↓ Skip to main content

人工頭脳と練金術

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of the Japan Association for Philosophy of Science, January 1961
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (93rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users
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
人工頭脳と練金術
Published in
Journal of the Japan Association for Philosophy of Science, January 1961
DOI 10.4288/kisoron1954.5.3_108
Authors

前原 昭二

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Attention Score in Context

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 23 September 2020.
All research outputs
#6,980,780
of 24,357,902 outputs
Outputs from Journal of the Japan Association for Philosophy of Science
#1
of 1 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#550
of 7,909 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of the Japan Association for Philosophy of Science
#2
of 2 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,357,902 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 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 0.0. This one scored the same or higher as 0 of them.
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 7,909 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 2 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.