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
Journal

Harvard Data Science Review

close

Citation weight

Tierunranked
Weight in force
Weightingoff

Weight inputs

Each figure with its percentile among the ranked journals. A is the median, over the academics with a work here, of that academic’s citations to the works this site counts for them - never a Google Scholar profile total. Over every academic of this field, all years, whatever the filters select.

A · academics’ median21,960.0 · —
B · citations per work19.5 · —
N · works17 · —
P · academics6 · —
Formula result
Below the thresholdfewer than 20 works: unranked, and weighs 1

From this institution

Under these filters. A work with no citation count is unknown here, never a zero.

Works17
Citations332 over 17 of 17 works
Citations per counted work19.5
Weighted citations
Academics6
Departments3
First seen2020

Works placed per year

17 of these 17 works carry a year; an undated work is in no year. Works placed, under these filters.

Departments publishing there 3

DepartmentWorks
Columbia Political Science7
Harvard Government7
Yale Political Science4

A work held by two departments counts once in each, so these add up to more than the works above.

Works placed there 17

YearTitleAcademicsCitations
2022Widening Access to Applied Machine Learning with TinyMLDustin Tingley114
2021Designing for interactive exploratory data analysis requires theories of graphical inference (with discussion and rejoinder)Andrew Gelman91
2020An updated dynamic Bayesian forecasting model for the 2020 electionAndrew Gelman45
2020Towards Principled Unskewing: Viewing 2020 Election Polls Through a Corrective Lens from 2016Shiro Kuriwaki25
2023Comment: The Essential Role of Policy Evaluation for the 2020 Census Disclosure Avoidance SystemKosuke Imai · Shiro Kuriwaki15
2023Making Differential Privacy Work for Census Data UsersKosuke Imai12
2024Towards generalizing inferences from trials to target populationsMelody Huang10
2024Grappling with uncertainty in forecasting the 2024 U.S. presidential electionAndrew Gelman7
2024Predicting the 2024 Presidential ElectionRyan D. Enos4
2024Rejoinder: We Can Improve the Usability of the Census Noisy Measurements FileKosuke Imai2
2021Challenges in Incorporating Exploratory Data Analysis into Statistical WorkflowAndrew Gelman2
2020Predicting the 2020 presidential electionRyan D. Enos1
2023An Instrumental Variable for Non-Ignorable NonresponseShiro Kuriwaki1
2023Challenges in adjusting a survey that overrepresents people interested in politicsAndrew Gelman1
2024Hopes and limitations of reproducible statistics and machine learningAndrew Gelman1
2020Post-Election Interview with Andrew Gelman and G. Elliott MorrisAndrew Gelman1
2021Building on the Shoulders of Bears: Next Steps in Data Science EducationDustin Tingley0

Citations as counted, before any journal weight: 17 of these 17 works carry a count, and a work with no count is unknown, never a zero.