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

Intelligence & National Security

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’ median8,475.0 · —
B · citations per work25.0 · —
N · works15 · —
P · academics5 · —
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.

Works14
Citations325 over 12 of 14 works
Citations per counted work27.1
Weighted citations
Academics5
Departments5
First seen2007

Works placed per year

14 of these 14 works carry a year; an undated work is in no year. Works placed, under these filters.

Departments publishing there 5

DepartmentWorks
Dartmouth Government5
Brown Political Science4
Cornell Government3
Princeton Politics2
Penn Political Science1

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

Works placed there 14

YearTitleAcademicsCitations
2012Assessing Uncertainty in IntelligenceJeffrey A. Friedman133
2015Handling and Mishandling Estimative Probability: Likelihood, Confidence, and the Search for Bin LadenJeffrey A. Friedman77
2016Why assessing estimative accuracy is feasible and desirableJeffrey A. Friedman27
2017An INS Special Forum: intelligence and drones/Eyes in the sky for peacekeeping: the emergence of UAVs in UN operations/The democratic deficit on drones/The …Sarah E. Kreps19
2021New evidence and new methods for analyzing the Iranian revolution as an intelligence failureArthur Spirling17
2016Why Evaluating Estimative Accuracy is Feasible and DesirableJeffrey A. Friedman16
2008Shifting Currents: Changes in National Intelligence Estimates on the Iran Nuclear ThreatSarah E. Kreps10
2023Obstacles to Harnessing Analytic Innovation in Foreign Policy Analysis: A Case Study of Crowdsourcing in the U.S. Intelligence CommunityJeffrey A. Friedman · Michael Horowitz8
2017An INS Special Forum: intelligence and drones/Eyes in the sky for peacekeeping: the emergence of UAVs in UN operations/The democratic deficit on drones/The German Approach to Drone Warfare/Pursuing peace: the strategic limits of drone warfare/Seeing but unseen: intelligence drones in Israel/Drone paramilitary operations against suspected global terrorists: US and Australian perspectives/The ‘Terminator Conundrum’ and the future of drone warfareSarah E. Kreps5
2016Pearl Harbor and Midway: The Decisive Influence of Two Men on the OutcomeROSE McDERMOTT5
2011Experimental IntelligenceROSE McDERMOTT4
2007The Use and Misuse of Medical IntelligenceROSE McDERMOTT4
2021Understanding Agency Incentives in Intelligence Failures: A Text-as-Data Analysis of the Iranian RevolutionArthur Spirling
2014The Unintended Consequences of Edward Snowden’s narcissismROSE McDERMOTT

Citations as counted, before any journal weight: 12 of these 14 works carry a count, and a work with no count is unknown, never a zero.