double blind peer-review in games
Clicks: 96
ID: 203023
2015
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This
article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score —
reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
Reader Engagement
Steady Performance
28.5
/100
96 views
9 readers
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
SteadyRanked #23 of 27 articles by views in journal of macromolecular science, part c
Most read
Least read
Bar heights use a square-root scale.
Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet mintedCreate a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.
5
SUSD
one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
Pre-publication peer-review forms the basis for how scholarly journals assess whether an articleis suitable for publication. [...]
Abstract Quality Issue:
This abstract appears to be incomplete or contains metadata (16 words).
Try re-searching for a better abstract.
| Reference Key |
berger2015gamesdouble
Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using
SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
|
|---|---|
| Authors | ;Ulrich Berger;Martyn Rittman |
| Journal | journal of macromolecular science, part c |
| Year | 2015 |
| DOI |
10.3390/g7010001
|
| URL | |
| Keywords |
Citations
No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org
Comments
No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.