Countries where authors publish in Atomic Spectroscopy
Since Specialization
Citations
This map shows the geographic impact of research published in Atomic Spectroscopy. 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 Atomic Spectroscopy with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Atomic Spectroscopy more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers published in Atomic Spectroscopy. 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 Atomic Spectroscopy.
About Atomic Spectroscopy
The 680 papers published in Atomic Spectroscopy in the last decades have received a total of 5.5k indexed citations . Papers published in Atomic Spectroscopy usually cover Analytical Chemistry (503 papers), Mechanics of Materials (111 papers), Geophysics (60 papers), Geochemistry and Petrology (23 papers) and Pollution (32 papers) specifically the topics of Analytical chemistry methods development (479 papers), Laser-induced spectroscopy and plasma (110 papers), Geological and Geochemical Analysis (60 papers), Heavy metals in environment (31 papers), Heavy Metals in Plants (27 papers), Radioactive element chemistry and processing (19 papers), Astro and Planetary Science (16 papers) and X-ray Spectroscopy and Fluorescence Analysis (14 papers). The most active scholars publishing in Atomic Spectroscopy are Mustafa Soylak, Thomas W. May, Bayram Yüksel, Zhaochu Hu, Shizhong Chen, Arijit Sengupta, Zhang Wen, Vysetti Balaram, Kim A. Anderson and Shui‐Yuan Yang.
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.