Downloads provided by UsageCounts
This post publication review (written memorandum and supporting slides) critique the published claims of Zhang et al, Nature Communications 2017, based on published data and additional data shared with us by corresponding authors of the paper. The additional data were provided to us in a mixture of numerical format (permitting independent replotting) and laboratory-notebook-style powerpoints containing data as images. Full data have not been shared.
Majorana
Majorana
| 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). | 0 | |
| 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). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
| views | 130 | |
| downloads | 141 |

Views provided by UsageCounts
Downloads provided by UsageCounts