Are you a researcher?
Create a profile to get free access to personal recommendations for colleagues and new articles.
SCImago
Q1
WOS
Q2
Impact factor
1.4
SJR
0.776
CiteScore
2.4
Categories
Algebra and Number Theory
Computational Mathematics
Areas
Mathematics
Years of issue
1964-2025
journal names
Calcolo
Top-3 citing journals

Journal of Computational and Applied Mathematics
(510 citations)

Calcolo
(447 citations)

SIAM Journal on Numerical Analysis
(339 citations)
Top-3 organizations

University of Pisa
(83 publications)

Sapienza University of Rome
(53 publications)

Polytechnic University of Milan
(35 publications)

Central South University
(5 publications)

Indian Institute of Technology Guwahati
(5 publications)

Technion – Israel Institute of Technology
(5 publications)
Most cited in 5 years
Found
Publications found: 1063
Q1

A cut-and-branch algorithm for the external candidates examination scheduling problem
Avella P., Boccia M., Mannino C., Mele M., Viglione S.
Twice a year, the regional school departments in Norway need to schedule examination sessions for external candidates in the region, which also involves reserving and assigning rooms, examiners and reviewers. We present a cut-and-branch algorithm to get provably good solutions to this problem, the external candidates examination scheduling problem (ExtSchedule). The algorithm relies on a new family of valid inequalities, effective in tightening the initial formulation and accelerating the solution process. We develop an efficient separation algorithm and embed it in a cut-and-branch framework to solve the problem. The algorithm has been validated on real-life instances arising from the Vestfold County school department in Norway.
Q1

Complexity of scheduling few types of jobs on related and unrelated machines
Koutecký M., Zink J.
Abstract
The task of scheduling jobs to machines while minimizing the total makespan, the sum of weighted completion times, or a norm of the load vector are among the oldest and most fundamental tasks in combinatorial optimization. Since all of these problems are in general -hard, much attention has been given to the regime where there is only a small number k of job types, but possibly the number of jobs n is large; this is the few job types, high-multiplicity regime. Despite many positive results, the hardness boundary of this regime was not understood until now. We show that makespan minimization on uniformly related machines (
$$Q|HM|C_{\max }$$
Q
|
H
M
|
C
max
) is -hard already with 6 job types, and that the related Cutting Stock problem is -hard already with 8 item types. For the more general unrelated machines model (
$$R|HM|C_{\max }$$
R
|
H
M
|
C
max
), we show that if the largest job size
$$p_{\max }$$
p
max
or the number of jobs n is polynomially bounded in the instance size |I|, there are algorithms with complexity
$$|I|^{{{\,\mathrm{\textrm{poly}}\,}}(k)}$$
|
I
|
poly
(
k
)
. Our main result is that this is unlikely to be improved because
$$Q||C_{\max }$$
Q
|
|
C
max
is
$$\mathsf {W[1]}$$
W
[
1
]
-hard parameterized by k already when n,
$$p_{\max }$$
p
max
, and the numbers describing the machine speeds are polynomial in |I|; the same holds for
$$R||C_{\max }$$
R
|
|
C
max
(without machine speeds) when the job sizes matrix has rank 2. Our positive and negative results also extend to the objectives
$$\ell _2$$
ℓ
2
-norm minimization of the load vector and, partially, sum of weighted completion times
$$\sum w_j C_j$$
∑
w
j
C
j
. Along the way, we answer affirmatively the question whether makespan minimization on identical machines (
$$P||C_{\max }$$
P
|
|
C
max
) is fixed-parameter tractable parameterized by k, extending our understanding of this fundamental problem. Together with our hardness results for
$$Q||C_{\max }$$
Q
|
|
C
max
, this implies that the complexity of
$$P|HM|C_{\max }$$
P
|
H
M
|
C
max
is the only remaining open case.
Q1

Recoverable robust single machine scheduling with polyhedral uncertainty
Bold M., Goerigk M.
AbstractThis paper considers a recoverable robust single-machine scheduling problem under polyhedral uncertainty with the objective of minimising the total flow time. In this setting, a decision-maker must determine a first-stage schedule subject to the uncertain job processing times. Then following the realisation of these processing times, they have the option to swap the positions of up to $$\Delta $$
Δ
disjoint pairs of jobs to obtain a second-stage schedule. We first formulate this scheduling problem using a general recoverable robust framework, before we examine the incremental subproblem in further detail. We prove a general result for max-weight matching problems, showing that for edge weights of a specific form, the matching polytope can be fully characterised by polynomially many constraints. We use this result to derive a matching-based compact formulation for the full problem. Further analysis of the incremental problem leads to an additional assignment-based compact formulation. Computational results on budgeted uncertainty sets compare the relative strengths of the three compact models we propose.
Q1

Hybrid-sched: a QoS adaptive offline–online scheduler for real-time tasks on multi-cores
Purushothaman Nair P., Reddi H., Devaraj R., Sarkar A.
The performance of safety-critical systems implemented on multi-core platforms depends heavily on the scheduling mechanism used. This paper addresses the problem of multi-core scheduling of a real-time application modelled as a Directed Acyclic Graph (DAG) with multiple service levels (where, a higher service level implies higher Quality-of-Service (QoS)), by proposing a novel two-phase offline–online scheduling mechanism called HYBRID-SCHED. The offline phase constructs a static schedule assuming worst-case execution behaviour, in order to ensure desired predictability with a minimum guaranteed QoS under all possible execution scenarios. Two alternative offline solution strategies have been designed. While the first strategy is a fast but reasonably good heuristic solution called Service-level Aware Scheduler (SAS), the second is a branch-and-bound based optimal solution-space search technique. However, online execution based on strict adherence to the static schedule may result in poor resource utilization as actual execution time of tasks at run time may be significantly less than worst-case estimates. In order to improve the situation, an online scheduler called Actual Execution-time Aware Scheduler (AEAS) has been developed. The basic goal of AEAS is to strategically reclaim resources that were provided for tasks at design time but are in fact being used inactively at run time. By gradually raising the service levels of the remaining (yet-to-be-completed) jobs, AEAS can then use the recovered resources to improve system-level QoS. Using real-world benchmark applications, we assessed the performance of the suggested framework. Results obtained demonstrate the usefulness of our plan.
Q1

Preface: the practice and theory of automated timetabling (2022)
Özcan E., De Causmaecker P., Vanden Berghe G., Goossens D.
Q1
Journal of Scheduling
,
2024
,
citations by CoLab: 0

Q1

On variants of a load-balancing problem with unit-load jobs
Györgyi P., Kis T., Szögi E.
AbstractIn this paper, we reconsider an offline load-balancing problem with unit-time jobs that require one unit from a common resource throughout their execution. In the unit-time case, the jobs have to be assigned to time-slots such that a separable convex function of the load of the resource has to be minimized. Variants of this problem have been studied extensively in the literature under different names. We briefly discuss these problems and give a new implementation for one of them with a better worst-case time complexity than any of the known methods. We also consider the more general preemptive problem in which the execution of the jobs can be interrupted and resumed later. Furthermore, we divide the time horizon into disjoint time intervals, and for each interval, a separable convex cost function is given. The jobs have to be scheduled within their feasible intervals preemptively such that the total cost is minimized, where the cost is determined separately for each interval by the corresponding cost function. We show how to solve this problem in polynomial time by a single minimum-cost-flow computation. For the preemptive problem with one cost function only, we propose a proprietary algorithm for finding a feasible solution which is optimal for any convex cost function. We also present some qualitative computational results.
Q1

