We develop a systematic approach to measuring combinatorial innovation in the biomedical sciences based upon the comprehensive ontology of Medical Subject Headings (MeSH). This approach leverages an expert-defined knowledge ontology that features both breadth (27,875 MeSH analyzed across 25 million articles indexed by PubMed from 1902 onwards) and depth (we differentiate between Major and Minor MeSH terms to identify differences in the knowledge network representation constructed from primary research topics only). With this level of uniform resolution we differentiate between three different modes of innovation contributing to the combinatorial knowledge network: (i) conceptual innovation associated with the emergence of new concepts and entities (measured as the entry of new MeSH); and (ii) recombinant innovation, associated with the emergence of new combinations, which itself consists of two types: peripheral (i.e., combinations involving new knowledge) and core (combinations comprised of pre-existing knowledge only). Another relevant question we seek to address is whether examining triplet and quartet combinations, in addition to the more traditional dyadic or pairwise combinations, provide evidence of any new phenomena associated with higher-order combinations. Analysis of the size, growth, and coverage of combinatorial innovation yield results that are largely independent of the combination order, thereby suggesting that the common dyadic approach is sufficient to capture essential phenomena. Our main results are twofold: (a) despite the persistent addition of new MeSH terms, the network is densifying over time meaning that scholars are increasingly exploring and realizing the vast space of all knowledge combinations; and (b) conceptual innovation is increasingly concentrated within single research articles, a harbinger of the recent paradigm shift towards convergence science.
翻译:我们根据医学主题标题(MesHH)综合理论学,制定了一套系统的方法,以衡量生物医学科学的组合创新。 这种方法利用了一种专家界定的知识肿瘤学,既包括广度(27 875 MeSH),包括1902年以来由PubMed指数指数化的2 500万篇文章分析的广度(27 875 MeSH),也包括深度(我们区分主要和次要MesH的术语,以确定仅从初级研究专题构建的知识网络代表面的差异)。由于这种程度的统一解决方案,我们区分了有助于组合知识网络的三种不同的创新模式:(一) 与新概念和实体的出现相关的概念创新(以新的医学标题或对称的组合为新概念和实体的趋同(以日益集中的MeSH);以及(二) 重新组合创新,与新组合(即涉及新知识的组合)和核心(仅由原始知识构成的组合)。 我们寻求解决的另一个相关问题是,除了更传统的理论或双交的组合外, 任何新概念创新的组合的组合是持续、持续、不断增长的循环、不断演化和不断演化的主要结果的组合。