Materials Map

Discover the materials research landscape. Find experts, partners, networks.

  • About
  • Privacy Policy
  • Legal Notice
  • Contact

The Materials Map is an open tool for improving networking and interdisciplinary exchange within materials research. It enables cross-database search for cooperation and network partners and discovering of the research landscape.

The dashboard provides detailed information about the selected scientist, e.g. publications. The dashboard can be filtered and shows the relationship to co-authors in different diagrams. In addition, a link is provided to find contact information.

×

Materials Map under construction

The Materials Map is still under development. In its current state, it is only based on one single data source and, thus, incomplete and contains duplicates. We are working on incorporating new open data sources like ORCID to improve the quality and the timeliness of our data. We will update Materials Map as soon as possible and kindly ask for your patience.

To Graph

1.080 Topics available

To Map

977 Locations available

693.932 PEOPLE
693.932 People People

693.932 People

Show results for 693.932 people that are selected by your search filters.

←

Page 1 of 27758

→
←

Page 1 of 0

→
PeopleLocationsStatistics
Naji, M.
  • 2
  • 13
  • 3
  • 2025
Motta, Antonella
  • 8
  • 52
  • 159
  • 2025
Aletan, Dirar
  • 1
  • 1
  • 0
  • 2025
Mohamed, Tarek
  • 1
  • 7
  • 2
  • 2025
Ertürk, Emre
  • 2
  • 3
  • 0
  • 2025
Taccardi, Nicola
  • 9
  • 81
  • 75
  • 2025
Kononenko, Denys
  • 1
  • 8
  • 2
  • 2025
Petrov, R. H.Madrid
  • 46
  • 125
  • 1k
  • 2025
Alshaaer, MazenBrussels
  • 17
  • 31
  • 172
  • 2025
Bih, L.
  • 15
  • 44
  • 145
  • 2025
Casati, R.
  • 31
  • 86
  • 661
  • 2025
Muller, Hermance
  • 1
  • 11
  • 0
  • 2025
Kočí, JanPrague
  • 28
  • 34
  • 209
  • 2025
Šuljagić, Marija
  • 10
  • 33
  • 43
  • 2025
Kalteremidou, Kalliopi-ArtemiBrussels
  • 14
  • 22
  • 158
  • 2025
Azam, Siraj
  • 1
  • 3
  • 2
  • 2025
Ospanova, Alyiya
  • 1
  • 6
  • 0
  • 2025
Blanpain, Bart
  • 568
  • 653
  • 13k
  • 2025
Ali, M. A.
  • 7
  • 75
  • 187
  • 2025
Popa, V.
  • 5
  • 12
  • 45
  • 2025
Rančić, M.
  • 2
  • 13
  • 0
  • 2025
Ollier, Nadège
  • 28
  • 75
  • 239
  • 2025
Azevedo, Nuno Monteiro
  • 4
  • 8
  • 25
  • 2025
Landes, Michael
  • 1
  • 9
  • 2
  • 2025
Rignanese, Gian-Marco
  • 15
  • 98
  • 805
  • 2025

Merz, B.

  • Google
  • 1
  • 4
  • 187

in Cooperation with on an Cooperation-Score of 37%

Topics

Publications (1/1 displayed)

  • 2012HESS Opinions "More efforts and scientific rigour are needed to attribute trends in flood time series"187citations

Places of action

Chart of shared publication
Delgado, J.
1 / 3 shared
Hundecha, Y.
1 / 1 shared
Uhlemann, S.
1 / 1 shared
Vorogushyn, S.
1 / 1 shared
Chart of publication period
2012

Co-Authors (by relevance)

  • Delgado, J.
  • Hundecha, Y.
  • Uhlemann, S.
  • Vorogushyn, S.
OrganizationsLocationPeople

article

HESS Opinions "More efforts and scientific rigour are needed to attribute trends in flood time series"

  • Delgado, J.
  • Hundecha, Y.
  • Merz, B.
  • Uhlemann, S.
  • Vorogushyn, S.
Abstract

<jats:p>Abstract. The question whether the magnitude and frequency of floods have changed due to climate change or other drivers of change is of high interest. The number of flood trend studies is rapidly rising. When changes are detected, many studies link the identified change to the underlying causes, i.e. they attribute the changes in flood behaviour to certain drivers of change. We propose a hypothesis testing framework for trend attribution which consists of essential ingredients for a sound attribution: evidence of consistency, evidence of inconsistency, and provision of confidence statement. Further, we evaluate the current state-of-the-art of flood trend attribution. We assess how selected recent studies approach the attribution problem, and to which extent their attribution statements seem defendable. In our opinion, the current state of flood trend attribution is poor. Attribution statements are mostly based on qualitative reasoning or even speculation. Typically, the focus of flood trend studies is the detection of change, i.e. the statistical analysis of time series, and attribution is regarded as an appendix: (1) flood time series are analysed by means of trend tests, (2) if a significant change is detected, a hypothesis on the cause of change is given, and (3) explanations or published studies are sought which support the hypothesis. We believe that we need a change in perspective and more scientific rigour: detection should be seen as an integral part of the more challenging attribution problem, and detection and attribution should be placed in a sound hypothesis testing framework.</jats:p>

Topics
  • impedance spectroscopy