On the computation of robust examination timetables: methods and experimental results
Bassimir B., Wanka R.
AbstractWith ever-rising student numbers and an increasing shift towards more interdisciplinary study programs, the requirements for finding schedules for courses and exams become ever more complex. In real-world scenarios, the models used for calculating solutions to the course and the examination timetabling problem often must be provided to the students at the time of registration. In the field of curriculum-based course timetabling, timetables are calculated based on the structure of the study programs. For the examination timetabling problem, only a few papers focus on scheduling exams without registration data, as the requirements for exams are often more strict, or partial information is known from course registrations. In this paper we show that with the use of robustness techniques, we can also define the examination timetabling problem based on curricula. We introduce three robustness measures that address the inherent uncertainty when using the curriculum-based model. These robustness measures, along with other quality measures, are analyzed using a multi-objective simulated annealing algorithm. The results are compared on the Pareto front approximations found. We present a case study showing that, without a significant loss in solution quality, the chance is significantly reduced that rescheduling will be required after the exact numbers for the model are known.
Q1

Resource leveling: complexity of a unit execution time two-processor scheduling variant and related problems
Bendotti P., Brunod Indrigo L., Chrétienne P., Escoffier B.
This paper mainly focuses on a resource leveling variant of a two-processor scheduling problem. The latter problem is to schedule a set of dependent UET jobs on two identical processors with minimum makespan. It is known to be polynomial-time solvable. In the variant we consider, the resource constraint on processors is relaxed and the objective is no longer to minimize makespan. Instead, a deadline is imposed on the makespan and the objective is to minimize the total resource use exceeding a threshold resource level of two. This resource leveling criterion is known as the total overload cost. Sophisticated matching arguments allow us to provide a polynomial algorithm computing the optimal solution as a function of the makespan deadline. It extends a solving method from the literature for the two-processor scheduling problem. Moreover, the complexity of related resource leveling problems sharing the same objective is studied. These results lead to polynomial or pseudo-polynomial algorithms or NP-hardness proofs, allowing for an interesting comparison with classical machine scheduling problems.
Q1

Scientific workflow scheduling algorithms in cloud environments: a comprehensive taxonomy, survey, and future directions
Saeedizade E., Ashtiani M.
Scientific workflows are large applications that consist of smaller computational units called tasks that have data dependency on each other. The tasks of a workflow can be scheduled and executed on distributed resources in a parallel manner. Cloud computing offers distributed, scalable, virtualized, cost-effective computing environments making them ideal platforms to execute scientific workflows. Cloud services provide their users with a vision of an unlimited amount of computing resources. However, considering different types of resources and QoS requirements, the problem of workflow scheduling lies in the NP-complete class. Thus, numerous types of research have been conducted in this area during the past years. In this paper, we aim to provide a comprehensive study of the workflow scheduling problem, existing solutions, and available tools that can be used by researchers in this domain. First, we present a taxonomy on scheduling algorithms and examine the existing works from different perspectives from application and resource models to algorithms’ objectives and their nature. We also have presented a taxonomy of evaluation data sets as well as simulation tools and their architecture since the evaluation of an algorithm is important and must be performed accurately. Next, we survey some of the most recent works in the context of the proposed taxonomy with a focus on emerging cloud services like serverless computing or workflow as a service platform and state-of-the-art scheduling approaches. Moreover, we discuss some of the existing gaps in the literature and identify possible research directions that can be seen as potential contributions to future developments.
Q1

Scheduling of e-commerce packaging machines: blocking machines and their impact on the performance–waste tradeoff
Briskorn D., Boysen N., Zey L.
AbstractTo streamline their fulfillment processes, many e-commerce retailers today use automated packaging machines for their outbound parcels. An important performance–waste tradeoff is associated with these machines: To reduce packaging waste when handling different sized goods, packaging machines should be able to handle different carton sizes. However, more carton sizes lead to a more involved scheduling process, so that the throughput performance deteriorates (and vice versa). To investigate this tradeoff, this paper develops scheduling procedures for a specific type of packaging machine, called blocking machines. These packaging machines provide multiple back-to-back packaging devices, each continuously processing a dedicated carton size, but blocking each other whenever incoming goods are not properly ordered according to carton sizes on the infeed conveyor. To reduce the resulting throughput loss, we derive various scheduling problems for optimizing the inflow of goods, provide a thorough analysis of the computational complexity, and derive an exact dynamic programming approach that is polynomial in the number of orders to be packed. This allows us to solve even large real-world instances to proven optimality with which we can analyze the performance–waste tradeoff of blocking machines.
Q1

Scheduling a single machine with multiple due dates per job
Kühn R., Weiß C., Ackermann H., Heydrich S.
AbstractIn this paper, we consider single-machine scheduling with multiple due dates per job. This is motivated by several industrial applications, where it is not important by how much we miss a due date. Instead the relevant objective is to minimize the number of missed due dates. Typically, this situation emerges whenever fixed delivery appointments are chosen in advance, such as in the production of individualized pharmaceuticals or when customers can only receive goods at certain days in the week, due to constraints in their warehouse operation. We compare this previously unexplored problem with classical due date scheduling, for which it is a generalization. We show that single-machine scheduling with multiple due dates is NP-hard in the strong sense if processing times are job dependent. If processing times are equal for all jobs, then single-machine scheduling with multiple due dates is at least as hard as the long-standing open problem of weighted tardiness with equal processing times and release dates $$1 \mid r_j, p_j = p \mid \sum w_j T_j$$
1
∣
r
j
,
p
j
=
p
∣
∑
w
j
T
j
. Finally, we focus on the case of equal processing times and provide several polynomially solvable special cases as well as an exact branch-and-bound algorithm and heuristics for the general case. Experiments show that our branch-and-bound algorithm compares well to modern exact methods to solve problem $$1 \mid r_j, p_j = p \mid \sum w_{j} T_{j}$$
1
∣
r
j
,
p
j
=
p
∣
∑
w
j
T
j
.
Q1

