World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!
Daniel C. Thompson

Daniel C. Thompson

D-Index & Metrics

Mathematics

D-Index
36
Citations
4397
World Ranking
2686
National Ranking
177

Daniel C. Thompson publication distribution in Mathematics in 2026

The chart shows the distribution of publications by all Research.com ranked scientists in the field of Mathematics in 2026. The highlighted bar marks where Daniel C. Thompson sits on this spectrum.

42–46 publications: 3 scientists 47–51 publications: 5 scientists 52–56 publications: 7 scientists 57–61 publications: 20 scientists 62–66 publications: 14 scientists 67–71 publications: 25 scientists 72–76 publications: 19 scientists 77–81 publications: 35 scientists 82–86 publications: 50 scientists 87–91 publications: 60 scientists 92–96 publications: 86 scientists 97–101 publications: 84 scientists 102–106 publications: 83 scientists 107–111 publications: 90 scientists 112–116 publications: 99 scientists 117–121 publications: 90 scientists 122–126 publications: 91 scientists 127–131 publications: 109 scientists 132–136 publications: 110 scientists 137–141 publications: 98 scientists 142–146 publications: 112 scientists 147–151 publications: 102 scientists 152–156 publications: 88 scientists 157–161 publications: 106 scientists 162–166 publications: 83 scientists 167–171 publications: 102 scientists 172–176 publications: 77 scientists 177–181 publications: 81 scientists 182–186 publications: 78 scientists 187–191 publications: 71 scientists 192–196 publications: 92 scientists 197–201 publications: 64 scientists 202–206 publications: 69 scientists 207–211 publications: 64 scientists 212–216 publications: 62 scientists 217–221 publications: 58 scientists 222–226 publications: 53 scientists 227–231 publications: 50 scientists 232–236 publications: 46 scientists 237–241 publications: 46 scientists 242–246 publications: 46 scientists 247–251 publications: 43 scientists 252–256 publications: 29 scientists 257–261 publications: 45 scientists 262–266 publications: 30 scientists 267–271 publications: 33 scientists 272–276 publications: 34 scientists 277–281 publications: 30 scientists 282–286 publications: 31 scientists 287–291 publications: 21 scientists 292–296 publications: 34 scientists 297–301 publications: 26 scientists 302–306 publications: 10 scientists 307–311 publications: 17 scientists 312–316 publications: 23 scientists 317–321 publications: 13 scientists 322–326 publications: 16 scientists 327–331 publications: 26 scientists 332–336 publications: 13 scientists 337–341 publications: 13 scientists 342–346 publications: 16 scientists 347–351 publications: 17 scientists 352–356 publications: 12 scientists 357–361 publications: 18 scientists 362–366 publications: 18 scientists 367–371 publications: 9 scientists 372–376 publications: 11 scientists 377–381 publications: 8 scientists 382–386 publications: 8 scientists 387–391 publications: 9 scientists 392–396 publications: 9 scientists 397–401 publications: 8 scientists 402–406 publications: 11 scientists 407–411 publications: 6 scientists 412–416 publications: 6 scientists 417–421 publications: 9 scientists 422–426 publications: 8 scientists 427–431 publications: 5 scientists 432–436 publications: 8 scientists 437–441 publications: 8 scientists 442–446 publications: 4 scientists 447–451 publications: 4 scientists 452–456 publications: 4 scientists 457–461 publications: 2 scientists 462–466 publications: 2 scientists 467–471 publications: 4 scientists 472–476 publications: 3 scientists 477–481 publications: 3 scientists 482–486 publications: 6 scientists 487–491 publications: 3 scientists 492–496 publications: 5 scientists 497–501 publications: 5 scientists 502–506 publications: 1 scientists 507–511 publications: 6 scientists 512–516 publications: 4 scientists 517–521 publications: 1 scientists 522–526 publications: 3 scientists 527–531 publications: 1 scientists 532–536 publications: 4 scientists 537+ publications: 100 scientists
42 publications 537+

This scientist: 56 publications — 1st percentile

1% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 537 publications or more.

Daniel C. Thompson D-index placement in Mathematics in 2026

The chart shows the D-index (discipline H-index) distribution of Mathematics scientists ranked by Research.com in 2026. The highlighted bar marks where Daniel C. Thompson sits on this spectrum.

