Current Status of the AMOEBA Polarizable Force Field

1.1k indexed citations

Abstract

loading...

About

This paper, published in 2010, received 1.1k indexed citations. Written by Jay W. Ponder, Chuanjie Wu, Pengyu Ren, Vijay S. Pande, John D. Chodera, Michael J. Schnieders, Imran S. Haque, David L. Mobley, Daniel S. Lambrecht and Robert A. DiStasio 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 (562 citations), Molecular Biology (537 citations) and Materials Chemistry (321 citations). Published in The Journal of Physical Chemistry B.

Countries where authors are citing Current Status of the AMOEBA Polarizable Force Field

Specialization
Citations

This map shows the geographic impact of Current Status of the AMOEBA Polarizable Force Field. 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 Current Status of the AMOEBA Polarizable Force Field with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Current Status of the AMOEBA Polarizable Force Field more than expected).

Fields of papers citing Current Status of the AMOEBA Polarizable Force Field

Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of Current Status of the AMOEBA Polarizable Force Field. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the Current Status of the AMOEBA Polarizable Force Field.

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/jp910674d.

Explore hit-papers with similar magnitude of impact

Rankless by CCL
2026