Serial batching to minimize the weighted number of tardy jobs
Hermelin D., Mnich M., Omlor S.
Abstract
The
$$1\vert \text {s-batch}(\infty ),r_j\vert \sum w_jU_j$$
1
|
s-batch
(
∞
)
,
r
j
|
∑
w
j
U
j
scheduling problem takes as input a batch setup time
$$\Delta $$
Δ
and a set of n jobs, each having a processing time, a release date, a weight, and a due date; the task is to find a sequence of batches that minimizes the weighted number of tardy jobs. This problem was introduced by Hochbaum and Landy (Oper Res Lett 16(2):79–86, 1994); as a wide generalization of Knapsack, it is
$$\textsf{NP}$$
NP
-hard. In this work, we provide a multivariate complexity analysis of the
$$1\vert \text {s-batch}(\infty ), r_j\vert \sum w_jU_j$$
1
|
s-batch
(
∞
)
,
r
j
|
∑
w
j
U
j
problem with respect to several natural parameters. That is, we establish a classification into fixed-parameter tractable and
$$\textsf{W}[1]$$
W
[
1
]
-hard problems, for parameter combinations of (i)
$$\#p$$
#
p
= number of distinct processing times, (ii)
$$\#w$$
#
w
= number of distinct weights, (iii)
$$\#d$$
#
d
= number of distinct due dates, (iv)
$$\#r$$
#
r
= number of distinct release dates. Thereby, we significantly extend the work of Hermelin et al. (Ann Oper Res 298:271–287, 2018) who analyzed the parameterized complexity of the non-batch variant of this problem without release dates. As one of our key results, we prove that
$$1\vert \text {s-batch}(\infty ), r_j\vert \sum w_jU_j$$
1
|
s-batch
(
∞
)
,
r
j
|
∑
w
j
U
j
is
$$\textsf{W}[1]$$
W
[
1
]
-hard parameterized by the number of distinct processing times and distinct due dates. To the best of our knowledge, these are the first parameterized intractability results for scheduling problems with few distinct processing times. Further, we show that
$$1\vert \text {s-batch}(\infty ), r_j\vert \sum w_jU_j$$
1
|
s-batch
(
∞
)
,
r
j
|
∑
w
j
U
j
is fixed-parameter tractable parameterized by
$$\#d + \#p + \#r$$
#
d
+
#
p
+
#
r
, and parameterized by
$$\#d + \#w$$
#
d
+
#
w
if there is just a single release date. Both results hold even if the number of jobs per batch is limited by some integer b.
Q1

Modelling and solving the university course timetabling problem with hybrid teaching considerations
Davison M., Kheiri A., Zografos K.G.
AbstractThe university course timetabling problem is a challenging problem to solve. As universities have evolved, the features of this problem have changed. One emerging feature is hybrid teaching where classes can be taught online, in-person or a combination of both in-person and online. This work presents a multi-objective binary programming model that includes common university timetabling features, identified from the literature, as well as hybrid teaching features. A lexicographic solution method is outlined and computational experiments using benchmark data are used to demonstrate the key aspects of the model and explore trade-offs among the objectives considered. The results of these experiments demonstrate that the model can be used to find demand-driven schedules for universities that include hybrid teaching. They also show how the model could be used to inform practitioners who are involved in strategic decision-making at universities.
Q1

Network routing on regular digraphs and their line graphs
Faber V., Streib N.
This paper concerns all-to-all network routing on regular digraphs. In previous work, we focused on efficient routing in highly symmetric digraphs with low diameter for fixed degree. Here, we show that every connected regular digraph has an all-to-all routing scheme and associated schedule with no waiting. In fact, this routing scheme becomes more efficient as the diameter goes down with respect to the degree and number of vertices. Lastly, we examine the simple scheduling algorithm called “farthest-distance-first” and prove that it yields optimal schedules for all-to-all communication in networks of interest, including Kautz graphs.
Q1

