Be on top: lists of highly cited authors

2026-01-14 14:44

Recently, ITMO University researcher Anton Korobeynikov, the author of the SPAdes genome assembler, was added to Clarivate’s prestigious Highly Cited Researchers list. Only scientists whose publications rank in the top 1% most-cited worldwide over the past decade can have this honour.

Scientific impact goes beyond the h-index or the number of publications. Even if you are at the beginning of your scholar track, you have to know how global recognition metrics work. Who qualifies as “highly cited”? In what contexts do these lists truly matter: whether for international university rankings, competitive grant applications, or prestigious awards? And why should you start learning about them now?

There are several lists, each of them following their own methodology and purpose. One can resemble an elite club of top-performing researchers; another functions as a shortlist of potential Nobel laureates; a third one provides an open, dynamic map of scientific influence across disciplines and regions.

In the message below we analyze the following: who compiles these lists? What are their underlying criteria and limitations? And how can you, as a researcher, use them strategically?

Highly Cited Researchers (Clarivate) as the scientific elite

This list refers to one of the most prestigious and rigorous international recognitions in science. Published annually by Clarivate (Web of Science), it identifies researchers whose publications rank in the top 0.1% globally, specifically, those whose papers have been consistently placed in the top 1% most-cited within their field and year of publication over the past 11 years.

Selection is not based on citation counts only. Clarivate employs a multi-layered integrity assessment to ensure scientific credibility:

Publications with any signs of hyper-authorship (more than 30 co-authors or group authorship without clear individual contribution) are excluded;
Excessive self-citation or disproportionate citations from co-authors are flagged and discounted.

This rigorous filtering ensures the list reflects true scholarly influence rather than high output or citation gaming.

The list provides 22 subject categories and an additional Cross-Field category for researchers whose impact spans disciplines. This highlights the growing importance of interdisciplinary work.

In 2025, Clarivate awarded the Highly Cited Researcher distinction 7,131 times to 6,868 unique researchers from 60 countries. Some scientists were recognized in multiple fields, hence, the number of awards was higher than that of scholars.

From Russia, five scholars were added to the list this year:

Anton Korobeynikov (ITMO University), author of the SPAdes genome assembler, a tool now used by researchers worldwide;
Maksim Molokeev (Kemerovo State University);
Artem Oganov (Skoltech);
Vladimir Romanovsky (Tyumen State University);
Karem Mahmoud (Ural Federal University).

“I’m pleased to be included in this ranking, however, science and scientific work is the result of the efforts of the entire team… I hope we will continue producing strong scientific results, regardless of rankings or indices,” notes Anton Korobeynikov.

Rankings are not the goal, they are the imprint that meaningful, collaborative work leaves in the scientific community.

Citation Laureates (Clarivate) is “almost Nobel”

This is more a gallery of scientific greatness than ranking.

Every year, Clarivate identifies researchers whose work received more than 2,000 citations and are expected to be of Nobel Prize caliber, basing on citation impact, novelty, and expert analysis.

This distinction is truly exceptional. Out of over 64 million scholarly articles published since 1970, only around 11,000 have reached the 2,000-citation threshold. Among them, 465 scientists have been designated Citation Laureates since the program began in 2002. 89 of them — nearly 1 in 5 — won the Nobel Prize.

Recognition as a Citation Laureate precedes the Nobel by several years or even decades, showcasing the time it takes for transformative ideas to gain full acknowledgment.

However, 2024 brought an unprecedented case: two weeks after being named Citation Laureates, David Baker, John Jumper, and Demis Hassabis (AlphaFold, the revolutionary AI system for protein structure prediction) were awarded the Nobel Prize in Chemistry.

Top 2% Scientists (Scopus/Stanford) as the large influence map

This list includes over 100,000 researchers whose citation metrics place them within the top 2% of scientists in their specific subfield, even in “nanophotonics in 2D materials”, “computational immunology of viral escape” and other specialized niches.

Methodological strength of this list lies in context-aware normalization:

it distinguishes single and co-authorship, acknowledging leadership and conceptual contribution;
it accounts for co-authorship patterns, adjusting for field-specific norms (large collaborations in high-energy physics vs. small-team work in theoretical math);
it uses a composite indicator that discounts self-citations and emphasizes citation impact per author.

For each scientist, two profiles are published: career-long impact (from the start of publication activity), and single-year impact, making it possible to spotlight rising stars whose recent work is gaining rapid traction rather than only established leaders.

The entire dataset is available free of charge.

In 2025, over 1,000 Russian researchers appeared in the top 2%. This does not mean they are “better” or “worse” than those on Clarivate’s list; rather, the methodologies serve different purposes.

Comparison of three lists

Таблица

Criterion	Highly Cited Researchers	Citation Laureates	Top 2% Scientists
Data Source	Web of Science	Web of Science	Scopus
Time Frame	11 years	since 1970	career/1 year
Threshold	Top 1% most-cited papers	>2 000 citations	Top 2%, based on the c-score
Selection Method	citation count combined with expert verification	citation count combined with quality expertise	algorithmic calculation with normalization by fields
Primary Purpose	Identify researchers with sustained, high-impact influence	Highlight scientists with Nobel Prize–level breakthroughs	Provide a transparent benchmark of scholarly productivity and influence

How to use these lists?

For Early-Career Researchers
Just stepping onto the research path? These lists will help you identify scholars whose work consistently appears in top-tier rankings in your field. Often, these publications do something more than just report discoveries: they map out the key challenges, unresolved questions, and most promising directions for future work.

For graduate students & PhDs
Wondering how your contribution measures up on the global stage? Dive into the open Top 2% Scientists database (based on Scopus).

There, besides a single metric you will find:

your composite c-score, normalized for author position (first/last/solo),
citation impact excluding self-citations,
benchmarks with peers in your specific subfield.

This will help you answer multiple questions. Should I prioritize high-impact collaborations over solo work? Focus on deep, foundational studies rather than rapid-fire publications?

For Institutions & Research Centers
Institutions that consistently feature in global rankings and whose researchers maintain strong publication profiles in high-impact journals become magnets for talent.

Final Reminder: rankings are mirrors rather than milestones. Citation impact often lags years behind real breakthroughs. In humanities, law, or education, conventional citation-based metrics may profoundly underrepresent the true influence of publications. .

Anna Gelfand