Trackademia

Welcome to Trackademia

The idea behind Trackademia is to build on existing academic databases like Google Scholar and OpenAlex so that you can trust the data and use it for whatever you want. That comes down to two things.

More data, and more ways to use it. We aggregate publication data from every major source into a single dataset and add information pulled from faculty CVs. Then we let you slice it however you want: choose which sources to build from, write your own formulas, weight journals, adjust for department size.

More accurate, and honest about where it isn’t. We focus on a smaller set of schools so we can verify everything carefully. Faculty lists come from department websites rather than being inferred from publication records, so we know who should be in the data before we go looking. When we can’t find data on someone, we record the gap instead of dropping them. Every number comes with a coverage rate you can check against ground truth.

Everything in Trackademia is built from seven units. AI merges duplicate records across sources and tags each publication so these categories hold up:

  • Publication — citation counts, authors, journal, peer review status, and more
  • Publication group — versions of the same work combined into one entity, such as a working paper and the article it became
  • Academic
  • Department
  • University
  • Field
  • Journal

There are two modes. In Database mode you browse the underlying records and filter by any of the seven units. In Analytics mode you get graphs and comparisons, and you switch views to compare two departments, compare one department against the average of the others, or see them all at once. Tabs let you focus on a particular level of the data.

Back to the list
Academic

Michael Horowitz

close

Academic

RankDistinguished
As of2026 · CV
DepartmentPenn Political Science
UniversityPenn
FieldPolitical Science
Scholarprofile

Totals

Publications147
Citations7,773
h-index48 · Scholar
Citations per year in post409.1
Years in post19 from the CV positions

Coverage

Works with a count78 of 147
Share53%

Positions

Adjunct, RAND Corporation2025–
Director of Perry World House and Richard Per…2024–
Commissioner, Global Commission on Responsibl…2024–2026
Consultant, Office of the Under Secretary of…2024–2025
Senior Fellow for Technology and Innovation,…2024–
Senior Advisor, WestExec2024–
Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for For…2023–2024
Director, Emerging Capabilities Policy Office…2022–2023
and 22 more

Top venues 43 venues

The 8 holding the most of these works; 35 more hold at least one.

Journal of Conflict Resolution11
Foreign Affairs10
War on the Rocks10
Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists9
International Security9
The Journal of Politics7
International Organization6
The Monkey Cage6

Publications per year

Works this academic published in each year, by the year each work appeared; an undated work is in no year, and a work two colleagues wrote counts for each of them. The kind, works and year filters decide which works are here at all.

Citations per year

Citations received in each year, from this academic’s verified Scholar profile, which counts every citation to everything they ever wrote: no publication filter reaches this line - not the kinds, not the works switch, not the year window on publication - and no journal weight either. It is a profile total, so it does not match the works listed below.

Publications 147 works

Every work these filters select, most cited first and the works with no count at the end: a work nobody has a figure for is unknown, never a zero to be ranked among the works that have one, and it prints an em dash. Each figure is that work’s own citations - Scholar’s count where there is one, else OpenAlex’s - and is not weighted.