Selection hyper-heuristics and job shop scheduling problems: How does instance size influence performance?
Garza-Santisteban F., Cruz-Duarte J.M., Amaya I., Ortiz-Bayliss J.C., Conant-Pablos S.E., Terashima-Marín H.
Selection hyper-heuristics are novel tools that combine low-level heuristics into robust solvers commonly used for tackling combinatorial optimization problems. However, the training cost is a drawback that hinders their applicability. In this work, we analyze the effect of training with different problem sizes to determine whether an effective simplification can be made. We select Job Shop Scheduling problems as an illustrative scenario to analyze and propose two hyper-heuristic approaches, based on Simulated Annealing (SA) and Unified Particle Swarm Optimization (UPSO), which use a defined set of simple priority dispatching rules as heuristics. Preliminary results suggest a relationship between instance size and hyper-heuristic performance. We conduct experiments training on two different instance sizes to understand such a relationship better. Our data show that hyper-heuristics trained in small-sized instances perform similarly to those trained in larger ones. However, the extent of such an effect changes depending on the approach followed. This effect was more substantial for the model powered by SA, and the resulting behavior for small and large-sized instances was very similar. Conversely, for the model powered by UPSO, data were more outspread. Even so, the phenomenon was noticeable as the median performance was similar between small and large-sized instances. In fact, through UPSO, we achieved hyper-heuristics that performed better on the training set. However, using small-sized instances seems to overspecialize, which results in spread-out testing performance. Hyper-heuristics resulting from training with small-sized instances can outperform a synthetic Oracle on large-sized testing instances in about 50% of the runs for SA and 25% for UPSO. This allows for significant time savings during the training procedure, thus representing a worthy approach.
Top-100
Citing journals
100
200
300
400
500
600
|
|
Journal of Computational and Applied Mathematics
510 citations, 4.31%
|
|
Calcolo
447 citations, 3.78%
|
|
SIAM Journal on Numerical Analysis
339 citations, 2.87%
|
|
Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering
324 citations, 2.74%
|
|
Computers and Mathematics with Applications
320 citations, 2.71%
|
|
Journal of Scientific Computing
313 citations, 2.65%
|
|
Applied Mathematics and Computation
296 citations, 2.5%
|
|
Applied Numerical Mathematics
293 citations, 2.48%
|
|
Numerical Algorithms
262 citations, 2.22%
|
|
Numerical Methods for Partial Differential Equations
179 citations, 1.51%
|
|
ESAIM: Mathematical Modelling and Numerical Analysis
173 citations, 1.46%
|
|
SIAM Journal of Scientific Computing
170 citations, 1.44%
|
|
Numerische Mathematik
165 citations, 1.4%
|
|
Computational and Applied Mathematics
149 citations, 1.26%
|
|
Mathematics
148 citations, 1.25%
|
|
Journal of Computational Physics
145 citations, 1.23%
|
|
Linear Algebra and Its Applications
143 citations, 1.21%
|
|
IMA Journal of Numerical Analysis
125 citations, 1.06%
|
|
Mathematics of Computation
120 citations, 1.01%
|
|
AIP Conference Proceedings
100 citations, 0.85%
|
|
International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering
98 citations, 0.83%
|
|
Lecture Notes in Computer Science
97 citations, 0.82%
|
|
Advances in Computational Mathematics
95 citations, 0.8%
|
|
International Journal of Computer Mathematics
95 citations, 0.8%
|
|
Mathematical Methods in the Applied Sciences
95 citations, 0.8%
|
|
SIAM Journal on Matrix Analysis and Applications
85 citations, 0.72%
|
|
AIMS Mathematics
81 citations, 0.69%
|
|
Optical and Quantum Electronics
77 citations, 0.65%
|
|
Mathematical Models and Methods in Applied Sciences
75 citations, 0.63%
|
|
International Journal for Numerical Methods in Fluids
74 citations, 0.63%
|
|
Numerical Linear Algebra with Applications
69 citations, 0.58%
|
|
Applied Mathematics Letters
68 citations, 0.58%
|
|
Symmetry
68 citations, 0.58%
|
|
Journal of Applied Mathematics and Computing
66 citations, 0.56%
|
|
Mathematics and Computers in Simulation
61 citations, 0.52%
|
|
BIT Numerical Mathematics
61 citations, 0.52%
|
|
Linear and Multilinear Algebra
53 citations, 0.45%
|
|
Journal of Mathematical Analysis and Applications
52 citations, 0.44%
|
|
Lecture Notes in Computational Science and Engineering
52 citations, 0.44%
|
|
Journal of Inequalities and Applications
45 citations, 0.38%
|
|
Chaos, Solitons and Fractals
40 citations, 0.34%
|
|
Advances in Difference Equations
40 citations, 0.34%
|
|
Mathematical Problems in Engineering
39 citations, 0.33%
|
|
Numerical Functional Analysis and Optimization
39 citations, 0.33%
|
|
Communications in Nonlinear Science and Numerical Simulation
38 citations, 0.32%
|
|
Optimization
38 citations, 0.32%
|
|
Springer Proceedings in Mathematics and Statistics
36 citations, 0.3%
|
|
Computational Mechanics
36 citations, 0.3%
|
|
Computers and Fluids
34 citations, 0.29%
|
|
AEJ - Alexandria Engineering Journal
34 citations, 0.29%
|
|
Engineering Analysis with Boundary Elements
33 citations, 0.28%
|
|
Journal of Numerical Mathematics
32 citations, 0.27%
|
|
Nonlinear Dynamics
32 citations, 0.27%
|
|
Inverse Problems
32 citations, 0.27%
|
|
Applicable Analysis
30 citations, 0.25%
|
|
Mediterranean Journal of Mathematics
30 citations, 0.25%
|
|
Computational Methods in Applied Mathematics
30 citations, 0.25%
|
|
Axioms
29 citations, 0.25%
|
|
Results in Physics
29 citations, 0.25%
|
|
International Journal of Applied and Computational Mathematics
27 citations, 0.23%
|
|
Abstract and Applied Analysis
26 citations, 0.22%
|
|
Journal of Approximation Theory
26 citations, 0.22%
|
|
Physica Scripta
25 citations, 0.21%
|
|
Lecture Notes in Mathematics
25 citations, 0.21%
|
|
Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications
25 citations, 0.21%
|
|
Computing (Vienna/New York)
25 citations, 0.21%
|
|
Results in Mathematics
24 citations, 0.2%
|
|
Mathematical and Computer Modelling
23 citations, 0.19%
|
|
Journal of Mathematical Sciences
22 citations, 0.19%
|
|
SIAM Journal on Control and Optimization
22 citations, 0.19%
|
|
Theoretical Computer Science
