Pick two researchers. Every attack is one of their real publications, played back in the order they were published. A paper's citation count sets how hard it hits, and the journal it appeared in scales that further — a landmark paper in a top venue lands a critical hit; a quiet one barely registers.
Books and chapters are thrown, reviews become flurries, datasets rain down. The winner is decided by a single power score combining h-index, total citations, publication count and recent impact. The drama is choreographed, but the arithmetic is real — the higher score always wins.
Data comes from OpenAlex, a free, open catalogue of the world's research.
This is a joke, and it should be read as one. It uses only public bibliometric data about researchers — the same numbers on any university profile page. Nothing is invented: no fabricated quotes, no made-up social media, and nothing implying anything about anyone's research integrity.
A "power score" is not a measure of a scholar's worth. Citation counts are a poor and biased proxy for research quality — they favour older researchers, larger fields, English-language work and certain disciplines. Please do not use this to make any decision about a real person.
Provided as-is, for entertainment, with no warranty and no liability accepted for accuracy or for any use made of it. Records may be incomplete or wrong; that's the database, not the person. If you're a researcher featured here and would rather not be, that's entirely fair — nothing is stored, and closing the tab removes it.