This map shows the geographic impact of research published in Interpretation. 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 Interpretation with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Interpretation more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers published in Interpretation. 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 Interpretation.
About Interpretation
The 1.5k papers published in Interpretation in the last decades have received a total of 15.7k indexed citations . Papers published in Interpretation usually cover Geophysics (783 papers), Geology (216 papers), Earth-Surface Processes (202 papers), Geochemistry and Petrology (148 papers) and Mechanics of Materials (462 papers) specifically the topics of Seismic Imaging and Inversion Techniques (627 papers), Hydrocarbon exploration and reservoir analysis (447 papers), Geological formations and processes (189 papers), Geological Studies and Exploration (178 papers), Geological Modeling and Analysis (142 papers), Hydraulic Fracturing and Reservoir Analysis (112 papers), Geological and Geophysical Studies (96 papers) and Geophysical and Geoelectrical Methods (96 papers). The most active scholars publishing in Interpretation are Kurt J. Marfurt, Sergey B. Fomel, Fangyu Li, Ghassan AlRegib, Tao Zhao, Hongliu Zeng, Motaz Alfarraj, Xinming Wu, Bruce S. Hart and Atish Roy.
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.