22 citations, 0.19%
|
|
Japan Journal of Industrial and Applied Mathematics
22 citations, 0.19%
|
|
Fractals
22 citations, 0.19%
|
|
Advances in Water Resources
21 citations, 0.18%
|
|
Bulletin of the Iranian Mathematical Society
20 citations, 0.17%
|
|
Archives of Computational Methods in Engineering
20 citations, 0.17%
|
|
Finite Elements in Analysis and Design
20 citations, 0.17%
|
|
SEMA SIMAI Springer Series
19 citations, 0.16%
|
|
Journal of Applied Mathematics
19 citations, 0.16%
|
|
Results in Applied Mathematics
19 citations, 0.16%
|
|
Computational Mathematics and Mathematical Physics
19 citations, 0.16%
|
|
Applied Mathematical Modelling
19 citations, 0.16%
|
|
Journal of Mathematics
19 citations, 0.16%
|
|
Partial Differential Equations in Applied Mathematics
19 citations, 0.16%
|
|
Handbook of Numerical Analysis
18 citations, 0.15%
|
|
Bulletin of the Malaysian Mathematical Sciences Society
18 citations, 0.15%
|
|
Journal of Industrial and Management Optimization
18 citations, 0.15%
|
|
Computational Optimization and Applications
18 citations, 0.15%
|
|
Journal of Global Optimization
18 citations, 0.15%
|
|
Introduction to Modeling Biological Cellular Control Systems
18 citations, 0.15%
|
|
Journal of Function Spaces
17 citations, 0.14%
|
|
Springer Optimization and Its Applications
17 citations, 0.14%
|
|
Nonlinear Analysis, Theory, Methods and Applications
17 citations, 0.14%
|
|
International Journal of Computational Methods
17 citations, 0.14%
|
|
Mathematical Programming
17 citations, 0.14%
|
|
ZAMM Zeitschrift fur Angewandte Mathematik und Mechanik
17 citations, 0.14%
|
|
IEEE Access
17 citations, 0.14%
|
|
Journal of Ocean Engineering and Science
17 citations, 0.14%
|
|
Tensor Spaces and Numerical Tensor Calculus
17 citations, 0.14%
|
|
SIAM Review
16 citations, 0.14%
|
|
Show all (70 more) | |
100
200
300
400
500
600
|
Citing publishers
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
|
|
Springer Nature
3388 citations, 28.66%
|
|
Elsevier
3264 citations, 27.61%
|
|
Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics (SIAM)
705 citations, 5.96%
|
|
Wiley
684 citations, 5.79%
|
|
Taylor & Francis
440 citations, 3.72%
|
|
MDPI
351 citations, 2.97%
|
|
Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE)
229 citations, 1.94%
|
|
EDP Sciences
219 citations, 1.85%
|
|
Hindawi Limited
208 citations, 1.76%
|
|
World Scientific
188 citations, 1.59%
|
|
Walter de Gruyter
170 citations, 1.44%
|
|
American Institute of Mathematical Sciences (AIMS)
168 citations, 1.42%
|
|
Oxford University Press
142 citations, 1.2%
|
|
AIP Publishing
138 citations, 1.17%
|
|
American Mathematical Society
127 citations, 1.07%
|
|
IOP Publishing
120 citations, 1.01%
|
|
Cambridge University Press
91 citations, 0.77%
|
|
Pleiades Publishing
59 citations, 0.5%
|
|
Association for Computing Machinery (ACM)
52 citations, 0.44%
|
|
Alexandria University
33 citations, 0.28%
|
|
SAGE
32 citations, 0.27%
|
|
Science in China Press
26 citations, 0.22%
|
|
Emerald
25 citations, 0.21%
|
|
Rocky Mountain Mathematics Consortium
22 citations, 0.19%
|
|
Frontiers Media S.A.
18 citations, 0.15%
|
|
American Physical Society (APS)
13 citations, 0.11%
|
|
Social Science Electronic Publishing
13 citations, 0.11%
|
|
ASME International
9 citations, 0.08%
|
|
American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE)
9 citations, 0.08%
|
|
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA)
8 citations, 0.07%
|
|
Mathematical Society of the Republic of China
8 citations, 0.07%
|
|
Ain Shams University
8 citations, 0.07%
|
|
Steklov Mathematical Institute
8 citations, 0.07%
|
|
The Royal Society
7 citations, 0.06%
|
|
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
7 citations, 0.06%
|
|
Hacettepe University
7 citations, 0.06%
|
|
Institute for Operations Research and the Management Sciences (INFORMS)
7 citations, 0.06%
|
|
Wilmington Scientific Publishers
7 citations, 0.06%
|
|
American Chemical Society (ACS)
6 citations, 0.05%
|
|
Optica Publishing Group
6 citations, 0.05%
|
|
Tusi Mathematical Research Group (TMRG)
6 citations, 0.05%
|
|
National Association of Directors of Nursing Administration in Long Term Care
6 citations, 0.05%
|
|
Trans Tech Publications
5 citations, 0.04%
|
|
University of Nis
5 citations, 0.04%
|
|
5 citations, 0.04%
|
|
Mathematical Sciences Publishers
5 citations, 0.04%
|
|
Global Science Press
5 citations, 0.04%
|
|
Japan Society of Civil Engineers
5 citations, 0.04%
|
|
National Library of Serbia
5 citations, 0.04%
|
|
Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)
4 citations, 0.03%
|
|
King Saud University
4 citations, 0.03%
|
|
Springer Publishing Company
4 citations, 0.03%
|
|
4 citations, 0.03%
|
|
Tech Science Press
4 citations, 0.03%
|
|
IOS Press
3 citations, 0.03%
|
|
Korean Society of Mechanical Engineers
3 citations, 0.03%
|
|
Institute of Mathematical Statistics
3 citations, 0.03%
|
|
Korean Institute of Electrical Engineers
3 citations, 0.03%
|
|
Lviv Polytechnic National University
3 citations, 0.03%
|
|
Canadian Mathematical Society
3 citations, 0.03%
|
|
Society of Petroleum Engineers
3 citations, 0.03%
|
|
Kazan Federal University
3 citations, 0.03%
|
|
Allerton Press
3 citations, 0.03%
|
|
Akademiai Kiado
3 citations, 0.03%
|
|
Scientific Research Publishing
3 citations, 0.03%
|
|
Tbilisi Centre for Mathematical Sciences
3 citations, 0.03%
|
|
Begell House
2 citations, 0.02%
|
|
Royal Society of Chemistry (RSC)
2 citations, 0.02%
|
|
Mary Ann Liebert
2 citations, 0.02%
|
|
University of Kragujevac, Faculty of Science
2 citations, 0.02%
|
|
Mathematical Association of America
2 citations, 0.02%
|
|
Editions Technip
2 citations, 0.02%
|
|
Erdal Karapinar
2 citations, 0.02%
|
|
Copernicus
2 citations, 0.02%
|
|
Taehan Suhakhoe
2 citations, 0.02%
|
|
Wuhan University
2 citations, 0.02%
|
|
Sociedade Brasileira de Matematica
2 citations, 0.02%
|
|
Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory
2 citations, 0.02%
|
|
Stichting SciPost
2 citations, 0.02%
|
|
Verein zur Forderung des Open Access Publizierens in den Quantenwissenschaften
2 citations, 0.02%
|
|
Hans Publishers
2 citations, 0.02%
|
|
World Scientific and Engineering Academy and Society (WSEAS)
2 citations, 0.02%
|
|
Sakarya University Journal of Science
2 citations, 0.02%
|
|
Academia Sinica
1 citation, 0.01%
|
|
1 citation, 0.01%
