Countries where authors publish in Communications in Computational Physics
Since Specialization
Citations
This map shows the geographic impact of research published in Communications in Computational Physics. 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 papers published in Communications in Computational Physics with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Communications in Computational Physics more than expected).
Fields of papers published in Communications in Computational Physics
This network shows the impact of papers published in Communications in Computational Physics. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the papers published in Communications in Computational Physics.
About Communications in Computational Physics
The 1.6k papers published in Communications in Computational Physics in the last decades have received a total of 23.3k indexed citations . Papers published in Communications in Computational Physics usually cover Computational Mechanics (911 papers), Numerical Analysis (205 papers) and Applied Mathematics (180 papers) specifically the topics of Advanced Numerical Methods in Computational Mathematics (349 papers), Computational Fluid Dynamics and Aerodynamics (320 papers) and Lattice Boltzmann Simulation Studies (275 papers). The most active scholars publishing in Communications in Computational Physics are Dongbin Xiu, Junseok Kim, George Em Karniadakis, Ameya D. Jagtap, Praveen Chandrashekar, Kun Xu, Jiwei Zhang, Anita T. Layton, Gene Hou and Jin Wang.
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.