YearTitleVenueKindCitations
2018Artificial Intelligence, International Competition, and the Balance of PowerTexas ScholarWorks (Texas Digital Library)article621
2014How Prior Military Experience Influences The Future Militarized Behavior of LeadersInternational Organizationarticle438
2012When Backing Down is the Right Decision: Partisanship, New Information, and Audience CostsThe Journal of Politicsarticle386
2010Non-State Actors and the Diffusion of Innovations: The Case of Suicide TerrorismInternational Organizationarticle366
2015Improving Probabilistic Predictions by Identifying and Cultivating ‘Superforecasters’Perspectives on Psychological Sciencearticle346
2015The Psychology of Intelligence Analysis: Drivers of Prediction Accuracy in World PoliticsJournal of Experimental Psychology Appliedarticle340
2019When Speed Kills: Autonomous Weapon Systems, Deterrence, and StabilityJournal of Strategic Studiesarticle328
2005Leader Age, Regime Type, and Violent International RelationsJournal of Conflict Resolutionarticle253
2016The Consequences of Drone Proliferation: Separating Fact from FictionInternational Securityarticle230
2017Droning On: The Proliferation of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles and Military InnovationInternational Organizationarticle226
2020Introduction: Artificial Intelligence and International SecurityTexas National Security Reviewarticle225
2014Allying to Kill: Terrorist Intergroup Cooperation and the Consequences for LethalityJournal of Conflict Resolutionarticle222
2024Adopting AI: How Familiarity Breeds Both Trust and ContemptAI & Societyarticle196
2001When Does Aerial Bombing Work? Quantitative Empirical Tests, 1917-1999Journal of Conflict Resolutionarticle187
2011Drafting Support for War: Conscription and Mass Support for WarfareThe Journal of Politicsarticle163
2015When Leaders Matter: Rebel Experience and Nuclear ProliferationThe Journal of Politicsarticle160
2009Long Time Going: Religion and the Duration of CrusadingInternational Securityarticle159
2021Ethics and Governance of Artificial Intelligence: Evidence from a Survey of Machine Learning ResearchersJournal of Artificial Intelligence Researcharticle158
2016The Ethics and Morality of Robotic Warfare: Assessing the Debate Over Autonomous WeaponsDaedalusarticle153
2016Public opinion and the politics of the killer robots debateResearch & Politicsarticle150
2009The Spread of Nuclear Weapons and International Conflict: Does Experience MatterJournal of Conflict Resolutionarticle150
2024Bending the Automation Bias Curve: A Study of Human and AI-based Decision Making in National Security ContextsInternational Studies Quarterlyarticle130
2021What Influences Attitudes about Artificial Intelligence Adoption: Evidence From US Local OfficialsPLoS ONEarticle127
2020Do Emerging Military Technologies Matter for International Politics?Annual Review of Political Sciencearticle122
2015The Rise and Spread of Suicide BombingAnnual Review of Political Sciencearticle119
2023What is a military innovation and why it mattersJournal of Strategic Studiesarticle115
2015Introducing the LEAD DatasetInternational Interactionsarticle97
2018Studying Leaders and Military Conflict: Conceptual Framework and Research AgendaJournal of Conflict Resolutionarticle90
2014Poor Man’s Atomic Bomb? Explaining the Relationship Between Weapons of Mass DestructionJournal of Conflict Resolutionarticle89
2018Tactical Diversity in Militant ViolenceInternational Organizationarticle82
2022Honor Among Thieves: Understanding Rhetorical and Material Cooperation Among Violent Non-State ActorsInternational Organizationarticle80
2018The Promise and Peril of Military Applications of Artificial IntelligenceBulletin of the Atomic Scientistsarticle77
2016A Revised Look at Interstate Wars, 1816-2007Journal of Conflict Resolutionarticle73
2012What Determines Military Victory? Testing the Modern SystemSecurity Studiesarticle73
2022Algorithms and Influence: Artificial Intelligence and Crisis Decision-makingInternational Studies Quarterlyarticle69
2020The Future of Military Applications of Artificial Intelligence: A Role for Confidence-Building Measures?Orbisarticle69
2018Sizing up the adversary: Leader attributes and coercion in international conflictJournal of Conflict Resolutionarticle69
2016Why Words Matter: The Real World Consequences of Defining Autonomous Weapon Systemsarticle62
2011Domestic Institutions and Wartime CasualtiesInternational Studies Quarterlyarticle58
2022Who’s prone to drone? A global time-series analysis of armed uninhabited aerial vehicle proliferationConflict Management and Peace Sciencearticle51
2022Leadership Targeting and Militant Alliance BreakdownThe Journal of Politicsarticle45
