Fifth order Moeller-Plesset perturbation theory: comparison of existing correlation methods and implementation of new methods correct to fifth order
Abstract
loading...
About
In The Last Decade
doi.org/10.1021/j100377a033 →Countries where authors are citing Fifth order Moeller-Plesset perturbation theory: comparison of existing correlation methods and implementation of new methods correct to fifth order
This map shows the geographic impact of Fifth order Moeller-Plesset perturbation theory: comparison of existing correlation methods and implementation of new methods correct to fifth order. 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 Fifth order Moeller-Plesset perturbation theory: comparison of existing correlation methods and implementation of new methods correct to fifth order with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Fifth order Moeller-Plesset perturbation theory: comparison of existing correlation methods and implementation of new methods correct to fifth order more than expected).
Fields of papers citing Fifth order Moeller-Plesset perturbation theory: comparison of existing correlation methods and implementation of new methods correct to fifth order
This network shows the impact of Fifth order Moeller-Plesset perturbation theory: comparison of existing correlation methods and implementation of new methods correct to fifth order. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the Fifth order Moeller-Plesset perturbation theory: comparison of existing correlation methods and implementation of new methods correct to fifth order.
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/j100377a033.