Indexed in Journament

bioinspiration & biomimetics

ISSN 1748-3190· EN

Certificate of Indexing
Login or register to claim ownership or editorship of this journal.
30.5 / 100
Journament Score
Poor
Ranked #18,790 of 29,324 scored journals (34,008 indexed)
14 Articles
Scores higher than 35.9% of scored journals
050100
The Journament Score is computed from platform statistics — reader engagement, accessibility, publication timeliness, keyword breadth, community impact and content distribution — into a single 0–100 figure, recalculated as new articles and metadata are indexed. Dimensions that cannot be measured for this journal are excluded rather than estimated. It is independent of the paid AI Quality Analysis, which never affects this score or the ranking. Full methodology →

About This Journal

Short Name bioinspir biomim
Abbreviated Name bioinspir biomim
ISSN 1748-3190

Quality Profile

6 of 12 dimensions measured
Engagement 30.4
Timeliness 0.0
Diversity 37.4
Innovation 15.0
Community Impact 5.7
Content Distribution 83.0
This journal Average of scored journals
Platform statistics — the free Journament Score AI Quality Analysis — separate paid product, ranks nothing

6 of the 12 dimensions could not be measured for this journal. They are left out entirely rather than plotted as zero, and with 6 dimensions measured there is not enough of a profile to draw as a shape.

Show the numbers
Dimension This journal Corpus average
Engagement 30.4 30.4
Accessibility — 19.1
Timeliness 0.0 9.2
Diversity 37.4 25.8
Innovation 15.0 27.4
Community Impact 5.7 7.8
Content Distribution 83.0 88.6
Content Quality — 55.5
Ethics & Transparency — 40.2
Editorial Standards — 33.4
Publication Regularity — 53.2
Geographic Reach — 30.8

Publications Per Year

Articles (14)

2008
A computational study of the aerodynamic performance of a dragonfly wing section in gliding flight.
Vargas, Abel;Mittal, Rajat;Dong, Haibo;
Vol. 3 , No. 2 , pp. 026004
342 views DOI Abstract
2014
A theoretical analysis of pitch stability during gliding in flying snakes.
Jafari, Farid;Ross, Shane D;Vlachos, Pavlos P;Socha, John J;
Vol. 9 , No. 2 , pp. 025014
340 views DOI Abstract
2019
Experimental study of a passive control of airfoil lift using bioinspired feather flap.
Wang, Longjun;Alam, Md Mahbub;Zhou, Yu;
Vol. 14 , pp. 066005
303 views DOI Abstract
2018
Enhancement of aerodynamic performance of a heaving airfoil using synthetic-jet based active flow control.
Wang, Chenglei;Tang, Hui;
Vol. 13 , No. 4 , pp. 046005
298 views DOI Abstract
2020
A swarm design paradigm unifying swarm behaviors using minimalistic communication.
Varughese, Joshua Cherian;Hornischer, Hannes;Zahadat, Payam;Thenius, Ronald;Wotawa, Franz;Schmickl, Thomas;
285 views DOI Abstract
2015
An improved quasi-steady aerodynamic model for insect wings that considers movement of the center of pressure.
Han, Jong-Seob;Kim, Joong-Kwan;Chang, Jo Won;Han, Jae-Hung;
Vol. 10 , No. 4 , pp. 046014
285 views DOI Abstract
2016
Biomimetic cellular metals-using hierarchical structuring for energy absorption.
Bührig-Polaczek, A;Fleck, C;Speck, T;Schüler, P;Fischer, S F;Caliaro, M;Thielen, M;
Vol. 11 , No. 4 , pp. 045002
274 views DOI Abstract
2018
Corrigendum: An analytical model and scaling of chordwise flexible flapping wings in forward flight (2016 Bioinspir. and Biomim. 12 016006).
Kodali, Deepa;Kang, Chang-Kwon;
272 views DOI Abstract
2019
Determination of spatial fidelity required to accurately mimic the flight dynamics of a bat.
Windes, Peter;Tafti, Danesh;Mueller, Rolf;
255 views DOI Abstract
2016
Aerodynamic parameters from distributed heterogeneous CNT hair sensors with a feedforward neural network.
Magar, Kaman Thapa;Reich, Gregory W;Kondash, Corey;Slinker, Keith;Pankonien, Alexander M;Baur, Jeffery W;Smyers, Brian;
Vol. 11 , No. 6 , pp. 066006
249 views Abstract
2020
A swarm design paradigm unifying swarm behaviors using minimalistic communication.
Varughese, Joshua Cherian;Hornischer, Hannes;Zahadat, Payam;Thenius, Ronald;Wotawa, Franz;Schmickl, Thomas;
285 views DOI Abstract
2019
Determination of spatial fidelity required to accurately mimic the flight dynamics of a bat.
Windes, Peter;Tafti, Danesh;Mueller, Rolf;
255 views DOI Abstract
2019
Experimental study of a passive control of airfoil lift using bioinspired feather flap.
Wang, Longjun;Alam, Md Mahbub;Zhou, Yu;
Vol. 14 , pp. 066005
303 views DOI Abstract
2018
Classifying vortex wakes using neural networks.
Colvert, Brendan;Alsalman, Mohamad;Kanso, Eva;
Vol. 13 , No. 2 , pp. 025003
188 views DOI Abstract
2018
Enhancement of aerodynamic performance of a heaving airfoil using synthetic-jet based active flow control.
Wang, Chenglei;Tang, Hui;
Vol. 13 , No. 4 , pp. 046005
298 views DOI Abstract
2018
Corrigendum: An analytical model and scaling of chordwise flexible flapping wings in forward flight (2016 Bioinspir. and Biomim. 12 016006).
Kodali, Deepa;Kang, Chang-Kwon;
272 views DOI Abstract
2018
Numerical investigation of low-noise airfoils inspired by the down coat of owls.
Bodling, Andrew;Sharma, Anupam;
Vol. 14 , No. 1 , pp. 016013
162 views DOI Abstract
2017
On the dynamics of perching manoeuvres with low-aspect-ratio planforms.
Fernando, J N;Rival, D E;
Vol. 12 , No. 4 , pp. 046007
157 views DOI Abstract
2016
Biomimetic cellular metals-using hierarchical structuring for energy absorption.
Bührig-Polaczek, A;Fleck, C;Speck, T;Schüler, P;Fischer, S F;Caliaro, M;Thielen, M;
Vol. 11 , No. 4 , pp. 045002
274 views DOI Abstract
2016
Aerodynamic parameters from distributed heterogeneous CNT hair sensors with a feedforward neural network.
Magar, Kaman Thapa;Reich, Gregory W;Kondash, Corey;Slinker, Keith;Pankonien, Alexander M;Baur, Jeffery W;Smyers, Brian;
Vol. 11 , No. 6 , pp. 066006
249 views Abstract
Journament Score
30.5/100 · Poor
Ranked #18,790 of 29,324 scored
(34,008 journals indexed)
Platform Statistics
AI Quality Analysis
Separate paid analysis — does not affect ranking.
Journament

