| Title |
Solar Wind Electrons Alphas and Protons (SWEAP) Investigation: Design of the Solar Wind and Coronal Plasma Instrument Suite for Solar Probe Plus
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Space Science Reviews, October 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11214-015-0206-3 |
| Authors |
Justin C. Kasper, Robert Abiad, Gerry Austin, Marianne Balat-Pichelin, Stuart D. Bale, John W. Belcher, Peter Berg, Henry Bergner, Matthieu Berthomier, Jay Bookbinder, Etienne Brodu, David Caldwell, Anthony W. Case, Benjamin D. G. Chandran, Peter Cheimets, Jonathan W. Cirtain, Steven R. Cranmer, David W. Curtis, Peter Daigneau, Greg Dalton, Brahmananda Dasgupta, David DeTomaso, Millan Diaz-Aguado, Blagoje Djordjevic, Bill Donaskowski, Michael Effinger, Vladimir Florinski, Nichola Fox, Mark Freeman, Dennis Gallagher, S. Peter Gary, Tom Gauron, Richard Gates, Melvin Goldstein, Leon Golub, Dorothy A. Gordon, Reid Gurnee, Giora Guth, Jasper Halekas, Ken Hatch, Jacob Heerikuisen, George Ho, Qiang Hu, Greg Johnson, Steven P. Jordan, Kelly E. Korreck, Davin Larson, Alan J. Lazarus, Gang Li, Roberto Livi, Michael Ludlam, Milan Maksimovic, James P. McFadden, William Marchant, Bennet A. Maruca, David J. McComas, Luciana Messina, Tony Mercer, Sang Park, Andrew M. Peddie, Nikolai Pogorelov, Matthew J. Reinhart, John D. Richardson, Miles Robinson, Irene Rosen, Ruth M. Skoug, Amanda Slagle, John T. Steinberg, Michael L. Stevens, Adam Szabo, Ellen R. Taylor, Chris Tiu, Paul Turin, Marco Velli, Gary Webb, Phyllis Whittlesey, Ken Wright, S. T. Wu, Gary Zank |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 103 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Greece | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 101 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 26 | 25% |
| Researcher | 19 | 18% |
| Student > Master | 10 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 6 | 6% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 5% |
| Other | 11 | 11% |
| Unknown | 26 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Physics and Astronomy | 51 | 50% |
| Engineering | 7 | 7% |
| Earth and Planetary Sciences | 7 | 7% |
| Energy | 2 | 2% |
| Computer Science | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 6 | 6% |
| Unknown | 29 | 28% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 07 October 2018.
All research outputs
#7,361,161
of 25,837,817 outputs
Outputs from Space Science Reviews
#504
of 1,259 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#84,457
of 297,384 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Space Science Reviews
#8
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,837,817 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,259 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% 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 297,384 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.