Countries where authors publish in Geophysical Prospecting
Since Specialization
Citations
This map shows the geographic impact of research published in Geophysical Prospecting. 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 Geophysical Prospecting with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Geophysical Prospecting more than expected).
Fields of papers published in Geophysical Prospecting
This network shows the impact of papers published in Geophysical Prospecting. 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 Geophysical Prospecting.
About Geophysical Prospecting
The 4.3k papers published in Geophysical Prospecting in the last decades have received a total of 88.8k indexed citations . Papers published in Geophysical Prospecting usually cover Geophysics (3.7k papers), Ocean Engineering (2.1k papers), Oceanography (400 papers), Mechanical Engineering (830 papers) and Geology (89 papers) specifically the topics of Seismic Imaging and Inversion Techniques (2.5k papers), Seismic Waves and Analysis (2.1k papers), Geophysical and Geoelectrical Methods (1.3k papers), Geophysical Methods and Applications (1.2k papers), Hydraulic Fracturing and Reservoir Analysis (639 papers), Drilling and Well Engineering (487 papers), Reservoir Engineering and Simulation Methods (266 papers) and Underwater Acoustics Research (206 papers). The most active scholars publishing in Geophysical Prospecting are R. D. Barker, M.H. Loke, George A. McMechan, A. P. Annan, Joel Davis, Colin M. Sayers, Sergey Fomel, R. E. White, Mark Chapman and Manika Prasad.
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.