Countries where authors publish in Logica Universalis
Since Specialization
Citations
This map shows the geographic impact of research published in Logica Universalis. 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 Logica Universalis with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Logica Universalis more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers published in Logica Universalis. 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 Logica Universalis.
About Logica Universalis
The 348 papers published in Logica Universalis in the last decades have received a total of 1.5k indexed citations . Papers published in Logica Universalis usually cover Theoretical Computer Science (17 papers), Computational Theory and Mathematics (168 papers) and Artificial Intelligence (207 papers) specifically the topics of Logic, Reasoning, and Knowledge (190 papers), Advanced Algebra and Logic (141 papers), Logic, programming, and type systems (96 papers), Philosophy and Theoretical Science (45 papers), Semantic Web and Ontologies (34 papers), Rough Sets and Fuzzy Logic (28 papers), Classical Philosophy and Thought (23 papers) and Computability, Logic, AI Algorithms (19 papers). The most active scholars publishing in Logica Universalis are Jean-Yves Béziau, Diderik Batens, Hans Smessaert, Henri Prade, Didier Dubois, Roy T. Cook, Terence Parsons, Arnon Avron, Claudio Pizzi and Till Mossakowski.
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.