DLIMCLSOC-PHOct 30, 2015

Quantifying the Cognitive Extent of Science

arXiv:1511.00040v2107 citations
Originality Highly original
AI Analysis

This provides a new metric for assessing scientific progress and the role of team size, which could inform funding and policy decisions in science.

The authors tackled the problem of measuring the cognitive expansion of science beyond publication volume by developing a big-data method based on lexical diversity in article titles, applied to 20 million articles over decades, showing that cognitive growth does not align with publication trends and that larger teams cover smaller cognitive territory than smaller teams.

While the modern science is characterized by an exponential growth in scientific literature, the increase in publication volume clearly does not reflect the expansion of the cognitive boundaries of science. Nevertheless, most of the metrics for assessing the vitality of science or for making funding and policy decisions are based on productivity. Similarly, the increasing level of knowledge production by large science teams, whose results often enjoy greater visibility, does not necessarily mean that "big science" leads to cognitive expansion. Here we present a novel, big-data method to quantify the extents of cognitive domains of different bodies of scientific literature independently from publication volume, and apply it to 20 million articles published over 60-130 years in physics, astronomy, and biomedicine. The method is based on the lexical diversity of titles of fixed quotas of research articles. Owing to large size of quotas, the method overcomes the inherent stochasticity of article titles to achieve <1% precision. We show that the periods of cognitive growth do not necessarily coincide with the trends in publication volume. Furthermore, we show that the articles produced by larger teams cover significantly smaller cognitive territory than (the same quota of) articles from smaller teams. Our findings provide a new perspective on the role of small teams and individual researchers in expanding the cognitive boundaries of science. The proposed method of quantifying the extent of the cognitive territory can also be applied to study many other aspects of "science of science."

Foundations

The foundational work for this paper's niche, ranked by how specifically the neighbourhood builds on it — not by global fame.

Your Notes