Countries where authors publish in Ore Geology Reviews
Since Specialization
Citations
This map shows the geographic impact of research published in Ore Geology Reviews. 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 Ore Geology Reviews with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Ore Geology Reviews more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers published in Ore Geology Reviews. 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 Ore Geology Reviews.
About Ore Geology Reviews
The 6.1k papers published in Ore Geology Reviews in the last decades have received a total of 164.1k indexed citations . Papers published in Ore Geology Reviews usually cover Geophysics (5.2k papers), Geochemistry and Petrology (1.5k papers), Artificial Intelligence (4.2k papers), Paleontology (252 papers) and Inorganic Chemistry (345 papers) specifically the topics of Geological and Geochemical Analysis (5.1k papers), Geochemistry and Geologic Mapping (4.1k papers), earthquake and tectonic studies (2.7k papers), Geochemistry and Elemental Analysis (1.2k papers), High-pressure geophysics and materials (991 papers), Hydrocarbon exploration and reservoir analysis (361 papers), Radioactive element chemistry and processing (345 papers) and Paleontology and Stratigraphy of Fossils (250 papers). The most active scholars publishing in Ore Geology Reviews are David I. Groves, Franco Pirajno, Jeremy P. Richards, Emmanuel John M. Carranza, T. Campbell McCuaig, Richard J. Goldfarb, M. Santosh, Gavin M. Mudd, Jingwen Mao and Peter Laznicka.
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.