Profile
Statistics

Xiqing Wang


Nanotek Instruments, Inc. (2011 - current)
Oak Ridge National Laboratory (2007-2010)
University of California Riverside (2001-2006)
Bio

Xiqing Wang received BS and MS from Fudan University, Shanghai, China and a PhD from University of California Riverside in 2006, all in Chemistry. He was a postdoctoral researcher at Oak Ridge National Laboratory working on soft-templated mesoporous carbons. Since 2011, he joined Nanotek Instruments, Inc. as a Sr. Materials Scientist.

Current research interests: 1. Nanoporous materials 2. Nanostructured carbon materials, e.g., graphene 3. Energy storage (supercapacitors, Li-ion batteries, Li-S batteries)

Research Fields

Chemical Sciences

Editorial Board Memberships

Xiqing is not currently contributing as an editor for any journal or publisher.

Pre Publication Reviews

Showing of  

Your statistics are calculated based on the information you have submitted to Publons.
Read more about them here.

Compare your statistics to those of any research field on Publons using the form below. Leaving the form blank will compare your statistics to all research fields on Publons.


Reviews

97

Reviews (last 12 months)

7

Reviews (average per year)

10

Merit

308

Openness

0.0%

Review to Publication ratio

1.9:1


Journal Impact Factors of journals reviewed for

The distribution of the Journal Impact Factors of journals Xiqing Wang has reviewed for.

Xiqing Wang

All fields reviewers

Total reviews over time

A cumulative record of Xiqing Wang's total number of reviews.

Reviews per month

The total number of reviews performed by Xiqing Wang each month.

Average review length

The average number of words per review compared to the average of All fields reviewers and the average of reviewers at affiliated institutions.

Note: only reviews with associated content are included in the graph below and where content is present we can not guarantee that it is complete or truly the content of the review.

Weekly review punchcard

The distribution of days that reviews were performed on, compared to All fields reviewers and reviewers at affiliated institutions.