The Galaxy Luminosity Function and Luminosity Density at Redshiftz= 0.1
- Journal
- The Astrophysical Journal
In The Last Decade
doi.org/10.1086/375776 →Countries where authors are citing The Galaxy Luminosity Function and Luminosity Density at Redshiftz= 0.1
This map shows the geographic impact of The Galaxy Luminosity Function and Luminosity Density at Redshiftz= 0.1. 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 The Galaxy Luminosity Function and Luminosity Density at Redshiftz= 0.1 with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites The Galaxy Luminosity Function and Luminosity Density at Redshiftz= 0.1 more than expected).
Fields of papers citing The Galaxy Luminosity Function and Luminosity Density at Redshiftz= 0.1
This network shows the impact of The Galaxy Luminosity Function and Luminosity Density at Redshiftz= 0.1. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the The Galaxy Luminosity Function and Luminosity Density at Redshiftz= 0.1.
About The Galaxy Luminosity Function and Luminosity Density at Redshiftz= 0.1
This paper, published in 2003, received 613 indexed citations . Written by Michael R. Blanton, David W. Hogg, Neta A. Bahcall, J. Brinkmann, Andrew J. Connolly, István Csabai, M. Fukugita, J. Loveday, Avery Meiksin and Jeffrey A. Munn covering the research area of Instrumentation and Astronomy and Astrophysics. It is primarily cited by scholars working on Astronomy and Astrophysics (601 citations), Instrumentation (311 citations) and Ecology (96 citations). Published in The Astrophysical Journal.
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/10.1086/375776.