|
|
Bentham Science Publishers Ltd.
1 citation, 0.01%
|
|
1 citation, 0.01%
|
|
Institution of Engineering and Technology (IET)
1 citation, 0.01%
|
|
American Physiological Society
1 citation, 0.01%
|
|
Japan Society of Mechanical Engineers
1 citation, 0.01%
|
|
Society of Exploration Geophysicists
1 citation, 0.01%
|
|
1 citation, 0.01%
|
|
Soil Science Society of America
1 citation, 0.01%
|
|
International Union of Crystallography (IUCr)
1 citation, 0.01%
|
|
Arizona State University
1 citation, 0.01%
|
|
Acoustical Society of America (ASA)
1 citation, 0.01%
|
|
ifmbe proceedings
1 citation, 0.01%
|
|
Balikesir University
1 citation, 0.01%
|
|
electronic proceedings in theoretical computer science, eptcs
1 citation, 0.01%
|
|
Zhejiang University Press
1 citation, 0.01%
|
|
Show all (70 more) | |
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
|
Publishing organizations
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
|
|
University of Pisa
83 publications, 4.99%
|
|
Sapienza University of Rome
53 publications, 3.19%
|
|
Polytechnic University of Milan
35 publications, 2.1%
|
|
University of Naples Federico II
33 publications, 1.98%
|
|
University of Bari Aldo Moro
33 publications, 1.98%
|
|
University of Turin
31 publications, 1.86%
|
|
University of Genoa
30 publications, 1.8%
|
|
University of Pavia
30 publications, 1.8%
|
|
University of Trieste
22 publications, 1.32%
|
|
University of Bologna
19 publications, 1.14%
|
|
Institute for Applied Mathematics Mauro Picone
19 publications, 1.14%
|
|
University of Milan
18 publications, 1.08%
|
|
University of Padua
16 publications, 0.96%
|
|
Polytechnic University of Turin
14 publications, 0.84%
|
|
South China Normal University
12 publications, 0.72%
|
|
University of Basilicata
12 publications, 0.72%
|
|
Purdue University
12 publications, 0.72%
|
|
Sorbonne University
11 publications, 0.66%
|
|
Shanghai University
10 publications, 0.6%
|
|
Institute of Applied Mathematics and Information Technologies
10 publications, 0.6%
|
|
Fudan University
9 publications, 0.54%
|
|
University of Cagliari
9 publications, 0.54%
|
|
University of Florence
9 publications, 0.54%
|
|
Indian Institute of Technology Guwahati
8 publications, 0.48%
|
|
Katholieke Universiteit Leuven
8 publications, 0.48%
|
|
Chalmers University of Technology
8 publications, 0.48%
|
|
ETH Zurich
8 publications, 0.48%
|
|
University of Rome Tor Vergata
8 publications, 0.48%
|
|
Qufu Normal University
8 publications, 0.48%
|
|
Lanzhou University
8 publications, 0.48%
|
|
University of Zaragoza
8 publications, 0.48%
|
|
Xi'an Jiaotong University
7 publications, 0.42%
|
|
Nanjing University of Information Science and Technology
7 publications, 0.42%
|
|
Nanjing University
7 publications, 0.42%
|
|
University of Parma
7 publications, 0.42%
|
|
University of Calabria
7 publications, 0.42%
|
|
University of L'Aquila
7 publications, 0.42%
|
|
Ca' Foscari University of Venice
7 publications, 0.42%
|
|
University of Chicago
7 publications, 0.42%
|
|
King Abdulaziz University
6 publications, 0.36%
|
|
Harbin Institute of Technology
6 publications, 0.36%
|
|
Aix-Marseille University
6 publications, 0.36%
|
|
Nanjing Normal University
6 publications, 0.36%
|
|
Aalto University
6 publications, 0.36%
|
|
Shanghai Normal University
6 publications, 0.36%
|
|
University of Perugia
6 publications, 0.36%
|
|
University of Udine
6 publications, 0.36%
|
|
Monash University
6 publications, 0.36%
|
|
Xiangtan University
6 publications, 0.36%
|
|
University of Macau
6 publications, 0.36%
|
|
Ruhr University Bochum
6 publications, 0.36%
|
|
Technical University of Braunschweig
6 publications, 0.36%
|
|
University of Stuttgart
6 publications, 0.36%
|
|
Université Laval
6 publications, 0.36%
|
|
University of Delaware
6 publications, 0.36%
|
|
Marchuk Institute of Numerical Mathematics of the Russian Academy of Sciences
5 publications, 0.3%
|
|
University of Tabriz
5 publications, 0.3%
|
|
Indian Institute of Technology Delhi
5 publications, 0.3%
|
|
University of Guilan
5 publications, 0.3%
|
|
Technion – Israel Institute of Technology
5 publications, 0.3%
|
|
Northwestern Polytechnical University
5 publications, 0.3%
|
|
China University of Mining and Technology
5 publications, 0.3%
|
|
Uppsala University
5 publications, 0.3%
|
|
Central South University
5 publications, 0.3%
|
|
Chongqing University
5 publications, 0.3%
|
|
Technische Universität Dresden
5 publications, 0.3%
|
|
Hunan Normal University
5 publications, 0.3%
|
|
University of Modena and Reggio Emilia
5 publications, 0.3%
|
|
University of Trento
5 publications, 0.3%
|
|
University of Insubria
5 publications, 0.3%
|
|
Zhengzhou University
5 publications, 0.3%
|
|
Vienna University of Technology
5 publications, 0.3%
|
|
Hamburg University
5 publications, 0.3%
|
|
University of Duisburg-Essen
5 publications, 0.3%
|
|
University of the Bundeswehr Munich
5 publications, 0.3%
|
|
University of Houston
5 publications, 0.3%
|
|
Babes-Bolyai University
5 publications, 0.3%
|
|
Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur
4 publications, 0.24%
|
|
Indian Institute of Technology Madras
4 publications, 0.24%
|
|
Huazhong University of Science and Technology
4 publications, 0.24%
|
|
Technical University of Munich
4 publications, 0.24%
|
|
University of Bordeaux
4 publications, 0.24%
|
|
Heidelberg University
4 publications, 0.24%
|
|
University of Nantes
4 publications, 0.24%
|
|
Xidian University
4 publications, 0.24%
|
|
University of Oxford
4 publications, 0.24%
|
|
Shaoguan University
4 publications, 0.24%
|
|
University of Salerno
4 publications, 0.24%
|
|
Zaozhuang University
4 publications, 0.24%
|
|
Scuola Normale Superiore
4 publications, 0.24%
|
|
Technical University of Dortmund
4 publications, 0.24%
|
|
Technical University of Berlin
4 publications, 0.24%
|
|
Yunnan University
4 publications, 0.24%
|
|
Beijing Computational Science Research Center
4 publications, 0.24%
|
|
University of Minnesota
4 publications, 0.24%
|
|
University of Erlangen–Nuremberg
4 publications, 0.24%
|
|
University of Graz
4 publications, 0.24%
|
|
Universidad Carlos III de Madrid
4 publications, 0.24%
|
|
Louisiana State University
4 publications, 0.24%
|
|
Texas A&M University
4 publications, 0.24%
|
|
Show all (70 more) | |
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
|