30 D-Index: 174 scientists 31 D-Index: 151 scientists 32 D-Index: 174 scientists 33 D-Index: 117 scientists 34 D-Index: 136 scientists 35 D-Index: 127 scientists 36 D-Index: 145 scientists 37 D-Index: 153 scientists 38 D-Index: 150 scientists 39 D-Index: 150 scientists 40 D-Index: 138 scientists 41 D-Index: 136 scientists 42 D-Index: 93 scientists 43 D-Index: 108 scientists 44 D-Index: 115 scientists 45 D-Index: 112 scientists 46 D-Index: 103 scientists 47 D-Index: 75 scientists 48 D-Index: 59 scientists 49 D-Index: 67 scientists 50 D-Index: 60 scientists 51 D-Index: 57 scientists 52 D-Index: 59 scientists 53 D-Index: 62 scientists 54 D-Index: 60 scientists 55 D-Index: 50 scientists 56 D-Index: 42 scientists 57 D-Index: 54 scientists 58 D-Index: 50 scientists 59 D-Index: 42 scientists 60 D-Index: 41 scientists 61 D-Index: 35 scientists 62 D-Index: 40 scientists 63 D-Index: 21 scientists 64 D-Index: 31 scientists 65 D-Index: 27 scientists 66 D-Index: 29 scientists 67 D-Index: 19 scientists 68 D-Index: 25 scientists 69 D-Index: 17 scientists 70 D-Index: 18 scientists 71 D-Index: 12 scientists 72 D-Index: 14 scientists 73 D-Index: 13 scientists 74 D-Index: 18 scientists 75 D-Index: 9 scientists 76 D-Index: 11 scientists 77 D-Index: 10 scientists 78 D-Index: 9 scientists 79 D-Index: 16 scientists 80 D-Index: 12 scientists 81 D-Index: 10 scientists 82 D-Index: 5 scientists 83 D-Index: 5 scientists 84 D-Index: 13 scientists 85 D-Index: 6 scientists 86+ D-Index: 99 scientists
30 D-Index 86+

This scientist: 36 D-Index — 29th percentile

29% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 86 D-Index or more.

Overview

Daniel C. Thompson is a researcher affiliated with Swansea University in the United Kingdom. Their work primarily spans the fields of Physics and Astronomy, with significant contributions to Mathematics. The main subfields of their study include Nuclear and High Energy Physics, Mathematical Physics, Geometry and Topology, Statistical and Nonlinear Physics, and Algebra and Number Theory.

Their research topics reflect a focused engagement with complex theoretical areas, including Black Holes and Theoretical Physics, Algebraic Structures and Combinatorial Models, Homotopy and Cohomology in Algebraic Topology, Nonlinear Waves and Solitons, Advanced Topics in Algebra, Quantum Chromodynamics and Particle Interactions, as well as studies in Particle Physics both theoretical and experimental.

Daniel C. Thompson has a number of recent publications across notable venues. Selected papers include:

  • E6(6) exceptional Drinfel'd algebras, 2021, Journal of High Energy Physics
  • Generalised cosets, 2020, Journal of High Energy Physics
  • Resurgence in the bi-Yang-Baxter model, 2021, Nuclear Physics B
  • Unifying approaches to chiral bosons, 2023, Physical review. D/Physical review. D.
  • Integrable deformation of ℂPn and generalised Kähler geometry, 2020, Journal of High Energy Physics

The scientist frequently publishes in venues such as arXiv (Cornell University), Journal of High Energy Physics, Physical Review D, International Journal of Electronic Governance, and Nuclear Physics B.

Collaboration plays a significant role in Daniel C. Thompson's work. Frequent co-authors include:

  • Lewis T. Cole
  • Alex S. Arvanitakis
  • Saskia Demulder
  • Ryan A. Cullinan
  • Ben Hoare

Overall, the research profile of Daniel C. Thompson illustrates active engagement with high energy theoretical physics and related mathematical frameworks through contributions to various specialized domains and frequent scholarly collaborations.

