
doi: 10.1063/1.2914018
Art forgery is a complex subject; it has as much to do with the personality of the faker or the salesman who markets the spurious work as it has to do with the recapturing of some past technique or mood. And it is a subject that is still highly active today, despite the unquestionably improved art historical scholarship of recent decades: the controversy over the gold from Ziwiye, the stir caused by the forgery of Fragonard and Samuel Palmer, and the impact of the Beirut school's pressure-cast counterfeits of early English coinage—all headline-makers over the past five years—affirm that clearly enough.
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 3 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 10% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
