atomic and Molecular Physics, and Optics. It is primarily cited by scholars working on Molecular Biology (624 citations), Materials Chemistry (228 citations) and Computational Theory and Mathematics (142 citations). Published in Chemical Reviews.
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/cr040426m.