Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC'04)
In The Last Decade
doi.org/w83900295 →Countries where authors are citing Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC'04)
This map shows the geographic impact of Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC'04). 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 Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC'04) with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC'04) more than expected).
Fields of papers citing Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC'04)
This network shows the impact of Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC'04). Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC'04).
About Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC'04)
This paper, published in 2004, received 838 indexed citations . Written by Lonneke van der Plas and Martin Rajman covering the research area of Artificial Intelligence. It is primarily cited by scholars working on Artificial Intelligence (610 citations), Language and Linguistics (110 citations) and Experimental and Cognitive Psychology (93 citations).
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/w83900295.