Since the 1950s, citation impact has been the dominant metric by which science is quantitatively evaluated. But research contributions play distinct roles in the unfolding drama of scientific debate, agreement and advance, and institutions may value different kinds of advances. Computational power, access to citation data and an array of modeling techniques have given rise to a widening portfolio of metrics to extract different signals regarding their contribution. Here we unpack the complex, temporally evolving relationship between citation impact alongside novelty and disruption, two emerging measures that capture the degree to which science not only influences, but transforms later work. Novelty captures how research draws upon unusual combinations of prior work. Disruption captures how research comes to eclipse the prior work on which it builds, becoming recognized as a new scientific direction. We demonstrate that: 1) novel papers disrupt existing theories and expand the scientific frontier; 2) novel papers are more likely to become "sleeping beauties" and accumulate citation impact over the long run; 3) novelty can be reformulated as distance in journal embedding spaces to map the moving frontier of science. The evolution of embedding spaces over time reveals how yesterday's novelty forms today's scientific conventions, which condition the novelty--and surprise--of tomorrow's breakthroughs.
翻译:20世纪50年代以来,引言影响一直是科学定量评估的主要衡量标准。但研究贡献在科学辩论、协议和进步的演进中发挥着不同的作用,而机构则可能重视不同的进步。计算力、引证数据的获取和一系列模型技术导致一系列指标的扩大,以获取关于其贡献的不同信号。在这里,我们解开引用影响与新颖和混乱之间复杂的、时间演变中的关系,这两类新兴措施不仅反映了科学的影响程度,而且改变了后来的工作。新颖地捕捉了研究如何从以往工作的不同组合中吸取经验。干扰性地捕捉了研究如何掩盖以前的工作,并被公认为是新的科学方向。我们证明:1)新论文扰乱了现有的理论,扩大了科学前沿;2)新论文更有可能成为“沉睡的美景”和积累长期的引文影响;3)新事物可以被重新改写为期刊中隐蔽空间的距离,以绘制科学的前沿。嵌入空间的演变演变过程揭示了过去科学突破性、明天的突破性科学突破性、新颖性变化形式。