2019What makes Foreign Policy Teams Tick: Explaining Variation in Group Performance At Geopolitical ForecastingThe Journal of Politicsarticle45
2017Domestic Signaling of Commitment Credibility: Military Recruitment and Alliance FormationJournal of Conflict Resolutionarticle43
2024Battles of Precise MassForeign Affairsarticle42
2022Do Armed Drones Reduce Terrorism? Evidence From 18 CountriesInternational Studies Quarterlyarticle38
2010Debating the Role of Religion in WarInternational Securityarticle36
2005Who’s Behind That Curtain? Unveiling Potential Leverage over Pyongyang.The Washington Quarterlyarticle36
2005Evolution or Revolution?Journal of Strategic Studiesarticle36
2018Sizing Up the Adversary: Leader Attributes, Credibility, and Reciprocation in International ConflictJournal of Conflict Resolutionarticle29
2022Who is Prone to Drone: Analyzing the Proliferation of Armed Uninhabited Aerial VehiclesConflict Management and Peace Sciencearticle28
2009The Future of War and American Military StrategyOrbisarticle28
2009Correspondence: The Limits to PartitionInternational Securityarticle24
2022A Force for the Future: A High-Reward, Low-Risk Approach to AI Military InnovationForeign Affairsarticle21
2020AI and the Diffusion of Global Powerarticle19
2016A Deeper Look at Interstate War Data: Interstate War Data version 1.1Research & Politicsarticle18
2018Debating Drone ProliferationInternational Securityarticle17
2025To Compete or Retreat: The Diffusion of Precision StrikeJournal of Peace Researcharticle15
2014Coming Next in Military Tech.Bulletin of the Atomic Scientistsarticle15
2014The Looming Robotics Gap.Foreign Policyarticle14
2019Correspondence: Military-Technological Imitation and Rising PowersInternational Securityarticle12
2023Who Gets Smart? Explaining How Precision Bombs ProliferateSSRN Electronic Journalarticle11
2012Should “Systems Thinkers” Accept the Limits on Political Forecasting or Push the LimitsCritical Reviewarticle9
2025Autonomous Weapon Systems: No human-in-the-loop required, and other myths dispelledWar on the Rocksarticle8
2023Obstacles to Harnessing Analytic Innovation in Foreign Policy Analysis: A Case Study of Crowdsourcing in the U.S. Intelligence CommunityIntelligence & National Securityarticle8
2025Morally Opposed? A Theory of Public Attitudes and Emerging Military TechnologiesConflict Management and Peace Sciencearticle7
2022Climbing the Ladder: Explaining the Vertical Proliferation of Cruise MissilesJournal of Conflict Resolutionarticle7
2021Leading in Artificial Intelligence Through Confidence Building MeasuresThe Washington Quarterlyarticle7
2020Modern Conflict and Artificial Intelligencearticle7
2022COVID-19 and Public Support for Autonomous Technologies - Did the Pandemic Catalyze a World of Robots?PLoS ONEarticle6
2021How Joe Biden can use confidence-building measures for military uses of AIBulletin of the Atomic Scientistsarticle6
2015The Morality of Robotic WarThe New York Timesarticle6
Walsh. T.(2021)article5
2026Artificial Intelligence and the Future of Strategic StabilityTexas National Security Reviewarticle4
2015Adoption Capacity and the Spread of Suicide Bombing: A Response to Andrea Gilli and Mauro Gilli.H-Diploarticle4
2026Delegating Destruction: Coercive Threats and Automated Nuclear SystemsInternational Organizationarticle3
2024Military Attitudes on the Chemical Weapons Taboo: Evidence from the Pacific Theater.The Journal of Politicsarticle3
2004Don’t Take Canberra for Granted: The Future of the U.S.-Australian Alliance.Orbisarticle2
2011Information Age Weaponry and the Future Shape of Security in East Asia.Global Asiaarticle0
2026Trump’s $1.5 Trillion Defense Budget Should Not Come as a Surprisearticle
2026Military AI Adoption is Outpacing Global Cooperationarticle
2026No One Wins in Anthropic’s Fight With the PentagonFinancial Timesarticle
2026First Ukraine, Now Iran: A New Era of Drone Warfare Takes Holdarticle
2026Iran’s Drone Advantage: The Pentagon Copied Tehran’s Technology but Is Still Struggling to Keep UpForeign Affairsarticle
2025What Drones Can—And Cannot—Do on the BattlefieldForeign Affairsarticle
2025What America Gets Wrong about the AI RaceForeign Affairsarticle
2025Is the Pentagon Slowing Artificial Intelligence Adoptionarticle
2025Fixing the Pentagon’s Broken Innovation PipelineThe National Interestarticle
2025Nuclear Non-Proliferation is the Wrong Framework for AI Governancearticle
2025Time to Take Risk in Defense Acquisitionsarticle
2025Will Trump’s ‘Big, Beautiful’ Defense Spending Lastarticle
2025What to know about the new U.S. AI Diffusion Policy and Export Controlsarticle
2025What to know about the new Trump Administration executive order on artificial intelligencearticle
2025The Cost of the AGI DelusionForeign Affairsarticle
2024Stealth and Scale: Quality, Quantity, and Modern Military PowerWar on the Rocksarticle
