Chinese Automation Congress (CAC) (CAC)

This comprehensive ranking presents a curated list of scientific conferences within the domain of Engineering and Technology. Developed by Research.com—a distinguished resource recognized for providing trusted data and in-depth analysis on scientific contributions across all major academic fields since 2014—the ranking offers an authoritative perspective for scholars, practitioners, and institutions worldwide.

The rank of each conference is determined by a unique bibliometric score, meticulously formulated by Research.com. This score is derived from the estimated h-index and the number of leading scientists who have participated in each conference over the previous three years, thereby reflecting both the academic influence and the caliber of contributors associated with each event. Impact Score values presented here were gathered on 2024-11-27, ensuring that the ranking leverages the most current and relevant data available.

The evaluation process entailed an exhaustive review of more than 2,262 conferences, selected following a rigorous inspection protocol. This process encompassed a careful analysis of over 26,934 scientific documents published during the last three years by 9,385 highly respected and accomplished scientists in Engineering and Technology. This depth of research and comprehensive vetting underscore the reliability and credibility of the ranking, reflecting the extraordinary commitment of Research.com experts to precision and thoroughness.

For a detailed overview of the methodology and the specific criteria applied in computing the ranking scores, please consult our Methodology Page.

Papers citation over time

A key indicator for each conference is its effectiveness in reaching other researchers with the papers published at that venue.

The chart below presents the interquartile range (first quartile 25%, median 50% and third quartile 75%) of the number of citations of articles over time.

Top authors and change over time

The top authors publishing at Chinese Automation Congress (based on the number of publications) are:

• Chenghui Zhang (29 papers) published 7 papers at the last edition, 5 more than at the previous edition,
• Zhiqiang Long (25 papers) published 10 papers at the last edition, 1 less than at the previous edition,
• Zhang Ren (22 papers) published 11 papers at the last edition, 1 more than at the previous edition,
• Qingdong Li (19 papers) published 10 papers at the last edition, 2 more than at the previous edition,
• Xiwang Dong (19 papers) published 10 papers at the last edition, 2 more than at the previous edition.

The overall trend for top authors publishing at this conference is outlined below. The chart shows the number of publications at each edition of the conference for top authors.

Top affiliations and change over time

Only papers with recognized affiliations are considered

The top affiliations publishing at Chinese Automation Congress (based on the number of publications) are:

• Shandong University (277 papers) published 23 papers at the last edition, 5 more than at the previous edition,
• National University of Defense Technology (169 papers) published 49 papers at the last edition, 21 more than at the previous edition,
• Beihang University (153 papers) published 42 papers at the last edition, 3 more than at the previous edition,
• Chinese Academy of Sciences (147 papers) published 32 papers at the last edition, 6 less than at the previous edition,
• Shandong University of Science and Technology (127 papers) published 37 papers at the last edition, 18 more than at the previous edition.

The overall trend for top affiliations publishing at this conference is outlined below. The chart shows the number of publications at each edition of the conference for top affiliations.

Publication chance based on affiliation

The publication chance index shows the ratio of articles published by the best research institutions at the conference edition to all articles published within that conference. The best research institutions were selected based on the largest number of articles published during all editions of the conference.

The chart below presents the percentage ratio of articles from top institutions (based on their ranking of total papers).Top affiliations were grouped by their rank into the following tiers: top 1-10, top 11-20, top 21-50, and top 51+. Only articles with a recognized affiliation are considered.

During the most recent 2020 edition, 10.48% of publications had an unrecognized affiliation. Out of the publications with recognized affiliations, 24.38% were posted by at least one author from the top 10 institutions publishing at the conference. Another 19.09% included authors affiliated with research institutions from the top 11-20 affiliations. Institutions from the 21-50 range included 28.71% of all publications and 27.83% were from other institutions.

Returning Authors Index

A very common phenomenon observed among researchers publishing scientific articles is the intentional selection of conferences they have already attended in the past. In particular, it is worth analyzing the case when the authors participate in the same conference from year to year.

The Returning Authors Index presented below illustrates the ratio of authors who participated in both a given as well as the previous edition of the conference in relation to all participants in a given year.

Returning Institution Index

The graph below shows the Returning Institution Index, illustrating the ratio of institutions that participated in both a given and the previous edition of the conference in relation to all affiliations present in a given year.

The experience to innovation index

Our experience to innovation index was created to show a cross-section of the experience level of authors publishing at a conference. The index includes the authors publishing at the last edition of a conference, grouped by total number of publications throughout their academic career (P) and the total number of citations of these publications ever received (C).

The group intervals were selected empirically to best show the diversity of the authors' experiences, their labels were selected as a convenience, not as judgment. The authors were divided into the following groups:

• Novice - P < 5 or C < 25 (the number of publications less than 5 or the number of citations less than 25),
• Competent - P < 10 or C < 100 (the number of publications less than 10 or the number of citations less than 100),
• Experienced - P < 25 or C < 625 (the number of publications less than 25 or the number of citations less than 625),
• Master - P < 50 or C < 2500 (the number of publications less than 50 or the number of citations less than 2500),
• Star - P ≥ 50 and C ≥ 2500 (both the number of publications greater than 50 and the number of citations greater than 2500).

The chart below illustrates experience levels of first authors in cases of publications with multiple authors.