Suppose that a mathematician is not cited by others or his contributions is cited in a small number of papers. Does it mean that his research is bad?
No need to consider like that. It only means that other researchers have not used his findings in their studies. Or his research area is not the one common to the majority. Whatever do the numbers show, a good research always stands...
May be research topic is not interesting to a large mathematical auditory. Does this mean that such topic is bad? I alway said NO!!! but now, I ask if it is good then why it is non-interesting for all?, in particular, for experts in the branch?
No need to consider like that. It only means that other researchers have not used his findings in their studies. Or his research area is not the one common to the majority. Whatever do the numbers show, a good research always stands...
I think this is not the case ,one of the reason of less citations is that very few people are working in pure mathematics side .Where as if you look at computational mathematics especially computational fluid dynamics or numerical you can find a greater number of literature and people working as compared to pure mathematics.
@Yanal Kashou
I do not say about geniuses, I keep in mind ordinary researchers only.
This is easy to say that I am a brilliant mathematician, but no one understands me .... or does not want to understand
@Sudev Naduvath
I agree, but how we understand that the research is good?
@ Miguel Ángel Montes
We come to a very interesting question!!! A good journal, what is it?
You write "high ranked journals"..... What do you keep in mind? Advanced in Math and something like this...
What is about normal journals which are good, but not super-top?
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Papers