Press "Enter" to skip to content

Some aspects of the quantitative myth

MedalistMRIDBirthFirstPPublicationsC/P
Okounkov3516221969199465 cited 1181 times by 560 authors18.2
Perelman2299391966198525 cited 285 times by 157 authors11.4
Tao36175519751996205 cited 3594 times by 1486 authors17.5
Werner3240911968199266 cited 879 times by 276 authors13.3
Lindenstrauss6057091970199540 cited 339 times by 227 authors8.5
Ngo6230541972199718 cited 117 times by 67 authors6.5
Smirnov3432601970199427 cited 309 times by 188 authors11.4
Villani6023571973199575 cited 1659 times by 681 authors22.1

Data source: AMS MathSciNet (May 2011). Have you heard about the Peter Principle?

Le Tricheur à l'as de carreau, par Georges de La Tour vers 1635, illustre le thème de l'opposition entre l'innocence et le vice

3 Comments

  1. Fabrice Baudoin 2011-06-10

    On mathscinet, as far as I know, the winner for C/P, with P >5 seems to be Gromov with C=6006 and P=125. For C the winner seems to be P.L. Lions with C=11282. For P, S. Albeverio is maybe not too far from the prize with P=681.

  2. Djalil Chafaï 2011-06-10

    Yes. For the extremes, there is also Erdos with P=1417 and Shelah with P=887 for instance. However, the aim of the given table was just to make apparent the great differences among the recent Fields medalists… rather than listing extremes!

  3. Ian Agol 2011-06-20

    You get a somewhat different picture of Perelman if you look at scholar.google.com. His three papers on the arxiv have 895, 471, and 261 citations respectively. Of course, google scholar is counting many more papers than mathscinet.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *