On the BFGS monolithic algorithm for the unified phase field damage theory
Impact in
Classified as
In The Last Decade
doi.org/10.1016/j.cma.2019.112704 →Countries where authors are citing On the BFGS monolithic algorithm for the unified phase field damage theory
This map shows the geographic impact of On the BFGS monolithic algorithm for the unified phase field damage theory. 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 On the BFGS monolithic algorithm for the unified phase field damage theory with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites On the BFGS monolithic algorithm for the unified phase field damage theory more than expected).
Fields of papers citing On the BFGS monolithic algorithm for the unified phase field damage theory
This network shows the impact of On the BFGS monolithic algorithm for the unified phase field damage theory. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the On the BFGS monolithic algorithm for the unified phase field damage theory.
About On the BFGS monolithic algorithm for the unified phase field damage theory
This paper, published in 2019, received 230 indexed citations . Written by Jian‐Ying Wu, Yuli Huang and Vinh Phu Nguyen covering the research area of Mechanics of Materials and Computational Mechanics. It is primarily cited by scholars working on Mechanics of Materials (212 citations), Computational Mechanics (86 citations), Mechanical Engineering (45 citations), Materials Chemistry (36 citations) and Civil and Structural Engineering (33 citations). Published in Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering.
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/10.1016/j.cma.2019.112704.