Materials Research Innovations

Our screening does not flag Materials Research Innovations. That is not a guarantee of quality — it means the venue is not on Beall's archive (frozen since 2017) and does not match our name-pattern heuristic. It is listed in Scopus, which is a positive signal.

Per our venue index, Materials Research Innovations appears in: Scopus. Index membership changes over time — confirm on the index's own site before relying on it.

Papers in Materials Research Innovations are cited about 2.3 times each within two years of publication, and Scimago places it in Q3, with an h-index of 63. Those are the open equivalents: the Clarivate Journal Impact Factor is a proprietary metric we neither compute nor license, so we show the two-year citation rate and Scimago quartile instead — they answer the same question of how heavily the journal is cited. A citation rate is a property of a field as much as of a journal.

In the Scimago Journal Rank 2025 edition, Materials Research Innovations is Q3 in all 4 of its subject categories. By category: Mechanics of Materials: Q3, #247 of 412; Condensed Matter Physics: Q3, #299 of 443; Mechanical Engineering: Q3, #407 of 696; Materials Science (miscellaneous): Q3, #448 of 700. Quartiles split the journals in a subject category into four equal groups by SJR, so Q1 is the most-cited quarter and Q4 the least; Materials Research Innovations is cited about 2.3 times per paper over two years, with an h-index of 63.

The Web of Science quartile comes from Clarivate's Journal Citation Reports (JCR), a proprietary product we neither license nor compute — so we cannot state a JCR quartile for Materials Research Innovations. The open equivalent is its Scimago quartile, Q3, derived from Scopus citation data. Because JCR ranks against Web of Science and Scimago against Scopus, the two can differ, so check Clarivate's site directly if you need the JCR quartile specifically.

Our index records its access status as "subscription". Where this is derived from publisher-level signals rather than works-level data it is a heuristic, so confirm on the journal's own site — particularly if an article processing charge matters to you.