I suspect that the most influential string research will now tend to be done in places where there is a strong nonstring quantum gravity group---so string and nonstring QG people share offices, meet at seminars and at coffeeroom etc. Places where string and nonstring research are on more or less equal footing---and where graduate students have a choice---are Potsdam, Utrecht, Perimeter, and Penn State. That's my hunch. So let's TEST the idea with a little race. Let's take two stringy papers published in 2007 and watch their citation counts. On the 'mixed-bet' side, here is one published in Journal of Statistical Mechanics in 2007 and was by some Potsdam and Utrecht folks http://www.citebase.org/abstract?id=oai:arXiv.org:hep-th/0610251 http://www.slac.stanford.edu/spires/find/hep/www?eprint=hep-th/0610251 The authors are Beisert, Eden, and Staudacher. On the 'monopoly' side, here is one that a string grad student recently told me could be the first "field-changing" paper since Maldacena 1998. It came out in Journal of HEP in 2007 and is by some Princeton and Harvard folks. http://www.citebase.org/abstract?id=oai:arXiv.org:hep-th/0703281 http://www.slac.stanford.edu/spires/find/hep/www?eprint=hep-th/0703281 The authors are Intriligator, Seifert, and Shih. To start them off more or less equal, let's only count citations since the beginning of 2007. If anyone has some other stringy paper published in 2007 that you think we should watch, from either a 'mixed' or a 'monopoly' department, let me know. My idea, that I want to test in a roughandready informal way, is that nonstring QG people are good for stringies to be around probably because it helps keep them in touch with reality and the classic priorities of empirical science (but there might be other reasons I haven't thought of). There are also some other signs of the times we could be watching as well, but here's one for starters. These are just informal indicators and don't rigorously prove anything, but they could serve as straws in the wind. Beisert started the year with a dozen or so cites, so I'll determine that and deduct it from their count---only want to tally cites since start of 2007.