Publishing organizations in 5 years
1
2
3
4
5
|
|
Indian Institute of Technology Guwahati
5 publications, 1.81%
|
|
Technion – Israel Institute of Technology
5 publications, 1.81%
|
|
Central South University
5 publications, 1.81%
|
|
South China Normal University
5 publications, 1.81%
|
|
Shanghai University
5 publications, 1.81%
|
|
Lanzhou University
5 publications, 1.81%
|
|
Harbin Institute of Technology
4 publications, 1.44%
|
|
Xi'an Jiaotong University
4 publications, 1.44%
|
|
Nanjing University of Information Science and Technology
4 publications, 1.44%
|
|
Nanjing University
4 publications, 1.44%
|
|
Xidian University
4 publications, 1.44%
|
|
University of Insubria
4 publications, 1.44%
|
|
Institute of Applied Mathematics and Information Technologies
4 publications, 1.44%
|
|
Monash University
4 publications, 1.44%
|
|
Xiangtan University
4 publications, 1.44%
|
|
Beijing Computational Science Research Center
4 publications, 1.44%
|
|
Beijing Normal University
3 publications, 1.08%
|
|
Fudan University
3 publications, 1.08%
|
|
Northwestern Polytechnical University
3 publications, 1.08%
|
|
Uppsala University
3 publications, 1.08%
|
|
Indian Institute of Space Science and Technology
3 publications, 1.08%
|
|
Aalto University
3 publications, 1.08%
|
|
Chongqing University
3 publications, 1.08%
|
|
Hunan Normal University
3 publications, 1.08%
|
|
Shanghai Normal University
3 publications, 1.08%
|
|
Shanghai University of Finance and Economics
3 publications, 1.08%
|
|
University of Pavia
3 publications, 1.08%
|
|
Qufu Normal University
3 publications, 1.08%
|
|
Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University
2 publications, 0.72%
|
|
Indian Institute of Science
2 publications, 0.72%
|
|
University of Tabriz
2 publications, 0.72%
|
|
Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur
2 publications, 0.72%
|
|
Indian Institute of Technology Madras
2 publications, 0.72%
|
|
National Institute of Technology Rourkela
2 publications, 0.72%
|
|
University of Guilan
2 publications, 0.72%
|
|
Institute for Advanced Studies in Basic Sciences
2 publications, 0.72%
|
|
Beijing Institute of Technology
2 publications, 0.72%
|
|
Sichuan University of Science and Engineering
2 publications, 0.72%
|
|
China University of Mining and Technology
2 publications, 0.72%
|
|
Fujian Normal University
2 publications, 0.72%
|
|
ETH Zurich
2 publications, 0.72%
|
|
University of Nantes
2 publications, 0.72%
|
|
Nankai University
2 publications, 0.72%
|
|
Technische Universität Dresden
2 publications, 0.72%
|
|
Università della Svizzera italiana
2 publications, 0.72%
|
|
Nanchang University
2 publications, 0.72%
|
|
Xiamen University
2 publications, 0.72%
|
|
Polytechnic University of Turin
2 publications, 0.72%
|
|
Shandong Normal University
2 publications, 0.72%
|
|
University of Oxford
2 publications, 0.72%
|
|
Shanghai Maritime University
2 publications, 0.72%
|
|
Suzhou University of Science and Technology
2 publications, 0.72%
|
|
University of Padua
2 publications, 0.72%
|
|
Changshu Institute of Technology
2 publications, 0.72%
|
|
Southwest Petroleum University
2 publications, 0.72%
|
|
University of Pisa
2 publications, 0.72%
|
|
New York University
2 publications, 0.72%
|
|
Shandong University
2 publications, 0.72%
|
|
Yunnan University
2 publications, 0.72%
|
|
Wayne State University
2 publications, 0.72%
|
|
University of Macau
2 publications, 0.72%
|
|
Moulay Ismail University
2 publications, 0.72%
|
|
University of Zaragoza
2 publications, 0.72%
|
|
University of Delaware
2 publications, 0.72%
|
|
Université Côte d'Azur
2 publications, 0.72%
|
|
Mohammed VI Polytechnic University
2 publications, 0.72%
|
|
University of Portsmouth
2 publications, 0.72%
|
|
National Research University Higher School of Economics
1 publication, 0.36%
|
|
Ural Federal University
1 publication, 0.36%
|
|
Southern Federal University
1 publication, 0.36%
|
|
North-Eastern Federal University
1 publication, 0.36%
|
|
Keldysh Institute of Applied Mathematics of the Russian Academy of Sciences
1 publication, 0.36%
|
|
Marchuk Institute of Numerical Mathematics of the Russian Academy of Sciences
1 publication, 0.36%
|
|
King Abdullah University of Science and Technology
1 publication, 0.36%
|
|
Imam Mohammad Ibn Saud Islamic University
1 publication, 0.36%
|
|
Najran University
1 publication, 0.36%
|
|
University of Delhi
1 publication, 0.36%
|
|
Birla Institute of Technology and Science, Pilani
1 publication, 0.36%
|
|
National Institute of Technology Puducherry
1 publication, 0.36%
|
|
Artvin Coruh University
1 publication, 0.36%
|
|
Khajeh Nasir Toosi University of Technology
1 publication, 0.36%
|
|
Kirklareli University
1 publication, 0.36%
|
|
Farhangian University
1 publication, 0.36%
|
|
University of Tübingen
1 publication, 0.36%
|
|
Hanoi National University of Education
1 publication, 0.36%
|
|
University of Maragheh
1 publication, 0.36%
|
|
Sirjan University of Technology
1 publication, 0.36%
|
|
Persian Gulf University
1 publication, 0.36%
|
|
University of Birjand
1 publication, 0.36%
|
|
University of Chinese Academy of Sciences
1 publication, 0.36%
|
|
Peking University
1 publication, 0.36%
|
|
Huazhong University of Science and Technology
1 publication, 0.36%
|
|
Beihang University
1 publication, 0.36%
|
|
Jilin University
1 publication, 0.36%
|
|
Veer Surendra Sai University of Technology
1 publication, 0.36%
|
|
Technical University of Munich
1 publication, 0.36%
|
|
Chalmers University of Technology
1 publication, 0.36%
|
|
KTH Royal Institute of Technology
1 publication, 0.36%
|
|
Pontificia Universidad Católica de Valparaíso
1 publication, 0.36%
|
|
Heidelberg University
1 publication, 0.36%
|
|
Show all (70 more) | |
1
2
3
4
5
|
Publishing countries
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
|
|
Italy
|
Italy, 701, 42.15%
Italy
701 publications, 42.15%
|
China
|
China, 238, 14.31%
China
238 publications, 14.31%
|
USA
|
USA, 124, 7.46%
USA
124 publications, 7.46%
|
France
|
France, 109, 6.55%
France
109 publications, 6.55%
|
Germany
|
Germany, 81, 4.87%
Germany
81 publications, 4.87%
|
India
|
India, 47, 2.83%
India
47 publications, 2.83%
|
United Kingdom
|
United Kingdom, 33, 1.98%
United Kingdom
33 publications, 1.98%
|
Iran
|
Iran, 32, 1.92%
Iran
32 publications, 1.92%
|
Chile
|
Chile, 28, 1.68%
Chile
28 publications, 1.68%
