Charles McCarty

644 citations
16 papers · 151 · h-index 6

Impact in

Papers in

Charles McCarty

13 papers receiving 130 citations

Peers

Charles McCarty
Comparison fields: 5 of 26
  • Theoretical Computer Science 8
  • Philosophy 63
  • Experimental and Cognitive Psychology 65
  • History and Philosophy of Science 22
  • Computational Theory and Mathematics 55
Replace Alan Weir with:
Alan Weir United Kingdom
Stanisław Jaśkowski Poland
Philip Kremer Canada
Sean Walsh United States
Juliette Kennedy Finland
Peter Koellner United States
Julien Murzi Germany
Kai F. Wehmeier United States
Veikko Rantala Finland
Sanford Shieh United States
Charles McCarty relative to Alan Weir United Kingdom Alan Weir's profile →
Citations per field
00.5×1.5×1.8×
Alan Weir · 1×
Citations per year

Countries citing papers authored by Charles McCarty

Since Specialization
Citations

This map shows the geographic impact of Charles McCarty's research. 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 Charles McCarty with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Charles McCarty more than expected).

Fields of papers citing papers by Charles McCarty

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers produced by Charles McCarty. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the papers produced by Charles McCarty. The network helps show where Charles McCarty may publish in the future.

Co-authors

The 1 scholars most cited alongside Charles McCarty, linked wherever they have co-authored with each other. Click a name or a connecting line to browse the papers they share.

Border = papers with Charles McCarty Line = papers co-authored together Charles McCarty links everyone, so they are left out of the graph.

All Works

16 of 16 papers shown
#Work
1 198172
2 198620
3 198713
4 20089
5 19879
6 19888
7 19885
8 19835
9 19883
10 20062
11 19882
12 19862
13 20111
14 20090
15 20060
16 20120

About Charles McCarty

Charles McCarty is a scholar working on Computational Theory and Mathematics, Artificial Intelligence, Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, Mathematical Physics and History and Philosophy of Science, having authored 16 papers that have together received 151 indexed citations. Recurring topics across this work include Logic, Reasoning, and Knowledge (10 papers), Computability, Logic, AI Algorithms (8 papers), Advanced Algebra and Logic (6 papers), Philosophy and Theoretical Science (4 papers), Logic, programming, and type systems (3 papers), Mathematical and Theoretical Analysis (2 papers), Bayesian Modeling and Causal Inference (2 papers) and Wittgensteinian philosophy and applications (1 paper). The work is most often cited by research in Theoretical Computer Science (8 citations), Philosophy (63 citations), Experimental and Cognitive Psychology (65 citations), History and Philosophy of Science (22 citations) and Computational Theory and Mathematics (55 citations). Charles McCarty has collaborated with scholars based in United Kingdom, United States and Australia. Frequent co-authors include Neil Tennant. Their work appears in journals such as Journal of Symbolic Logic, Journal of Philosophical Logic, Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic, Annals of Pure and Applied Logic and Grazer Philosophische Studien.

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.

Explore authors with similar magnitude of impact