Countries where authors publish in Physical review. A
Since Specialization
Citations
This map shows the geographic impact of research published in Physical review. A. 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 Physical review. A with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Physical review. A more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers published in Physical review. A. 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 Physical review. A.
About Physical review. A
The 22.0k papers published in Physical review. A in the last decades have received a total of 264.0k indexed citations . Papers published in Physical review. A usually cover Atomic and Molecular Physics, and Optics (20.1k papers), Acoustics and Ultrasonics (378 papers) and Artificial Intelligence (9.3k papers) specifically the topics of Quantum Information and Cryptography (8.8k papers), Cold Atom Physics and Bose-Einstein Condensates (5.6k papers), Quantum Computing Algorithms and Architecture (4.2k papers), Quantum Mechanics and Applications (4.1k papers), Quantum optics and atomic interactions (2.9k papers), Laser-Matter Interactions and Applications (2.4k papers), Mechanical and Optical Resonators (2.2k papers) and Quantum, superfluid, helium dynamics (1.9k papers). The most active scholars publishing in Physical review. A are Franco Nori, Jan Wiersig, Maria Schuld, Jay Gambetta, Adam Miranowicz, Boris A. Malomed, D. B. Milošević, V. V. Flambaum, Nathan Killoran and G. S. Agarwal.
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.