Abstract:Science advances by pushing the boundaries of the adjacent possible. While the global scientific enterprise grows at an exponential pace, at the mesoscopic level the exploration and exploitation of research ideas are reflected through the rise and fall of research fields. The empirical literature has largely studied such dynamics on a case-by-case basis, with a focus on explaining how and why communities of knowledge production evolve. Although fields rise and fall on different temporal and population scales, they are generally argued to pass through a common set of evolutionary stages. To understand the social processes that drive these stages beyond case studies, we need a way to quantify and compare different fields on the same terms. In this paper we develop techniques for identifying common patterns in the evolution of scientific fields and demonstrate their usefulness using 1.5 million preprints from the arXiv repository covering 175 research fields spanning Physics, Mathematics, Computer Science, Quantitative Biology and Quantitative Finance. We show that fields consistently follow a rise and fall pattern captured by a two parameters right-tailed Gumbel temporal distribution. We introduce a field-specific re-scaled time and explore the generic properties shared by articles and authors at the creation, adoption, peak, and decay evolutionary phases. We find that the early phase of a field is characterized by disruptive works mixing of cognitively distant fields written by small teams of interdisciplinary authors, while late phases exhibit the role of specialized, large teams building on the previous works in the field. This method provides foundations to quantitatively explore the generic patterns underlying the evolution of research fields in science, with general implications in innovation studies.

Quantifying the evolution of individual scientific impact

Quantifying patterns of research interest evolution

Stochastic modeling of scientific impact

Scientific elite revisited: patterns of productivity, collaboration, authorship and impact

A network-based normalized impact measure reveals successful periods of scientific discovery across disciplines

A network-based normalized impact measure reveals successful periods of scientific discovery across discipline

Quantifying the rise and fall of scientific fields.

Breaking down the relationship between academic impact and scientific disruption

Methods for measuring the citations and productivity of scientists across time and discipline

Quantifying the Ease of Scientific Discovery

Can Scientific Impact Be Predicted?

Quality versus quantity in scientific impact

Quantifying Success in Science: An Overview

Quantifying perceived impact of scientific publications

Correlated Impact Dynamics in Science

Analysis of effects to scientific impact indicators based on the coevolution of coauthorship and citation networks

Reputation and Impact in Academic Careers

The Gene of Scientific Success

Anatomy of Scientific Evolution

Initial Burst of Disruptive Efforts Ensuring Scientific Career Viability

The Role of Research Efficiency in the Evolution of Scientific Productivity and Impact: an Agent-Based Model