↓ Skip to main content

Evolution of DFT studies in view of a scientometric perspective

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Cheminformatics, October 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (80th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (70th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
37 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
82 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Evolution of DFT studies in view of a scientometric perspective
Published in
Journal of Cheminformatics, October 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13321-016-0166-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Robin Haunschild, Andreas Barth, Werner Marx

Abstract

This bibliometric study aims to analyze the publications in which density functional theory (DFT) plays a major role. The bibliometric analysis is performed on the full publication volume of 114,138 publications as well as sub-sets defined in terms of six different types of compounds and nine different research topics. Also, a compound analysis is presented that shows how many compounds with specific elements are known to be calculated with DFT. This analysis is done for each element from hydrogen to nobelium. We find that hydrogen, carbon, nitrogen, and oxygen occur most often in compounds calculated with DFT in terms of absolute numbers, but a relative perspective shows that DFT calculations were performed rather often in comparison with experiments for rare gas elements, many actinides, some transition metals, and polonium. The annual publication volume of DFT literature continues to grow steadily. The number of publications doubles approximately every 5-6 years while a doubling of publication volume every 11 years is observed for the CAplus database (14 years if patents are excluded). Calculations of the structure and energy of compounds dominate the DFT literature.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 82 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 82 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 23 28%
Student > Master 9 11%
Researcher 8 10%
Student > Bachelor 7 9%
Professor 3 4%
Other 8 10%
Unknown 24 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Chemistry 25 30%
Physics and Astronomy 12 15%
Social Sciences 5 6%
Chemical Engineering 4 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 4%
Other 8 10%
Unknown 25 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 16 October 2020.
All research outputs
#4,092,215
of 25,079,131 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Cheminformatics
#362
of 942 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#63,431
of 326,480 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Cheminformatics
#8
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,079,131 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 942 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 326,480 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 24 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.