Parity, circuits, and the polynomial-time hierarchy
Impact in
Classified as
- Journal
- Theory of Computing Systems
In The Last Decade
doi.org/10.1007/bf01744431 →Countries where authors are citing Parity, circuits, and the polynomial-time hierarchy
This map shows the geographic impact of Parity, circuits, and the polynomial-time hierarchy. 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 Parity, circuits, and the polynomial-time hierarchy with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Parity, circuits, and the polynomial-time hierarchy more than expected).
Fields of papers citing Parity, circuits, and the polynomial-time hierarchy
This network shows the impact of Parity, circuits, and the polynomial-time hierarchy. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the Parity, circuits, and the polynomial-time hierarchy.
About Parity, circuits, and the polynomial-time hierarchy
This paper, published in 1984, received 505 indexed citations . Written by Merrick L. Furst, James B. Saxe and Michael Sipser covering the research area of Hardware and Architecture, Computational Theory and Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence. It is primarily cited by scholars working on Computational Theory and Mathematics (438 citations), Artificial Intelligence (330 citations), Computer Networks and Communications (59 citations), Electrical and Electronic Engineering (53 citations) and Computer Graphics and Computer-Aided Design (19 citations). Published in Theory of Computing Systems.
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.
This paper is also available at doi.org/10.1007/bf01744431.