↓ Skip to main content

Uranus Pathfinder: exploring the origins and evolution of Ice Giant planets

Overview of attention for article published in Experimental Astronomy, September 2011
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 (83rd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (66th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
54 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
84 Mendeley
Title
Uranus Pathfinder: exploring the origins and evolution of Ice Giant planets
Published in
Experimental Astronomy, September 2011
DOI 10.1007/s10686-011-9251-4
Authors

Christopher S. Arridge, Craig B. Agnor, Nicolas André, Kevin H. Baines, Leigh N. Fletcher, Daniel Gautier, Mark D. Hofstadter, Geraint H. Jones, Laurent Lamy, Yves Langevin, Olivier Mousis, Nadine Nettelmann, Christopher T. Russell, Tom Stallard, Matthew S. Tiscareno, Gabriel Tobie, Andrew Bacon, Chris Chaloner, Michael Guest, Steve Kemble, Lisa Peacocke, Nicholas Achilleos, Thomas P. Andert, Don Banfield, Stas Barabash, Mathieu Barthelemy, Cesar Bertucci, Pontus Brandt, Baptiste Cecconi, Supriya Chakrabarti, Andy F. Cheng, Ulrich Christensen, Apostolos Christou, Andrew J. Coates, Glyn Collinson, John F. Cooper, Regis Courtin, Michele K. Dougherty, Robert W. Ebert, Marta Entradas, Andrew N. Fazakerley, Jonathan J. Fortney, Marina Galand, Jaques Gustin, Matthew Hedman, Ravit Helled, Pierre Henri, Sebastien Hess, Richard Holme, Özgur Karatekin, Norbert Krupp, Jared Leisner, Javier Martin-Torres, Adam Masters, Henrik Melin, Steve Miller, Ingo Müller-Wodarg, Benoît Noyelles, Chris Paranicas, Imke de Pater, Martin Pätzold, Renée Prangé, Eric Quémerais, Elias Roussos, Abigail M. Rymer, Agustin Sánchez-Lavega, Joachim Saur, Kunio M. Sayanagi, Paul Schenk, Gerald Schubert, Nick Sergis, Frank Sohl, Edward C. Sittler, Nick A. Teanby, Silvia Tellmann, Elizabeth P. Turtle, Sandrine Vinatier, Jan-Erik Wahlund, Philippe Zarka

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 84 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Japan 1 1%
Germany 1 1%
France 1 1%
Unknown 81 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 24 29%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 15%
Student > Master 9 11%
Professor 7 8%
Student > Bachelor 6 7%
Other 15 18%
Unknown 10 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Physics and Astronomy 28 33%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 22 26%
Environmental Science 4 5%
Engineering 4 5%
Unspecified 2 2%
Other 8 10%
Unknown 16 19%
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 05 May 2019.
All research outputs
#3,755,134
of 22,661,413 outputs
Outputs from Experimental Astronomy
#91
of 354 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#20,647
of 126,182 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Experimental Astronomy
#2
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,661,413 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 354 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% 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 126,182 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 83% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 4 of them.