2022Why DoD’s New Approach to Data and Artificial Intelligence Should Enhance National Defensearticle
2021Policy Roundtable: The Future of Transatlantic DeterrenceTexas National Security Reviewarticle
2021DoD’s 2021 China Military Power Report: How Advances in AI and Emerging Technologies Will Shape China’s Militaryarticle
2021War by Timeframe: Responding to China’s Pacing ChallengeWar on the Rocksarticle
2021Space Norms and U.S. National Security: Leading on Space DebrisWar on the Rocksarticle
2021How the US government can learn to see the futureLawfarearticle
2021Two Cheers for the Department of Defense’s New Data and Artificial Intelligence Leadership Initiativearticle
2021The Perils of Overhyping Artificial Intelligence: For AI to Succeed, It First Must Be Able to FailForeign Affairsarticle
2020The Death and Life of Terrorist Networks: How Alliances Help Militants SurviveForeign Affairsarticle
2020China Has Made Drone Warfare GlobalForeign Affairsarticle
2020The AI Literacy Gap Hobbling American OfficialdomWar on the Rocksarticle
2020War with Iran is Still Less Likely Than You ThinkThe Monkey Cagearticle
2019War with Iran is Probably Less Likely Than You ThinkThe Monkey Cagearticle
2019Yes. Iran Shot Down a U.S. Drone. Here’s Why You (Still) Don’t Need to Worry.The Monkey Cagearticle
2018Artificial Intelligence beyond the SuperpowersBulletin of the Atomic Scientistsarticle
2018A way to rein in drone proliferationBulletin of the Atomic Scientistsarticle
2018Congress Can Help the United States Lead in Artificial IntelligenceForeign Policyarticle
2018Artificial Intelligence and the Military: Technology is Only Half the BattleWar on the Rocksarticle
2018A new U.S. policy makes it (somewhat) easier to export dronesThe Monkey Cagearticle
2018The Algorithms of AugustForeign Policyarticle
2017Will Killer Robots be Banned? Lessons from Past Civil Society CampaignsLawfarearticle
2017Militant groups have drones. Now what?Bulletin of the Atomic Scientistsarticle
2017How surprising is North Korea’s nuclear success? Picking up where proliferation theories leave offWar on the Rocksarticle
2017The Future of War is Fast Approaching in the Pacific: Are the U.S. Military Services Ready?War on the Rocksarticle
2017Response to Matthew Baum and Philip Potter's review of Why Leaders FightPerspectives on Politicsarticle
2017Debating Drone Proliferation ReplyInternational Securityarticle
2017War and Democratic Constraint: How the Public Influences Foreign Policy. By Matthew A. Baum and Philip B. K. Potter. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 201…Perspectives on Politicsarticle
2016Who’ll want artificially intelligent weapons? ISIS, democracies, or autocracies?Bulletin of the Atomic Scientistsarticle
2016Ban killer robots? How about defining them first?Bulletin of the Atomic Scientistsarticle
2016Review of Red Team: How to Succeed By Thinking Like the EnemyInternational Politics Reviewsarticle
2016The Dictator's Army: Battlefield Effectiveness in Authoritarian RegimesThe Journal of Politicsarticle
2015Should ‘Killer Robots’ be Banned?˜The œnational interest/˜The œNational interestarticle
2015Joe Public v. Sue Scholar: Support for the Use of Forcearticle
2015Keeping Killer Robots on a Tight Leasharticle
2015Does anyone make accurate geopolitical predictions?The Monkey Cagearticle
2015How does the NFL’s Roger Goodell stay in power? By acting like a dictator.The Monkey Cagearticle
2015Ban or No Ban, Hard Questions Remain on Autonomous Weapons.IEEE Spectrumarticle
2015Rebel With a Bombarticle
2015What is Policy Relevance?War on the Rocksarticle
2014Beyond UCLASS: Preparing the Navy for Next Generation WarfareWar on the Rocksarticle
2014Do Killer Robots Save Lives?Politicoarticle
2014Moneyballing Obama’s Foreign Policy.Politicoarticle
2014Droning OnForeign Affairsarticle
2014The Crisis-Prevention Directorate˜The œnational interest/˜The œNational interestarticle
2014of the Atomic ScientistsBulletin of the Atomic Scientistsarticle
2013Presidents, Kings, Dictators, & War: Leader Risk and International PoliticsThe Knowledge Bank (The Ohio State University)article
2012Trending Upward: How the intelligence community can better see into the futurearticle
2011The Iraq Wars and America's Military RevolutionPerspectives on Politicsarticle
2010Correspondence: Long Time Going.International Securityarticle
2010Understanding Terrorist Innovation: Technology, Tactics and Global Trends.전략연구article
2006The diffusion of military technology and ideas전략연구article
1011Maintaining American Military Power In An Age Of Uncertainty.article
You Can’t Always Get What You Want: Why Foreign-Imposed Regime Change Seldom Improves Interstate Relations Alexander B. Downes, George Washington University, a…International Securityarticle