Which NICS Aromaticity Index for Planar π Rings Is Best?
Countries where authors are citing Which NICS Aromaticity Index for Planar π Rings Is Best?
This map shows the geographic impact of Which NICS Aromaticity Index for Planar π Rings Is Best?. 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 Which NICS Aromaticity Index for Planar π Rings Is Best? with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Which NICS Aromaticity Index for Planar π Rings Is Best? more than expected).
Fields of papers citing Which NICS Aromaticity Index for Planar π Rings Is Best?
This network shows the impact of Which NICS Aromaticity Index for Planar π Rings Is Best?. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the Which NICS Aromaticity Index for Planar π Rings Is Best?.
About Which NICS Aromaticity Index for Planar π Rings Is Best?
This paper, published in 2006, received 1.1k indexed citations . Written by Hossain Fallah‐Bagher‐Shaidaei, Chaitanya S. Wannere, Clémence Corminbœuf, Ralph Puchta and Paul von Ragué Schleyer covering the research area of Organic Chemistry and Geometry and Topology. It is primarily cited by scholars working on Organic Chemistry (942 citations), Materials Chemistry (341 citations) and Inorganic Chemistry (159 citations). Published in Organic Letters.
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/ol0529546.