Overall Quality Score

30.5/100

Tier: Poor

The Journament Overall Quality Score is a comprehensive metric that evaluates academic journals across multiple dimensions including engagement, accessibility, diversity, innovation, and community impact.

This score helps researchers, institutions, and publishers understand the holistic quality and impact of a journal beyond traditional metrics.

Engagement Score

30.4/100

Measures user interactions, views, citations, and community involvement with this journal's content.

Higher engagement scores indicate that the journal's content is actively being read, cited, and discussed within the academic community.

Accessibility Score

Not yet measured

Evaluates how easily researchers can access journal content, including open access availability, ISSN registration, and indexing.

This metric considers factors such as paywalls, open access policies, and availability across different academic databases and search engines.

Diversity Score

37.4/100

Assesses geographic and institutional diversity of authors, editorial board composition, and topic breadth.

A diverse journal publishes work from various geographic regions, institutions, and covers a broad range of topics within its field.

Innovation Score

15.0/100

Evaluates research novelty, interdisciplinary work, and emerging topics based on AI analysis of article abstracts.

This score reflects how much the journal publishes cutting-edge research, explores new methodologies, and bridges different academic disciplines.

Community Impact Score

5.7/100

Measures scholarly contribution and real-world applications of published research.

This metric evaluates how the journal's research translates into practical applications, policy changes, and benefits to society beyond academia.

Timeliness Score

0.0/100

Evaluates recent publication activity, publication frequency, and currency of research topics.

Higher scores indicate consistent publishing schedules and timely coverage of current research trends.

Content Distribution

83.0/100

Measures how evenly reader attention spreads across the journal's articles, using the Gini coefficient of article clicks.

Higher scores mean readership is distributed across many articles rather than concentrated on one or two.

Ethics & Transparency Score

Not yet measured

Research Integrity (10% weight)

Assesses COPE standards compliance, ethical considerations in research, transparency in methodologies, and reproducibility practices.

This metric ensures the journal maintains high ethical standards and promotes transparent, trustworthy research.

Content Quality Score

Not yet measured

Academic Rigor (20% weight) + Methodology Quality (12%)

Evaluates research methodology soundness, statistical rigor, theoretical framework strength, appropriateness of research methods, data quality, and clarity & readability.

This comprehensive metric ensures published research meets the highest academic standards.

Editorial Diversity Score

Not yet measured

Author Diversity + Interdisciplinary Value (8%)

Measures geographic diversity of authors, institutional variety, editorial board composition, and cross-disciplinary connections.

Diverse editorial teams bring varied perspectives and reduce bias in academic publishing.

Publication Regularity Score

Not yet measured

Assesses consistency of publication schedule, frequency stability, and predictable output patterns.

Regular publication schedules indicate reliable journal operations and consistent workflow management.

Geographic Reach Score

Not yet measured

Evaluates international author representation, global readership distribution, and cross-border research collaboration.

Wide geographic reach indicates global impact and international recognition of the journal's research.