|
Spain
|
Spain, 27, 1.62%
Spain
27 publications, 1.62%
|
Romania
|
Romania, 25, 1.5%
Romania
25 publications, 1.5%
|
Russia
|
Russia, 23, 1.38%
Russia
23 publications, 1.38%
|
Canada
|
Canada, 23, 1.38%
Canada
23 publications, 1.38%
|
Switzerland
|
Switzerland, 19, 1.14%
Switzerland
19 publications, 1.14%
|
Austria
|
Austria, 16, 0.96%
Austria
16 publications, 0.96%
|
Turkey
|
Turkey, 16, 0.96%
Turkey
16 publications, 0.96%
|
Saudi Arabia
|
Saudi Arabia, 15, 0.9%
Saudi Arabia
15 publications, 0.9%
|
Sweden
|
Sweden, 14, 0.84%
Sweden
14 publications, 0.84%
|
Bulgaria
|
Bulgaria, 13, 0.78%
Bulgaria
13 publications, 0.78%
|
Australia
|
Australia, 12, 0.72%
Australia
12 publications, 0.72%
|
Egypt
|
Egypt, 12, 0.72%
Egypt
12 publications, 0.72%
|
Israel
|
Israel, 12, 0.72%
Israel
12 publications, 0.72%
|
Morocco
|
Morocco, 12, 0.72%
Morocco
12 publications, 0.72%
|
Belgium
|
Belgium, 10, 0.6%
Belgium
10 publications, 0.6%
|
Greece
|
Greece, 10, 0.6%
Greece
10 publications, 0.6%
|
Serbia
|
Serbia, 9, 0.54%
Serbia
9 publications, 0.54%
|
Vietnam
|
Vietnam, 7, 0.42%
Vietnam
7 publications, 0.42%
|
Algeria
|
Algeria, 6, 0.36%
Algeria
6 publications, 0.36%
|
Argentina
|
Argentina, 6, 0.36%
Argentina
6 publications, 0.36%
|
Brazil
|
Brazil, 6, 0.36%
Brazil
6 publications, 0.36%
|
Lebanon
|
Lebanon, 6, 0.36%
Lebanon
6 publications, 0.36%
|
Poland
|
Poland, 6, 0.36%
Poland
6 publications, 0.36%
|
Finland
|
Finland, 6, 0.36%
Finland
6 publications, 0.36%
|
Japan
|
Japan, 6, 0.36%
Japan
6 publications, 0.36%
|
Hungary
|
Hungary, 5, 0.3%
Hungary
5 publications, 0.3%
|
Norway
|
Norway, 5, 0.3%
Norway
5 publications, 0.3%
|
Republic of Korea
|
Republic of Korea, 5, 0.3%
Republic of Korea
5 publications, 0.3%
|
Denmark
|
Denmark, 4, 0.24%
Denmark
4 publications, 0.24%
|
Cyprus
|
Cyprus, 4, 0.24%
Cyprus
4 publications, 0.24%
|
Netherlands
|
Netherlands, 4, 0.24%
Netherlands
4 publications, 0.24%
|
Colombia
|
Colombia, 3, 0.18%
Colombia
3 publications, 0.18%
|
Costa Rica
|
Costa Rica, 3, 0.18%
Costa Rica
3 publications, 0.18%
|
Kuwait
|
Kuwait, 3, 0.18%
Kuwait
3 publications, 0.18%
|
Mexico
|
Mexico, 3, 0.18%
Mexico
3 publications, 0.18%
|
Nigeria
|
Nigeria, 3, 0.18%
Nigeria
3 publications, 0.18%
|
Tunisia
|
Tunisia, 3, 0.18%
Tunisia
3 publications, 0.18%
|
Uzbekistan
|
Uzbekistan, 3, 0.18%
Uzbekistan
3 publications, 0.18%
|
Czech Republic
|
Czech Republic, 3, 0.18%
Czech Republic
3 publications, 0.18%
|
South Africa
|
South Africa, 3, 0.18%
South Africa
3 publications, 0.18%
|
Portugal
|
Portugal, 2, 0.12%
Portugal
2 publications, 0.12%
|
Jordan
|
Jordan, 2, 0.12%
Jordan
2 publications, 0.12%
|
Ireland
|
Ireland, 2, 0.12%
Ireland
2 publications, 0.12%
|
Pakistan
|
Pakistan, 2, 0.12%
Pakistan
2 publications, 0.12%
|
Slovakia
|
Slovakia, 2, 0.12%
Slovakia
2 publications, 0.12%
|
Croatia
|
Croatia, 2, 0.12%
Croatia
2 publications, 0.12%
|
Kazakhstan
|
Kazakhstan, 1, 0.06%
Kazakhstan
1 publication, 0.06%
|
Estonia
|
Estonia, 1, 0.06%
Estonia
1 publication, 0.06%
|
Bahrain
|
Bahrain, 1, 0.06%
Bahrain
1 publication, 0.06%
|
Botswana
|
Botswana, 1, 0.06%
Botswana
1 publication, 0.06%
|
Venezuela
|
Venezuela, 1, 0.06%
Venezuela
1 publication, 0.06%
|
Qatar
|
Qatar, 1, 0.06%
Qatar
1 publication, 0.06%
|
Kenya
|
Kenya, 1, 0.06%
Kenya
1 publication, 0.06%
|
Cuba
|
Cuba, 1, 0.06%
Cuba
1 publication, 0.06%
|
New Zealand
|
New Zealand, 1, 0.06%
New Zealand
1 publication, 0.06%
|
Slovenia
|
Slovenia, 1, 0.06%
Slovenia
1 publication, 0.06%
|
Thailand
|
Thailand, 1, 0.06%
Thailand
1 publication, 0.06%
|
Yugoslavia
|
Yugoslavia, 1, 0.06%
Yugoslavia
1 publication, 0.06%
|
Show all (37 more) | |
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
|
Publishing countries in 5 years
20
40
60
80
100
120
|
|
China
|
China, 105, 37.91%
China
105 publications, 37.91%
|
France
|
France, 25, 9.03%
France
25 publications, 9.03%
|
USA
|
USA, 24, 8.66%
USA
24 publications, 8.66%
|
Italy
|
Italy, 23, 8.3%
Italy
23 publications, 8.3%
|
India
|
India, 19, 6.86%
India
19 publications, 6.86%
|
Germany
|
Germany, 13, 4.69%
Germany
13 publications, 4.69%
|
Chile
|
Chile, 12, 4.33%
Chile
12 publications, 4.33%
|
United Kingdom
|
United Kingdom, 10, 3.61%
United Kingdom
10 publications, 3.61%
|
Russia
|
Russia, 9, 3.25%
Russia
9 publications, 3.25%
|
Iran
|
Iran, 9, 3.25%
Iran
9 publications, 3.25%
|
Spain
|
Spain, 6, 2.17%
Spain
6 publications, 2.17%
|
Morocco
|
Morocco, 6, 2.17%
Morocco
6 publications, 2.17%
|
Australia
|
Australia, 5, 1.81%
Australia
5 publications, 1.81%
|
Israel
|
Israel, 5, 1.81%
Israel
5 publications, 1.81%
|
Switzerland
|
Switzerland, 5, 1.81%
Switzerland
5 publications, 1.81%
|
Sweden
|
Sweden, 4, 1.44%
Sweden
4 publications, 1.44%
|
Austria
|
Austria, 3, 1.08%
Austria
3 publications, 1.08%
|
Saudi Arabia
|
Saudi Arabia, 3, 1.08%
Saudi Arabia
3 publications, 1.08%
|
Finland
|
Finland, 3, 1.08%
Finland
3 publications, 1.08%
|
Algeria
|
Algeria, 2, 0.72%
Algeria
2 publications, 0.72%
|
Canada
|
Canada, 2, 0.72%
Canada
2 publications, 0.72%
|
Colombia
|
Colombia, 2, 0.72%
Colombia
2 publications, 0.72%
|
Romania
|
Romania, 2, 0.72%
Romania
2 publications, 0.72%
|
Turkey
|
Turkey, 2, 0.72%
Turkey
2 publications, 0.72%
|
Croatia
|
Croatia, 2, 0.72%
Croatia
2 publications, 0.72%
|
Belgium
|
Belgium, 1, 0.36%
Belgium
1 publication, 0.36%
|
Botswana
|
Botswana, 1, 0.36%
Botswana
1 publication, 0.36%
|
Brazil
|
Brazil, 1, 0.36%
Brazil
1 publication, 0.36%
|
Vietnam
|
Vietnam, 1, 0.36%
Vietnam
1 publication, 0.36%
|
Greece
|
Greece, 1, 0.36%
Greece
1 publication, 0.36%
|
Egypt
|
Egypt, 1, 0.36%
Egypt
1 publication, 0.36%
|
Ireland
|
Ireland, 1, 0.36%
Ireland
1 publication, 0.36%
|
Costa Rica
|
Costa Rica, 1, 0.36%
Costa Rica
1 publication, 0.36%
|
Lebanon
|
Lebanon, 1, 0.36%
Lebanon
1 publication, 0.36%
|
Netherlands
|
Netherlands, 1, 0.36%
Netherlands
1 publication, 0.36%
|
Norway
|
Norway, 1, 0.36%
Norway
1 publication, 0.36%
|
Republic of Korea
|
Republic of Korea, 1, 0.36%
Republic of Korea
1 publication, 0.36%
|
Serbia
|
Serbia, 1, 0.36%
Serbia
1 publication, 0.36%
|
Slovenia
|
Slovenia, 1, 0.36%
Slovenia
1 publication, 0.36%
|
Czech Republic
|
Czech Republic, 1, 0.36%
Czech Republic
1 publication, 0.36%
|
South Africa
|
South Africa, 1, 0.36%
South Africa
1 publication, 0.36%
|
Japan
|
Japan, 1, 0.36%
Japan
1 publication, 0.36%
|
Show all (12 more) | |
20
40
60
80
100
120
|