Best Publications

  • Duality Symmetric String and M-Theory

    David S. Berman;Daniel C. Thompson

  • The gauge structure of generalised diffeomorphisms

    David S. Berman;Martin Cederwall;Axel Kleinschmidt;Daniel C. Thompson;Daniel C. Thompson

  • On non-abelian T-dual geometries with Ramond fluxes

    Konstadinos Sfetsos;Daniel C. Thompson

  • Duality invariant M-theory: gauged supergravities and Scherk-Schwarz reductions

    David S. Berman;Edvard T. Musaev;Daniel C. Thompson

  • Generalised integrable λ- and η-deformations and their relation

    Konstantinos Sfetsos;Konstantinos Sfetsos;Konstantinos Siampos;Daniel C. Thompson

  • Non-abelian T-duality, Ramond fields and coset geometries

    Yolanda Lozano;Eoin Ó. Colgáin;Konstadinos Sfetsos;Daniel C. Thompson

  • Non-Abelian T-duality and the AdS/CFT correspondence: New N=1 backgrounds

    Georgios Itsios;Georgios Itsios;Carlos Núñez;Konstadinos Sfetsos;Konstadinos Sfetsos;Daniel C. Thompson;Daniel C. Thompson

  • Spacetimes for \lambda-deformations

    Konstantinos Sfetsos;Daniel C. Thompson

  • Background field equations for the duality symmetric string

    David S. Berman;Neil B. Copland;Daniel C. Thompson

  • Spacetimes for λ-deformations

    Konstantinos Sfetsos;Daniel C. Thompson

  • Doubled aspects of generalised dualities and integrable deformations

    Saskia Demulder;Saskia Demulder;Falk Hassler;Falk Hassler;Falk Hassler;Daniel C. Thompson;Daniel C. Thompson

  • Aspects of multiple membranes

    David S. Berman;Laura C. Tadrowski;Daniel C. Thompson

  • Integrable λ-deformations: squashing coset CFTs and AdS5 × S 5

    Saskia Demulder;Konstantinos Sfetsos;Daniel C. Thompson

  • Duality Invariance: From M-theory to Double Field Theory

    Daniel C. Thompson

  • Poisson-Lie U-duality in exceptional field theory

    Emanuel Malek;Daniel C. Thompson;Daniel C. Thompson

  • On non-Abelian T-duality and new N=1 backgrounds

    Georgios Itsios;Georgios Itsios;Carlos Núñez;Konstadinos Sfetsos;Konstadinos Sfetsos;Daniel C. Thompson;Daniel C. Thompson

  • Membranes with a boundary

    David S. Berman;Daniel C. Thompson

  • Classical and quantum aspects of Yang-Baxter Wess-Zumino models

    Saskia Demulder;Sibylle Driezen;Alexander Sevrin;Alexander Sevrin;Daniel C. Thompson;Daniel C. Thompson

  • Integrability and non-Integrability in N=2 SCFTs and their Holographic Backgrounds

    Carlos Nunez;Dibakar Roychowdhury;Daniel C. Thompson

  • Duality Symmetric Strings, Dilatons and O(d,d) Effective Actions

    David S. Berman;Daniel C. Thompson

  • Boundary conditions for interacting membranes

    David S. Berman;Malcolm J. Perry;Ergin Sezgin;Daniel C. Thompson

  • Integrable $\lambda$-deformations: Squashing Coset CFTs and $AdS_5 imes S^5$

    Saskia Demulder;Konstantinos Sfetsos;Daniel C. Thompson

Frequent Co-Authors

Jan Zaanen
Jan Zaanen Leiden University
Ronan A Lyons
Ronan A Lyons Swansea University
Ben Hoare
Ben Hoare Durham University
James F. White
James F. White Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey
Mathew P. White
Mathew P. White University of Vienna
Mark J. Nieuwenhuijsen
Mark J. Nieuwenhuijsen Barcelona Institute for Global Health
Benedict W. Wheeler
Benedict W. Wheeler University of Exeter

If you think any of the details on this page are incorrect, let us know.

Report an issue

We appreciate your kind effort to assist us to improve this page, it would be helpful providing us with as much detail as possible in the text box below:

Related Online Degrees & Career Pathways

Students interested in Mathematics often explore related fields like business and data analytics to expand their career opportunities. For those aiming to combine math skills with leadership, understanding how can you transfer mba programs work is essential. This knowledge helps students choose flexible MBA options that accommodate their prior credits and experience.

Another popular pathway is pursuing a specialized data-focused degree. A data analytics masters programs provide students with quantitative and computational skills highly valued across industries, bridging the gap between mathematics and real-world applications.

For students seeking quicker or less competitive business degrees, exploring the easiest mba programs can offer a practical route. These programs typically have more accessible admission criteria without compromising the quality of education.

Furthermore, many professionals prefer the convenience of remote learning. Comparing options in easy online mba programs can reveal affordable and flexible formats suitable for those balancing work, study, and personal commitments.

Best Scientists Citing Daniel C. Thompson

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles