Physics is old. Together alongside astronomy, it’s the oldest scientific discipline. And the historic menses shows. Compared to other scientific areas, physics is a piece of cake growing field. I learned this from a 2010 newspaper past times Larsen too van Ins. The authors counted the number of publications per scientific areas. In physics, the number of publications grows at an annual charge per unit of measurement of 3.8%. This way it currently takes xviii years for the trunk of physics literature to double. For comparison, the growth charge per unit of measurement for publications inwards electrical engineering scientific discipline too engineering is 9% (7.5%) too has a doubling fourth dimension of 8 years (9.6 years).
The full number of scientific papers closely tracks the full number of authors, irrespective of discipline. The relation betwixt the 2 tin laissez passer on notice live on about fit past times a ability law, then that the number of papers is equal to the number of authors to the ability of β. But this number, β, turns out to live on field-specific, which I learned from a to a greater extent than recent paper: “Allometric Scaling inwards Scientific Fields” past times Dong et al.
In mathematics the exponent β is unopen to one, which way that the number of papers increases linearly alongside the number of authors. In physics, the exponent is smaller than one, about 0.877. And non solely this, it has been decreasing inwards the in conclusion x years or so. This way nosotros are seeing hither diminishing returns: More physicists number inwards a less than proportional growth of output.
The newspaper equally good constitute some fun facts. For example, a few sub-fields of physics are statistical outliers inwards that their researchers gain to a greater extent than than the average number papers. Dong et al quantified this past times a statistical mensurate that unfortunately doesn’t possess got an piece of cake interpretation. Either way, they offering a ranking of the nearly productive sub-fields inwards physics which is (in order):
(1) Physics of dark holes, (2) Cosmology, (3) Classical full general relativity, (4) Quantum information (5) Matter waves (6) Quantum mechanics (7) Quantum plain theory inwards curved infinite fourth dimension (8) full general theory too models of magnetic ordering (9) Theories too models of many electron systems (10) Quantum gravity.
Isn’t it interesting that this closely matches the fields that tend to attract media attention?
Another interesting slice of information that I constitute inwards the Dong et al newspaper is that inwards all sub-fields the exponent relating the numbers of citations alongside the number of authors is larger than one, about 1.1. This way that on the average the to a greater extent than people move inwards a sub-field, the to a greater extent than citation they receive. I squall upward this is relevant information for anyone who wants to brand feel of citation indices.
H5N1 3rd newspaper that I constitute really insightful to sympathize the inquiry dynamics inwards physics is “A Century of Physics” past times Sinatra et al. Among other things, they analyzed the frequency past times which sub-fields of physics reference to their ain or other sub-fields. The nearly self-referential sub-fields, they conclude, are nuclear physics too the physics of uncomplicated particles too fields.
Papers from these 2 sub-fields equally good possess got past times far the lowest expected “ultimate impact” which the authors define equally the typical number of citations a newspaper attracts over its lifetime, where the lifetime is the typical number of years inwards which the newspaper attracts citations (see figure below). In nuclear physics (labelled NP inwards figure) too and particle physics (EPF), the involvement of papers is short-term too the overall comport on remains low. By this measure, the category alongside the highest comport on is electromagnetism, optics, acoustics, oestrus transfer, classical mechanics too fluid dynamics (labeled EOAHCF).
H5N1 concluding graph from the Sinatra et al newspaper which I desire to depict your attending to is the productivity of physicists. As nosotros saw earlier, the full number of papers normalized to the full number of authors is somewhat below 1 too has been falling inwards the recent decade. However, if you lot human face at the number of papers per author, you lot notice that it has been sharply rise since the early on 1990s, ie, basically always since at that topographic point was email.
This way that the argue physicists look then much to a greater extent than productive today than when you lot were immature is that they collaborate more. And perhaps it’s non then surprising because at that topographic point is a rigid incentive for that: If you lot too I both write a paper, nosotros both possess got 1 paper. But if nosotros concur to co-author each other’s paper, we’ll both possess got two. I don’t hateful to bill scientists of deliberate gaming, precisely it’s obvious that accounting for papers past times the number puts single-authors at a disadvantage.
So this is what physics is, inwards 2018. An ageing plain that doesn’t desire to possess got its dwindling relevance.
The full number of scientific papers closely tracks the full number of authors, irrespective of discipline. The relation betwixt the 2 tin laissez passer on notice live on about fit past times a ability law, then that the number of papers is equal to the number of authors to the ability of β. But this number, β, turns out to live on field-specific, which I learned from a to a greater extent than recent paper: “Allometric Scaling inwards Scientific Fields” past times Dong et al.
In mathematics the exponent β is unopen to one, which way that the number of papers increases linearly alongside the number of authors. In physics, the exponent is smaller than one, about 0.877. And non solely this, it has been decreasing inwards the in conclusion x years or so. This way nosotros are seeing hither diminishing returns: More physicists number inwards a less than proportional growth of output.
 |
| Figure 2 from Dong et al, Scientometrics 112, 1 (2017) 583. β measures is the exponent past times which the number of papers scales alongside the number of authors. |
(1) Physics of dark holes, (2) Cosmology, (3) Classical full general relativity, (4) Quantum information (5) Matter waves (6) Quantum mechanics (7) Quantum plain theory inwards curved infinite fourth dimension (8) full general theory too models of magnetic ordering (9) Theories too models of many electron systems (10) Quantum gravity.
Isn’t it interesting that this closely matches the fields that tend to attract media attention?
Another interesting slice of information that I constitute inwards the Dong et al newspaper is that inwards all sub-fields the exponent relating the numbers of citations alongside the number of authors is larger than one, about 1.1. This way that on the average the to a greater extent than people move inwards a sub-field, the to a greater extent than citation they receive. I squall upward this is relevant information for anyone who wants to brand feel of citation indices.
H5N1 3rd newspaper that I constitute really insightful to sympathize the inquiry dynamics inwards physics is “A Century of Physics” past times Sinatra et al. Among other things, they analyzed the frequency past times which sub-fields of physics reference to their ain or other sub-fields. The nearly self-referential sub-fields, they conclude, are nuclear physics too the physics of uncomplicated particles too fields.
Papers from these 2 sub-fields equally good possess got past times far the lowest expected “ultimate impact” which the authors define equally the typical number of citations a newspaper attracts over its lifetime, where the lifetime is the typical number of years inwards which the newspaper attracts citations (see figure below). In nuclear physics (labelled NP inwards figure) too and particle physics (EPF), the involvement of papers is short-term too the overall comport on remains low. By this measure, the category alongside the highest comport on is electromagnetism, optics, acoustics, oestrus transfer, classical mechanics too fluid dynamics (labeled EOAHCF).
 |
| Figure three e from Sinatra et al, Nature Physics 11, 791–796 (2015). |
H5N1 concluding graph from the Sinatra et al newspaper which I desire to depict your attending to is the productivity of physicists. As nosotros saw earlier, the full number of papers normalized to the full number of authors is somewhat below 1 too has been falling inwards the recent decade. However, if you lot human face at the number of papers per author, you lot notice that it has been sharply rise since the early on 1990s, ie, basically always since at that topographic point was email.
 |
| Figure 1 e from Sinatra et al, Nature Physics 11, 791–796 (2015) |
This way that the argue physicists look then much to a greater extent than productive today than when you lot were immature is that they collaborate more. And perhaps it’s non then surprising because at that topographic point is a rigid incentive for that: If you lot too I both write a paper, nosotros both possess got 1 paper. But if nosotros concur to co-author each other’s paper, we’ll both possess got two. I don’t hateful to bill scientists of deliberate gaming, precisely it’s obvious that accounting for papers past times the number puts single-authors at a disadvantage.
So this is what physics is, inwards 2018. An ageing plain that doesn’t desire to possess got its dwindling relevance.
Comments
Post a Comment